slipping after putting

[klodkrawler05]

Played a casual solo round today and the below occurred, realized I wasn't 100% sure what the ruling would be for this in a tournament so I thought I'd ask.

I approached my lie on a fairly steep wooded hillside covered in leaves. I'm approximately 20' (6m) from the pin, I perform my putting routine and as I push off with my back foot my front foot (the one behind my lie) slid forward an inch or two and bumped into the disc/my lie.

Based on 806.1.B "After having released a putt, the player must demonstrate full control of balance behind the marker disc before advancing toward the target. A player who fails to do so has committed a stance violation and receives one penalty throw."

I assume this means I take a penalty stroke for stance violation by advancing toward the target? I still maintained my balance, simply skated forward a little and made contact with my lie.

Learning from this shot I think in the future I'd move to a straddle stance where possible to avoid so much forward/back weight transfer, or else I'd clear the leaves off of my lie so that I have more solid footing on the dirt instead.

 

[BillFleming]

Possibly no penalty...you didn't move past the lie (you say you bumped into the disc. You don't say the disc moved). Basically, once the disc leaves your hand (Circle1), no part of your body can touch ground ahead of your lie until you have shown balance. So, you can putt, lean forward and stay in that position for a bit, then touch your foot ahead of your lie. heck, you can even throw the disc, do the Karate Kid Crane stance, and then touch the ground before the disc once you've shown balance.

 

[dmoore1998]

I'm going to say penalty on the assumption that when you "slid forward and bumped into the disc" you pushed the disc forward and slid past the point where your mark was. To Bill's point above, you didn't SAY you did...and if you just touched the disc but somehow didn't move past the "mark"...then you're fine (but that seems unlikely to me).

Advancing toward the target isn't a penalty, if you started 4" behind the mark, and slid to 1" behind the mark, you're fine. If you advanced PAST the mark...penalty.

 

[araytx]

Played a casual solo round today and the below occurred, realized I wasn't 100% sure what the ruling would be for this in a tournament so I thought I'd ask.

I approached my lie on a fairly steep wooded hillside covered in leaves. I'm approximately 20' (6m) from the pin, I perform my putting routine and as I push off with my back foot my front foot (the one behind my lie) slid forward an inch or two and bumped into the disc/my lie.

Based on 806.1.B "After having released a putt, the player must demonstrate full control of balance behind the marker disc before advancing toward the target. A player who fails to do so has committed a stance violation and receives one penalty throw."

I assume this means I take a penalty stroke for stance violation by advancing toward the target? I still maintained my balance, simply skated forward a little and made contact with my lie.

Learning from this shot I think in the future I'd move to a straddle stance where possible to avoid so much forward/back weight transfer, or else I'd clear the leaves off of my lie so that I have more solid footing on the dirt instead.

Good thought klod.

Yes, that definitely is a penalty and would cost you a stroke (if called & seconded) in an event. I teach players to always straddle the uphill for putt -- for a couple of reasons -- but that situation is definitely one of them.

 

[Dingus]

Yes, that definitely is a penalty

Not sure how definite I view this. If the guy was in perfect balance, but the ground was literally sliding underneath his perfectly balanced feet, it wouldn't be a penalty in my mind.

 

[klodkrawler05]

I would have to guess that I did move the disc marking my lie, I admit I was more focused on my putt than immediately looking down at my feet. Seems unlikely to perfectly bump into the disc without pushing it forward some minute amount.

Thanks for all the quick replies everyone! Always a fun round when I get to learn something new.

 

[BillFleming]

I would have to guess that I did move the disc marking my lie, I admit I was more focused on my putt than immediately looking down at my feet. Seems unlikely to perfectly bump into the disc without pushing it forward some minute amount.

Thanks for all the quick replies everyone! Always a fun round when I get to learn something new.

When you are playing a solo round, calling penalties can be tough - did I or didn't I - there's no one but you to answer it. With other players, it is as simple as asking - did I or didn't I and getting the group's input.

BTW: on the opposite end, but still worth knowing about....read QA-STA-4 in the PDGA Rules Questions and Answers section under Stance. It is about an uphill lie and placing one foot behind and one foot in front of the marker before the throw.

 

[seedlings]

If I may tag on a similar question- situation I witnessed in casual round with friends: player approaches lie, has low tree limbs in the way and dead limbs on the ground. Trips over dead limbs and (trying not to fall outright) breaks off live limb in his line of sight. (He does fall awkwardly to the ground anyway.) In a Tournament, what might be the call?

 

[dmoore1998]

Not sure how definite I view this. If the guy was in perfect balance, but the ground was literally sliding underneath his perfectly balanced feet, it wouldn't be a penalty in my mind.

Based on 806.1.B "After having released a putt, the player must demonstrate full control of balance behind the marker disc before advancing toward the target. A player who fails to do so has committed a stance violation and receives one penalty throw."

He can be balanced, but he's not behind the marker disc (I mean he's still behind the disc, but the disc has been moved by him). It's 2 criteria. Balance, and being behind the mark. He might be good on the balance piece...but he's not good on being behind the mark piece (if were just the balance piece...there are lots of scenarios where one can be balanced but not behind the mark).

 

[BillFleming]

If I may tag on a similar question- situation I witnessed in casual round with friends: player approaches lie, has low tree limbs in the way and dead limbs on the ground. Trips over dead limbs and (trying not to fall outright) breaks off live limb in his line of sight. (He does fall awkwardly to the ground anyway.) In a Tournament, what might be the call?

