Rules enforcement from top PDGA pros

[Jugular]

We have this idea of 'benefit of the doubt' for calls and I wonder if it's a little too pervasive (I don't actually remember if its in the rules or not, will reread later). I think for jump putts we should require that the player clearly demonstrates contact with the lie until the disc is thrown, if there is any doubt then it's a penalty.

 

[Jugular]

By the way....I forget which tournament video it was on....but a player did do a 'jump tee shot'. As I recall it, it was a short hole and they did the 'jump putt', BUT they jumped and landed while still on the tee pad, so they never moved forward. Might have still been illegal if both feet left the ground before releasing the disc....but I feel the important part was that they never advanced past their 'marker/end of the tee pad' during the 'jump'.

Was it a tournament at Blue Ribbon Pines? Isn't there a 150' hole or something there?

 

[cheesethin]

This is a tough one and the main reason you don't see it called.

Is the disc still gripped by her? You can't tell clearly by the photo...it COULD be out of her grip (you really can't see if her fingers are still on the disc or not). The photo also isn't at the moment both feet left the ground....so there could be better evidence of the disc still in her grip at the time she leaves the ground.

I think this is one rule that is impossible to enforce as it happens so quickly it is difficult for the eye to spot what happened. And video/photos are normally not allowed for rules questions (actually, I don't think they are ever allowed, but I'm not 100% sure of that).

The best solution would be for the PDGA to ban 'jump putts'.

So, we can't use video/photo evidence to make calls. But with that understanding, her feet are far from the ground, the disc is near her hand. I am confident with my experience of movement that her feet left the ground well in advance of the disc leaving her hand.

I don't agree with the too fast to call idea. I believe that one can call jump putt violations in real time. The rules state that a clear violation must be called - and so the corollary is that if it is not clear then don't call it. With that in mind I played a game while watching the Las Vegas Open at the start of the year, Sexton was on Lead card, Rd 2 I think.

The game was that I watched jump putts (in real time, on first watch through) and I only ever called a violation when I was positive that their foot had left the ground first. This meant I was never allowed to be wrong - if I called a violation and then the slow-motion showed that I was wrong - then I was not calling a clear violation I was simply guessing on a close call. I called three jump putts, and on video review I was right each time.

Granted I'm doing this from the comfort of my own chair, without the pressures of being involved in the match myself, and three calls don't make a peer reviewed paper - but my point is that I believe it can be done.

 

[Consult20]

How do you properly word it without eliminating the ability / need to follow through?

The solution, IMHO, is to extend the circle to 75 feet or so.

This sounds like a terrible idea, although Bushnell would probably like it once they come out with their disc golf rangefinder.

 

[BeRReGoN]

No need to extend C1, just make a clear rule that your standing point behind your lie cannot lift before your other foot or whatever, touch the ground. So basically don't be in air at any point. I never see people jumping for any other shot anyway.

 

[robdeforge]

We have this idea of 'benefit of the doubt' for calls and I wonder if it's a little too pervasive (I don't actually remember if its in the rules or not, will reread later). I think for jump putts we should require that the player clearly demonstrates contact with the lie until the disc is thrown, if there is any doubt then it's a penalty.

from the Q&A:

QA-APP-4: My group thinks my disc is OB, but I think it's unclear. Doesn't benefit of the doubt go to the player? I'm safe, right?

Benefit of the doubt only comes into play as a tiebreaker when the group cannot make a decision, for example if two players see the disc as safe and two see it as OB. If a majority of your group thinks it's OB, then it's OB.

I still stand behind my idea to eliminate step putts, but would love it if somebody could poke some holes or tell me it's stupid for certain reasons

 

[Rastnav]

from the Q&A:
I still stand behind my idea to eliminate step putts, but would love it if somebody could poke some holes or tell me it's stupid for certain reasons

It's stupid. For reasons.

Fundamentally a step putt and a jump putt are no different than any throw from outside C1. There are probably plenty of occasions of stance violations well outside C2 where a player doesn't actually plant inside their lie, but you can't usually see them, so you aren't worked up about them.

