Hey, all those who, overall, do not like the PDGA: why don't you like the PDGA? I hear a lot of bad mouthing, etc., but don't actually hear a lot of genuine reasons why some people really don't like the PDGA. Please explain. You may pick more than one reason, if you feel the need.

My biggest problems with the PDGA are:
1. Too many divisions
2. Not making the penalties for rules violations harsh enough. (In fact it seems we are headed the other direction)

how harsh do you want it? the supposedly "overly harsh" 2MR is gone, but the new "stroke-and-distance" penalty is absurdly harsh.

1. Zero tolerance for alcohol at C and D tiers is gone. Dumb. This should be a mandatory statement by TDs. Zero tolerance for drugs and alcohol from 2min to turning in scorecard.
2. Misadded scorecard should be harsher. I mean how f...ing hard is it to add.
3. Doing away with 2MR takes away alot of risk-reward. It's not random chance if a disc gets stuck in a tree, its a negative consequence of taking a risk, just like skipping off the OB water and staying IB.
4. Foot faults: Since you get a warning, after that it should be 2 strokes.
5. Kicking your bag, loud profanity, kicking trashcans, doing anything disruptive out of anger should be 2 strokes with possibility of DQ by TD.

Would you like me to go on Pat?

1. Zero tolerance for alcohol at C and D tiers is gone. Dumb. This should be a mandatory statement by TDs. Zero tolerance for drugs and alcohol from 2min to turning in scorecard.
> Not a PDGA issue directly. Players and TDs are the only way to enforce this other than hiring off duty cops for your event.

2. Misadded scorecard should be harsher. I mean how f...ing hard is it to add.
> Used to be 2 shots for each shot over or under actual total. I've seen 30-shot penalties. Ball golf is a DQ. Players who get the current penalty are not happy when they get it so it seems appropriate.

3. Doing away with 2MR takes away alot of risk-reward. It's not random chance if a disc gets stuck in a tree, its a negative consequence of taking a risk, just like skipping off the OB water and staying IB.
> Not gone contrary to what even some Board members may say. It's optional just like making an OB or mando. One hole will have it at Pro Worlds in Wisconsin where it's appropriate. Removing trees blocking a fairway also reduces risk/reward but more importantly reduces luck, just like not using the 2m rule.

4. Foot faults: Since you get a warning, after that it should be 2 strokes.
> Not a PDGA issue. Players have to call it. Making second infraction tougher makes no difference if first one is never called.

5. Kicking your bag, loud profanity, kicking trashcans, doing anything disruptive out of anger should be 2 strokes with possibility of DQ by TD.
> The option is there for TDs to DQ and PDGA will likely back them if they call a DQ.

Not a PDGA issue directly. Players and TDs are the only way to enforce this.....


Chuck, players and TDs are the only ones who can enforce any of the rules. I don't understand your argument here.
I know the 2MR is optional, but by default it is gone. It is just my belief that rules should be stiffer by default and less harsh exceptions (like drop zones) can be made for special cases.
I know many players don't call foot faults, that's a whole issue by itself, but just because people don't call them doesn't make any difference as far as what the rules should say. Maybe if the penalties for things were a little harsher, people would think about them a little more, especially once they have been warned.

I know many players don't call foot faults, that's a whole issue by itself, but just because people don't call them doesn't make any difference as far as what the rules should say. Maybe if the penalties for things were a little harsher, people would think about them a little more, especially once they have been warned.


The reality on the course is that the harsher you make the penalty, the less likely anyone is to call it.

Then why do we have rules?

I voted that overall, I like the PDGA and think they do a good job with what resources they have available.

However, I still think that there are too many divisions, and tournaments are too expensive, especially for Open division competitors. $40-$75 is a lot of money to pony up to play in 'B' and 'C' tier events.

Funny that someone is complaining about rules and he blatenly broke a message board rule by posting a link that was considered a personal attack.

Then why do we have rules?



I don't follow your logic. Would you support harsher rules that would be called less often or more lenient rules that would get enforced almost universally? I get the feeling that you are arguing against Rhett's point without offering an alternative I don't think there's much you can do to increase rules enforcement short of hiring people to tag along, increase volunteership, or, as Rhett suggests, making rules that people will actually be likely to call. It's either going to increase tournament fees (hiring someone), be impossible short of forced labor (expecting more volunteers), or reasonable (making rules people are more likely to enforce by using accepted psychology).

How are rules enforced in ball golf? Is it anyone's responsibility, other than they player's, to enforce the rule if they accidentally tap their ball on a practice swing while no one's watching? Perhaps you'd really rather see an increase in players' integrity.

I speed too, MTL.

ah, i see what you mean. those a great examples.

Perhaps you'd really rather see an increase in players' integrity.


That would be nice, and I think you made my point for me.
As far as an alternative, I can't think of one, except....if no one calls rules violations then there are 2 (extreme) options:
1. Do away with the rules.
2. Make it a penalty to not call a rules violation. (except no one would ever call it)

How do you make players enforce rules? Does anyone know? Where is Terry to chime in on this one?

Funny that someone is complaining about rules and he blatenly broke a message board rule by posting a link that was considered a personal attack.



Funny that someone is complaing about a personal attack by making a personal attack.

Funny that I am complaining about a personal attack on someone making a personal attack by making another a personal attack. Anyone care to attack me?

