Uli rule call?!

[The Hammer]

Agreed, to a point. You're still BEHIND your mini though, directly in the line of play. The chosen shot line and line of play are 2 completely different things.

That's what I meant. I just didn't describe it very eloquently.

 

[Jeasy13]

Where do you and others get this from? All the rule means (for a standard RHBH thrower) is that he lines up and his pivot point (contact w/surface at point of release) is where the gray star is, instead of the black star in my diagram below. And YES, by Job, he can still throw a smooth anhyzer. The gray star is 4 inches at most from where the other one is.

DING DING DING We have a winner!
:clap::hfive:

 

[spikodelhyzer]

If you are shooting straight (towards basket a) as a layup to get around the the horn(when basket C is your basket), you are actually in front of your marker as your 'line of play'. Ideally someone should be shooting directly behind their 'line of play' or where their intended shot is going.

Consider the marked area as OB.

You realize that you are not actually in front of your marker when you are line up facing C and have the appropriate stance right? You are behind your lie and throwing. You can throw anyway you want when you are lined up behind your disc. People pitch out sideways from thick rough and still manage to stand behind their lie properly.

 

[Horsman]

Sorry but I have heard too much bad stuff about Geoff and from his style of play he has it coming

 

[lukebro22]

Not sure if this or something along these lines has been said, but i believe that the spirit of the rule needs to be taken into account. As a high school football official, we are taught that no flag is often better than too many flags. For instance, if a player is probably holding on the opposite side of the field 40 yds away from the play, a flag is not necessary. In disc golf, if a player foot faults 400 ft from the pin because he's taking a placement shot as opposed to making a run at the pin, its probably better for all involved not to call the fault. The player was not doing it intentionally to gain a competitive advantage, and was not gaining a competitive advantage. If you watch any college or nba basketball game, how often do you see the in-bounder stepping over the line before he releases the ball to the point guard to get the ball up court? The officials see this, but it's never called because there is no competitive advantage gained by doing this.

 

[BillyLrsn]

So how come the tee pad does not have to make a line towards the "target"?

 

[mashnut]

So how come the tee pad does not have to make a line towards the "target"?

You're not forced to take your entire runup on the tee pad, nor is it required to plant right at the front of the pad. The rules specify that you must have all supporting points on the tee when you throw, they don't limit you to as small an area as shots from elsewhere on the hole.

 

[dmbrun2]

Sometimes my spaghetti tastes like kitty litter...I wonder what my cat has been up to

 

[DangeRuss]

Sorry but I have heard too much bad stuff about Geoff and from his style of play he has it coming

opcorn:

 

[aardvarkious]

>In disc golf, if a player foot faults 400 ft from the pin because he's taking a placement shot as opposed to making a run at the pin, its probably better for all involved not to call the fault. The player was not doing it intentionally to gain a competitive advantage, and was not gaining a competitive advantage

Maybe this shouldn't be called. But then the rule needs to be changed. We can't have some players called on this rule, and some not.

In basketball, the total score (usually) does not matter- just who wins or who looses matters. So, if team A commits a foul that doesn't really give them an advantage over their opponent in that game, and team B later commits the same sort of foul, and neither team is called on it, you are right: no harm.

However, in disc golf you are competing with other people on other cards that may have the rules called on them differently. This certainly gives someone a competitive advantage. You have player A who commits a foot fault like the one you described twice on a par 5 hole. He gets called both times: not he is down a point, and he is expending focus making sure he doesn't foot fault for the rest of the game. Now you have player B. His card is more lax- guys C, D and E figure "we won't make calls like that, because if none of us make those calls no one really gains an advantage." Player B also foot faults twice on the same hole, but isn't called on it. Player B doesn't really have an advantage over C, D, and E. But her certainly does over player A. Not only has he been spared a point over A, but B also likely has a mental advantage since he isn't thinking as much about foot placement so has more focus on other elements of his throw.

If you are playing a round where you are only competing against your own card, then fine: no harm getting a little lax on the rules as long as everyone is given the same grace. But if you are competing against people on other cards, the rules as they are written need to be obeyed.

 

[tarel]

Sometimes my spaghetti tastes like kitty litter...I wonder what my cat has been up to

I like where this is going

 

[lukebro22]

>

However, in disc golf you are competing with other people on other cards that may have the rules called on them differently. This certainly gives someone a competitive advantage. You have player A who commits a foot fault like the one you described twice on a par 5 hole. He gets called both times: not he is down a point, and he is expending focus making sure he doesn't foot fault for the rest of the game. Now you have player B. His card is more lax- guys C, D and E figure "we won't make calls like that, because if none of us make those calls no one really gains an advantage." Player B also foot faults twice on the same hole, but isn't called on it. Player B doesn't really have an advantage over C, D, and E. But her certainly does over player A. Not only has he been spared a point over A, but B also likely has a mental advantage since he isn't thinking as much about foot placement so has more focus on other elements of his throw.

