A PDGA Rule Question About A Second Shot

[black udder]

LOL - you gotta play by the rules, right? The problem isn't the exiting rule, it's the players. You change the rule and you'll have people doing a run up for a fairway shot - if people don't call it, you're in the same boat you are now.

[rehder]

I agree with you BU, as I said before I wouldnt call people during casual play, does this mean that I wont point it out? Nope. It means Im not going to give them a warning. In competitive play - maybe. But this rule infraction is maybe not even as common as another rule infraction I see all over the place. People take more than 30 secs to throw after arriving at their lie.
And does that make the rule bad or like BU said the problem is that players dont call the infraction.

I heard about an example at Worlds where 3 out of a 4 man group where playing excruiciatingly slow, and often passing the 30 sec. mark. How can the single player give strokes? Atm. he cant because none of the other players would obviously second the call.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The problem isn't the exiting rule, it's the players. You change the rule and you'll have people doing a run up for a fairway shot - if people don't call it, you're in the same boat you are now.

The difference is that even if you want to call a foot fault, it happens so fast and there's no proof that it occurred. If you stand & deliver, you can see the foot placement. That's why you'll see more compliance as it is right now when people are making short upshots or putting with a stand & deliver stance. Other players are usually closer and the thrower knows they can see their feet, plus you can tell the thrower to look down where their feet are after the release and they can see the foot fault. Note that touching the mini with your foot during release is also a foot fault and that's easier to see with S&D.

[black udder]

The problem isn't the exiting rule, it's the players. You change the rule and you'll have people doing a run up for a fairway shot - if people don't call it, you're in the same boat you are now.

The difference is that even if you want to call a foot fault, it happens so fast and there's no proof that it occurred. If you stand & deliver, you can see the foot placement. That's why you'll see more compliance as it is right now when people are making short upshots or putting with a stand & deliver stance. Other players are usually closer and the thrower knows they can see their feet, plus you can tell the thrower to look down where their feet are after the release and they can see the foot fault. Note that touching the mini with your foot during release is also a foot fault and that's easier to see with S&D.

So now, it's obvious when and when it's not a fault. So that means that it'll be called, right? Like flipping a disc instead of marking it? Or going beyond the end of the tee? You know we could list several rules where the is fairly obvious and yet players will still ignore the rule. If you're within inches, I can see the difficulty, but I'm inclined to believe the folks that are really at fault are the ones that blatantly ignore it - going past their lie or beside their lie. Places it's impossible to miss.

I agree with what you're saying, Chuck, I still just believe that it's more of a player issue than a rule issue.

I've played with guys who will flip their disc to mark it and I'll mention that in tournament play that could cost them a stroke, and they'll say "yeah, I know, I don't do it then." So we have a "rule of convenience". They'll take the time and trouble to bend over and flip their disc, but not put a mini down? Their justification to themselves is that it's only casual play or "doubles" so it's not as strict - i.e. not all the rules apply. That's a skewed perception of the rules by the players.

Now - the main reason I would not want a stand & deliver is I know I would lose distance. I'll throw up to 300' or so from a stand still position. What do you suspect the pros are throwing? Just thinking of some of the longer holes that would benefit from that long second shot and wondering how/if it would change their capabilities? Not many folks stand still to throw (at least that you see in the pro circuit). Last I saw, it appears even Brinster has begun throwing with the run up again for under 300' shots.

[Chuck Kennedy]

I don't realistically ever see S&D happening as a rule. However, the issue of foot faults not being called or called inconsistently is not going away. I guess until there's real money in the sport, it doesn't matter as much and that's why we probably see low compliance from players calling them.

On the other hand, I do see more designers creating hazards, when they have the opportunity and finances, where a player will be forced to S&D from that lie, not due to a rule but because of the stance available. One idea being promoted is to create a bed of boulders where the 1-2 ft diameter rocks are spaced about 18"-24" apart so there's no room for a run-up but room to stand. Another easier way to create a similar hazard is to place larger logs loosely spaced like giant pick-up sticks with the rule that they cannot be moved. Players landing in there would not have a run-up either.

[Fritz]

Not to mention that the major of disc golfers are pretty laid back people. If it's not a blatant violation of the rule, no one really calls it.

[garublador]

Bad analogy chuck.

If the analogy is that something is different between what a player does from the tee versus what they do from the fairway, then it's spot on.

No it's not. Players are still able to use the exact same stroke on the fairway as they are off the tee. It's just that the tee offers a nicer place to do it. It's a bad analogy.

A good analogy would be that, if anything, the current rules are similar to what they do in ball golf. You are a bit limited by what you can do on the fairway because in ball golf you don't get a tee and in disc golf there's a very specific area in which you have to plant your foot when you throw and the conditions are generally worse. Whether or not players call is is irrelevant.

[black udder]

Chuck - you're probably right. the forced S&D shots do sound interesting, too.