You seem to want to enforce some hypothetical rule of verticality for feet only, but that will likely just lead to another ambiguity about whether someone's foot was past the vertical plane of the lie when they released.

Another theoretical rule, that two contact points must be maintained at release, is completely unworkable, as it would eliminate essentially all stagger stance putts and most regular throws.

All of this to solve a problem that is only a problem in the sense that people get worked up about it. The advantage gained from the decreased distance, if any, is de minimus.

Jump and step putting are exciting skills to have in the sport. Nothing quite so satisfying as canning a long putt made possible by the momentum gains from not preventing follow through to after the lie.

Given that, I'd argue that the preferable rule change (if any) would be to specifically make jump putting legal. So long as your last contact point was in the lie, actual jump putting would be legal outside of C1. C1 rules would remain as is. This wouldn't actually change much at all (although I suppose a putter like James Conrad might prove me wrong.) Perhaps one could add in a qualifier about first making contact again with the playing surface (after releasing the disc) within 1-2 meters of the lie to prevent actual flying putts. Although honestly, if anyone could make those work, they might be pretty cool to see.

To be clear, my stance is always that the existing rules are likely to be sufficient, so this is all hypothetical.

 

[robdeforge]

It's stupid. For reasons.

Fundamentally a step putt and a jump putt are no different than any throw from outside C1. There are probably plenty of occasions of stance violations well outside C2 where a player doesn't actually plant inside their lie, but you can't usually see them, so you aren't worked up about them.

You seem to want to enforce some hypothetical rule of verticality for feet only, but that will likely just lead to another ambiguity about whether someone's foot was past the vertical plane of the lie when they released.

Not sure I follow the logic... this would eliminate step putts, as step putters clearly have their non-plant foot in front of the lie before the disc is released. not like "a few frames" clearly, but that's how they set up their throw.

other than step putts, I can't think of many instances where this would prohibit actions that are currently allowed. can you give me some real life examples?

 

[Rastnav]

Not sure I follow the logic... this would eliminate step putts, as step putters clearly have their non-plant foot in front of the lie before the disc is released. not like "a few frames" clearly, but that's how they set up their throw.

other than step putts, I can't think of many instances where this would prohibit actions that are currently allowed. can you give me some real life examples?

You aren't taking into account that people will change their step putt strategy in the face of the new rules.

They will still want their momentum going toward the target, they'll just try to time the release differently.

 

[robdeforge]

Eagle is a good guy and I'm a fan, but add him to the list of pros that just don't know what they don't know

 

[DiscFifty]

Granted I'm doing this from the comfort of my own chair, without the pressures of being involved in the match myself, and three calls don't make a peer reviewed paper - but my point is that I believe it can be done.

Every elite pro bends/breaks the rules, they all know it. So why call someone out when they know they will retaliate against them at a time when they need to bend the rules. It's a scratch my back, scratch yours mentality. And unfortunately if they won't call it now, they sure as hell won't call it when some very serious money is on the line in the future.

 

[Discette]

Every elite pro bends/breaks the rules, they all know it. So why call someone out when they know they will retaliate against them at a time when they need to bend the rules. It's a scratch my back, scratch yours mentality. And unfortunately if they won't call it now, they sure as hell won't call it when some very serious money is on the line in the future.

There was some truth in this paragraph but unfortunately it was lost by using the word EVERY. Also, the back scratching among players often turns to back stabbing when there is Mo Money on the line!

 

[robdeforge]

https://youtu.be/85b-P7lQDAg?t=1657


"that might have been a foot fault there..." paige says from the booth, as we can see paige in the background of the video not make a call. pretty clear foot fault, cat knew she missed her mark immediately.

