803.05 A & B Stance Ruling Please

[7ontheline]

Shelby Forest has taken a beating this spring and has numerous LARGE fallen braches and trees. During doubles this Sunday a disc came to rest under the top of a fallen tree. The stance, possible run up area, and line of site was totally covered by branches. We played it where it lied and could have twisted something from the crazy stances we took to keep contact behind the disc.

Could we have taken the no closer, in the line, and five meter max relief behind the disc under this rule?

[Apothecary]

yup.

[Itchy]

Is this the casual relief rule?

Is there a 1 stroke penalty for moving your lie 5m behind your current lie to get breathing room from a tree?

[Chuck Kennedy]

No penalty if it's a casual obstacle you can't move. Otherwise, you can move back on the line of play inbounds as far as you want for a 1-throw penalty.

[7ontheline]

Sorry Chuck, I guess that's my rules question... is the fallen tree a casual obstacle? Its a lot more than a "broken branch" its the whole tree and its not going to moved except with the help of a chainsaw.

Thanks All.

[Chuck Kennedy]

If it's not a live tree, but a dead tree that's fallen, it qualifies as a casual obstacle that can't be moved. So you get relief on the line of play behind it.

[curt]

If he had a chainsaw and was determined enough, could he move it?*

how long would he have to accomplish his task?

*I'm assuming it isn't connected to the ground in any way.

[Chuck Kennedy]

No chainsaw action in tournament play (damaging an obstacle on the course, noise distraction for other groups). But similar to the Tiger Woods incident where several strong guys lifted and moved a rock out of his stance on TV in a tournament, you could get people to help move it. Although there's technically no time limit to remove a distraction before throwing (mom and baby in stroller moving slowly on a path), the rule provides an alternative in this case where the player can move back on the line of play without moving it. So the branch/tree should be easily movable by the people available nearby.

[curt]

Does the not damaging obstacle clause apply to casual obstacles? I wouldn't have thought to apply it to them. (Of course, for the most part, it doesn't matter as a casual obstacle can't really be destroyed in a way that matters).

[Chuck Kennedy]

Does the not damaging obstacle clause apply to casual obstacles?

Check out 803.05F. Casual obstacles are still part of the course. Breaking a dead branch might not be called but really shouldn't be done deliberately.