Fritz - maybe we need to divide the PDGA rule book into rules you have to abide by and rules we'd really like you to, but it's okay if you don't abide by?

For the rec players, I don't have a problem. They play whenever with whatever disc, maybe they keep score, maybe they don't. But if you're going to keep score, then you should abide by all the rules. I can see somebody not knowing every rule - there are some obtuse situations we find ourselves in, but the ones you're gonna run across almost every hole should be pretty clear and easily followed.

I sort of agree about the "laid back" - but I think "too nice" to call people on rules they should know might be closer.

[Chuck Kennedy]

No it's not. Players are still able to use the exact same stroke on the fairway as they are off the tee. It's just that the tee offers a nicer place to do it. It's a bad analogy.

Sorry but to tee or not to tee is a significant difference that's important in ball golf because they actually play it where it lies unlike disc golf. Being able to tee it up is a significant difference. In DG, we stand or release where it lies but we never actually play it where it lies like ball golf unless you are throwing the disc with your toes or kicking it.

The release point in DG can be identical say at chest height with the same disc as used on the tee (which can even be a driver) with the same run-up whether from the tee or the fairway much of the time. The ground where your drive lands is much less significant than if you had to hit a ball from it let alone with a driver.

[Fritz]

Chuck - you're probably right. the forced S&D shots do sound interesting, too.

Fritz - maybe we need to divide the PDGA rule book into rules you have to abide by and rules we'd really like you to, but it's okay if you don't abide by?

For the rec players, I don't have a problem. They play whenever with whatever disc, maybe they keep score, maybe they don't. But if you're going to keep score, then you should abide by all the rules. I can see somebody not knowing every rule - there are some obtuse situations we find ourselves in, but the ones you're gonna run across almost every hole should be pretty clear and easily followed.

I sort of agree about the "laid back" - but I think "too nice" to call people on rules they should know might be closer.

Sounds good to me j/k

I'm just saying the atmosphere and personality of disc golf is laid back, and unless someone is really breaking the rule to benefit their shot, or blatantly cheating, no one calls it because whatever. It's most likely due to the fact that the money isn't really there.
I guarantee that is first place was worth 5k+ you bet your ass people would be watching like hawks.
Even fora grand, some people call the foot fault. I witnessed Feldberg call one of the people in his group 1st round at CO States, call a guy because his foot was off to the side of the mini. The guy tried to argue, but Feldberg pointed to the foot print next to the mini, not behind it. Guy had to re shoot his shot. 2nd shot sucked.
Dave was playing for 1095$ check. I would have called it too.

[black udder]

I'll be the first to admit, I'm embarrassed to get called or warned of a fault or something. But the fact is, if you don't know the rules, you should feel grateful that somebody told you with a warning, not docking a stroke. The fact that we continue to uphold this relaxed attitude towards the rules of the game just propagates the tendency to ignore the rules.

I know it's supposed to be fun, but you can have lots of fun playing by the rules, too, right? I mean, you do, don't you?

To me it all comes down to scoring. If you're going to keep score, play by the rules. if you're not, then it doesn't matter. You don't have to stroke somebody on the first violation, but once warned, you shouldn't expect to continue to violate the rules and not pay the price.

[MIdiscgolfer]

Chuck I think you are taking my criticism of your analogy as disagreeing with your point. That isn't the case. I agree that the tee and the fairway are different places and that what pertains to one doesn't nessesarily pertain to the other. My contention is that the anaology that you used in response to my original post was just plan bad. And I can use your own words to prove it.

"If the analogy is that something is different between what a player does from the tee versus what they do from the fairway, then it's spot on."

This is a true satement.
But note how it begins
If the analogy is that something is different.....

Where in my post did I claim that there wasn't a difference between tee box and fairway?
Where in my post did I mention the tee box at all?

Your analogy, while very true in terms of the point you were rying to make, Didn't address any of the points I was making in my post. And that is why I said it was a bad analogy.

I don't disagree with anything you said and I don't have any problems with any of the points you were making. I am strictly arguing the appropriateness of the analogy.
(man I butchered that word. is it even a word?)
Anyhow I really just wanted to seeif I could win an argument with THE Chuck Kennedy

[Fritz]

Anyhow I really just wanted to seeif I could win an argument with THE Chuck Kennedy

CK is the Chuck Norris of Disc Golf...You won't win

[ChUcK]

Chuck Kennedy doesn't consult the PDGA rulebook...

The PDGA rulebook consults Chuck Kennedy!

You probably shouldn't have posted that, Fritz.

[Fritz]

Chuck Kennedy doesn't consult the PDGA rulebook...

The PDGA rulebook consults Chuck Kennedy!

You probably shouldn't have posted that, Fritz.

Oh no..I wanted to post it

Chuck Kennedy doesn't Foot Fault!

His feet have no faults.