803.03 Damaging the Course

A player who intentionally damages any part of the course receives two penalty throws

.

That is the rule and the important part is - intentionally. Which tripping isn't. So, the call should be no penalty.

 

[Dingus]

He can be balanced, but he's not behind the marker disc (I mean he's still behind the disc, but the disc has been moved by him)..

He was balanced, AND behind the marker disc, on mud, sliding towards his mark. He then, in a perfectly balanced state, slid into and beyond his mark. I say no penalty.

 

[Smigles]

Not sure how definite I view this. If the guy was in perfect balance, but the ground was literally sliding underneath his perfectly balanced feet, it wouldn't be a penalty in my mind.

If the guy were in perfect balance, he would not slip.

It is either a falling putt or a marker foul for stepping on your marker.

You can pick, it's a penalty anyway.

 

[peabody]

It is either a falling putt or a marker foul for stepping on your marker.

You can pick, it's a penalty anyway.

It is not a penalty until someone calls it.
In this case I highly doubt anyone would be a total douche and make a call.
My guess if you were to poll 1000 players you might get one a$$hole that would.

 

[Dingus]

If the guy were in perfect balance, he would not slip.

It is either a falling putt or a marker foul for stepping on your marker.

You can pick, it's a penalty anyway.

it is a penalty for stepping on your marker? What rule is that?

A skateboarder is balanced on the skateboard even though it is moving underneath him. Cannot a disc golfer be balanced on the ground even though the ground is moving beneath him?

 

[txmxer]

It is not a penalty until someone calls it.
In this case I highly doubt anyone would be a total douche and make a call.
My guess if you were to poll 1000 players you might get one a$$hole that would.

I'd agree with this based on what was described.

 

[dmoore1998]

He was balanced, AND behind the marker disc, on mud, sliding towards his mark. He then, in a perfectly balanced state, slid into and beyond his mark. I say no penalty.

He STARTED behind the marker disc, he didn't stay behind his mark. That matters.

The rule is that 2 things have to happen, he has to be balanced and behind his mark...he's not behind his mark. It's not "start behind your mark, and end up anywhere as long as you're balanced".

I do think your argument of "he's still balanced, it's the ground that's moving" is legit. You can certainly be balanced and sliding IMO.

 

[dmoore1998]

It is not a penalty until someone calls it.
In this case I highly doubt anyone would be a total douche and make a call.
My guess if you were to poll 1000 players you might get one a$$hole that would.

Technically, yes. It's not a penalty until someone calls it in the same way "that's not a foul because the ref didn't blow the whistle"...but we all understand that to be "that was a rules violation which should have resulted in that being called a foul".

I think the 2nd sentence is a huge problem though. It's the idea that "don't be a douche and enforce the rule that I broke, because only douches enforce the rules". It's the same issue anytime you have players responsible for rules enforcement. The rules only matter to the extent that whoever is in charge is enforcing them...if nobody is going to enforce a rule, do away with it or find better enforcement. Only douches enforce the rules, only douches break the rules and try to get away with it. Having players enforcing rules on one another is a no-win situation for anyone...ESPECIALLY when a single card is not the only card in play (it's different if it were a 4-person event, and the card said "let it slide, we're the only competitors, and none of us want it called).

I agree, most players wouldn't call it because "I don't like that rule in this situation"...but I also don't want players in any sport making up rules as they go, ignoring violations because they either don't like the rule or the application of the rule in that scenario.

 

[peabody]

I agree, most players wouldn't call it because "I don't like that rule in this situation"...but I also don't want players in any sport making up rules as they go, ignoring violations because they either don't like the rule or the application of the rule in that scenario.

I totally agree and you bring up a good point.
Even if someone makes a call we leave it up to that foursome to either follow the rule and second it or ignore the rule. Then the next foursome comes along and does the opposite.
You want fairness in this game get rid of situations where multiple groups can make multiple rulings on vaguely written rules.
What if two weren't watching? Benefit of the doubt would go to the thrower. Did the slip result in any advantage? I would ask myself that question prior to calling or seconding this particular foot fault. Heck his throw might have ended up out of bounds or in a really bad spot.

 

[Dingus]

It's the idea that "don't be a douche and enforce the rule that I broke, because only douches enforce the rules". It's the same issue anytime you have players responsible for rules enforcement. The rules only matter to the extent that whoever is in charge is enforcing them...if nobody is going to enforce a rule, do away with it or find better enforcement.

Yes we should absolutely do away with the 10m rule.

Douchebags enforce the rules as written without context. Nice guys enforce the spirit of the rules. Douchebags insist that the spirit of the rule is impossible to define and makes the rule completely invalid. Nice guys understand that the spirit of the game is incredibly easy to understand, and that Douchebags only say that because they are Douchebags.

Douchebags become HOA board members and fine you $50 for having your trash can within eyesight of the road. Its the rule dude, pay up.

 

[dmoore1998]

Douchebags enforce the rules as written without context. Nice guys enforce the spirit of the rules. Douchebags insist that the spirit of the rule is impossible to define and makes the rule completely invalid. Nice guys understand that the spirit of the game is incredibly easy to understand, and that Douchebags only say that because they are Douchebags.

Douchebags become HOA board members and fine you $50 for having your trash can within eyesight of the road. Its the rule dude, pay up.

Nikko? Is that you?