If you are playing a round where you are only competing against your own card, then fine: no harm getting a little lax on the rules as long as everyone is given the same grace. But if you are competing against people on other cards, the rules as they are written need to be obeyed.

I think there's a difference in being "lax", which I don't think should be the case, and understanding the spirit of the rules and making calls and seconds based on the spirit of the rule. Rules can be interpreted in many ways, especially the pdga rulebook that can be quite vague, but if everyone understood the reason that every rule was in place, there would be much less conflict. You are right about the rules needing to be enforced equally across the board, but my point is that everyone should understand the rules and why they're there, and enforce them accordingly.

 

[Greatzky]

Sorry but I have heard too much bad stuff about Geoff and from his style of play he has it coming

Would you care to enlighten us on what you have heard too much of and what "his style of play" pertains to? Thx in advance.

 

[aardvarkious]

to lukebro:

(1) Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line
of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc (except as specified in
803.04 E); and,
(2) have no supporting point contact with the marker disc or any object closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc; and,
(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds.

I can see that being enforced to varying degrees. But it seems pretty clear cut to me- I really don't see many different ways that can be interpreted.

 

[tallpaul]

Call a foot fault on every player on every shot; just to be sure.

 

[lukebro22]

to lukebro:

(1) Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line
of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc (except as specified in
803.04 E); and,
(2) have no supporting point contact with the marker disc or any object closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc; and,
(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds.

I can see that being enforced to varying degrees. But it seems pretty clear cut to me- I really don't see many different ways that can be interpreted.

Yes.. when i said the rule book was vague and people can interpret things differently i was not referring to this specific rule. The question you would have to ask yourself is why is this rule in place. That's how we (college and high school football officials) are trained to approach every possible situation. So like I said before, is a player 400+ ft away who is lined up for a fairway placement shot gaining a competitive advantage if he plants his foot 5 inches from where he should have? I think not, nor is he intentionally doing it to gain a competitive advantage. Rules are in place for safety and to maintain a fair competitive atmosphere, and I just don't see the point in calling infractions like these other than using the rule book itself to gain a competitive advantage.

 

[optidiscic]

my problem with foot faults is that for jump putts and run up shots I could feasibly call it every other time

I'd rather both methods were abolished

and don't tell me about gaining an advantage "many don't use these techniques due to fear of faulting....they inevitably get penalized for not breaking rules.

but really who wants to call a foot fault every other throw?

 

[KniceZ]

I read through this entire thread and I'm surprised no else commented on a couple of Paul's comments (if the quote is correct):

1 - He doesn't like waiting till the end of the round to get a ruling on a call. I would tend to agree with him on that. Maybe at that level there should be a marshall with each group. They should not have to wait for a decision. No other sport would put up with that.

2 - It appears that he thinks the pamphlet is insufficient and is advocating for a much more detailed and comprehensive set of rules. I disagree with this on two fronts: a- several people have complaining that everyone should know the rules. If the rule "book" was 500 pages to cover all the various nuances and possibilities even fewer people would know the rules. b - more complicated rules often provides more loop-holes and misinterpretation. Look at the problems with our legal or tax systems: thousands upon thousands of laws and regulations. I'm sure we all break dozens of laws a day and don't even know it. Or I could have just said - more rules is not necessarily better.

 

[JoakimBL]

So many people post "The problem with disc golf is [...]" and point fingers at the PDGA or the rules, when actually, the problem with disc golf is that so many players never read the rules and/or don't understand them and/or choose to ignore them.

If you want to play a PDGA sanctioned tournament, at least read the rules and play by them. If you donøt want to read the rules or play by them, don't play the tournaments that uses those rules.

 

[optidiscic]

So many people post "The problem with disc golf is [...]" and point fingers at the PDGA or the rules, when actually, the problem with disc golf is that so many players never read the rules and/or don't understand them and/or choose to ignore them.

If you want to play a PDGA sanctioned tournament, at least read the rules and play by them. If you donøt want to read the rules or play by them, don't play the tournaments that uses those rules.

so what do you think of the notion that the top card in an A-tier had difficulties with rules' calls and rules' interpetations?