 

[DiscJunkie]

I may be opening myself for some flaming here, but I'm going to state an OPINION.
First, a fact:
The original rule was created to prevent running long jumps at the basket. Players were taking running long jumps toward the basket, leaping just behind their marker and putting at the basket just before they hit the ground. In this way, they could make up some distance.
Now, the opinion:
The rule, as it stands, prevents this tactic effectively. The jump putts and step putts that many players use don't violate the original purpose of this rule, so the rule has not been changed. And, when violations get egregious, they are called.
Unless we begin to put officials on EVERY card, our present system will have to suffice.
Put it to bed guys. All this hand-wringing just strikes me as unhealthy and unproductive
It's their money, their tournament, their call.

 

[Jolt]

https://youtu.be/85b-P7lQDAg?t=1657


"that might have been a foot fault there..." paige says from the booth, as we can see paige in the background of the video not make a call. pretty clear foot fault, cat knew she missed her mark immediately.

Cat makes that miss quite often..fot to far right and to far forward. . i saw it MANY times on the GK pro videos this weekend and in the past
But many players do this and they will never get called

 

[DiscFifty]

Also, the back scratching among players often turns to back stabbing when there is Mo Money on the line!

lol..we'll see.......

 

[ballgolfconvert]

I think this is probably underselling how difficult this is.

I know people don't like bringing ball golf in, but this isn't about emulation, but expectations. The penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard is a disqualification, a penalty that is incredibly severe. And yet there are consistently top pros who don't know the rules all that well.

Now ask players to not only know the rules, but also officiate them? That is a heavy lift, especially in a sport with an exceedingly casual approach to what seems like just about everything.

I'm not saying you are wrong (how could I begin to even know?) But I am saying I think it would require a deep cultural change at the bottom of the sport.

You don't get disqualified or penalized further for signing a scorecard that has a score higher, only DQed for a lower score. Disc golf penalizes four strokes either way.

As far as this thread and time limits, i disagree that Nikko is commintting a penalty. Part of the rule is you get to look at your lie before the 30 seconds counts. From my tourney experience no one really has any idea what 30 seconds actually is. So without someone ready to click a stopwatch once he has assessed his lie, you can't call a penalty.

I see the opposite problem in events. Guys are in way too much of a hurry to putt out, costing them strokes every round. You can wait for the basket and the line of vision to clear, then you can assess your putt, then you have 30 seconds to putt or throw for that matter. If someone wealks through your line of vision, you can restart fresh in my opnion.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

Given that I haven't been watching disc golf but a few months and I know the "freeze" move, and I feel like I see it in just about every tourney video at some point, I'm not sure I agree with this assessment. Players may be glancing over their shoulders while in the "freeze" position, but I wouldn't exactly say they are watching.

Not that I'm worried about it, as I don't see that any rules violations that gain any advantage are actually occurring. The most I see is something like Nikko trolling everyone on the first hole of Idlewild by holding the basket the entire time while he picks up his lie after he literally taps out.

Obviously, my opinion isn't well informed, but generally I just don't care if a player takes 40 seconds at their lie trying to figure out whether they are going to throw a roller, a backhand or a forehand. And if that is OK, I don't see why taking a while to putt is an issue either. If people want to solve a solve a slow play issue, put a clock on the round pace of play like the PGA did.

I figure the serial violators of rules will get caught up with via reputation. Then you will start to see them being policed by their card mates.

Any bother of the "freeze" is squarely on the putters shoulders. You really should allow players to clear the area before making your putt.

 

[davetherocketguy]

You don't get disqualified or penalized further for signing a scorecard that has a score higher, only DQed for a lower score. Disc golf penalizes four strokes either way.

It's 2 throws actually.

See rule 808.G.2

 

[Steve West]

...You can wait for the basket and the line of vision to clear, then you can assess your putt, then you have 30 seconds to putt or throw for that matter. ...

You are almost correct, but the 30 seconds starts at the first comma. Assessing your putt does not buy you more time.

802.03 Excessive Time
A. A player has taken excessive time if they are present and have not thrown within 30 seconds after:
1. The previous player has thrown; and,
2. They have had a reasonable amount of time to arrive at and determine the lie; and,
3. They are next in the throwing order; and,
4. The playing area is clear and free of distractions.