Funny that someone is complaing about a personal attack by making a personal attack.




Personal attack and fact are different.

However, if you feel that my post was in anyway against a message board rule, please report it.

This goes with all of my posts.

Your avatar could be considered phallic.

Funny that someone is complaing about a personal attack by making a personal attack.




Personal attack and fact are different.

However, if you feel that my post was in anyway against a message board rule, please report it.

This goes with all of my posts.


BTW, MTL, my post was never reported and I removed it before it was because it was in bad taste. However, I'm not sure if it violated message board rules. If I post a link to a website that claims to hate you, how is that a personal attack? No one attacked you, they just stated a "fact".

I removed it before it was because it was in bad taste.



I thank you for making this decision. I accept it as an apology and will no longer be upset over it.

I never apologized and I am not sorry. Bad taste or not, I agreed with the website but figured I'd get put on probation.

BTW, thanks for diverting everyone from the subject and once again making this thread about YOU. You're quite proficient at doing that.

Now, back to the subject.....

How do you make players enforce rules? Does anyone know? Where is Terry to chime in on this one?

Perhaps you'd really rather see an increase in players' integrity.


That would be nice, and I think you made my point for me.
As far as an alternative, I can't think of one, except....if no one calls rules violations then there are 2 (extreme) options:
1. Do away with the rules.
2. Make it a penalty to not call a rules violation. (except no one would ever call it)

How do you make players enforce rules? Does anyone know? Where is Terry to chime in on this one?



My point was that you don't have to take one of the extremes. You can take some middle ground. Making rules that are more likely to be called would increase rules enforcement for things that are judgement calls or "minor" infractions (e.g. foot faults). Things like the 2 meter rule are hard to argue against because it's pretty easy to judge height of a stationary object (vs. proving that someone stepped over their lie.)

This doesn't have to be a situation where somebody (i.e. Terry Calhoun) "knows" what is and is not going to be called, but it could involve somebody actually paying attention to what is and is not being called, and making a decision of what rules to change based on actual calls. Simple science.


Going by your ("extreme") logic, we can not have rules, or make it a penalty which would, as you point out, be impossible to enforce.
You seem to be advocating the end of rules. Is this accurate? If so, then do you also advocate the end of disc golf? If so, why are you paying money to play a sport you wish would not be in existance?

Your avatar could be considered phallic.



Thank you for noticing. ;)

I'm not advocating for the end of rules. I'm smart enough to know that won't accomplish anything. My point with the poll on this (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=665873&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1) thread is this:
The poll shows that 76% of the voters believe that less than 55% of regular tourney players are perceived to have read the rules, with 34% saying less than 25% have read the rules.
If half the players haven't read the rules, this leads to confusion if a situation occurs and we can't count on these players to call rules infractions.
Also, since very little rules violations are called anyway, this means that players who have read the rules are not calling them. This seems like a major problem if I see things correctly.
Half of the players don't know the rules, the other half won't call them for whatever reason. So rules aren't being called.
WHY?
What do we have to do to get players to read the rules and call the violations?

The post was reported (and not by Robert), you just edited too quickly because you obviously realized that it was inappropriate to keep up.

What do we have to do to get players to read the rules and call the violations?



Good question.
We could institute a mandatory official's test to anyone joining the PDGA. (I think a lot of people would not like this)
We could mandate carrying the rule book at any sponsored event. (not complicated, but I still think a lot of people would complain)
We could continue to rely on the relatively small number of people who know and have read the rules. (not perfect, but getting the job done, more or less)

Any other suggestions?

I'm not sure how this has anything to do with your original idea of making the rules harsher, however. Care to enlighten me?

By the way, any moderators out there? I think the MB has forgotten to update it's clock for daylight savings.

I'm not sure how this has anything to do with your original idea of making the rules harsher, however. Care to enlighten me?


I guess my thinking was (apparently I was wrong) that if you make the consequences for violating a rule harsher, people will think twice about violating that rule. Now I realize that this will only occur if people actually call the rules violation, which is hoping too much. Also, you have to know what the rule is to actually know if someone violated it, which is also hoping too much.
I guess I just see this as a HUGE problem that is being ignored by everyone. So I am at a loss for words as to the solution. We, as a sport, have either ignored the problem or accepted it as an inevitability.....and that's kinda sad.

So you want people to call rules violations and report people yet when I have done that in the past you have only heard stories and then agreed with terms used on me such as "snitch" and "rat".

I just don't understand that logic.

So you want people to call rules violations and report people yet when I have done that in the past you have only heard stories and then agreed with terms used on me such as "snitch" and "rat".

I just don't understand that logic.


Show me.

I don't have that type of time to find it.

However, I am very pleased to hear that you are someone who also calls rules violations. I am glad that someone else does the same. It is for the better of disc golf.

I salute you!

I don't have that type of time to find it.


Good excuse considering you're on the DB 24-7.
Way to make empty statements. Why don't you go troll on another thread?

Also, you have to know what the rule is to actually know if someone violated it, which is also hoping too much.
I guess I just see this as a HUGE problem that is being ignored by everyone. So I am at a loss for words as to the solution. We, as a sport, have either ignored the problem or accepted it as an inevitability.....and that's kinda sad.



This would most likely make a nice sociological study.....although I am no sociologist to be sure. It is kind of a small "society" embracing and enforcing rules as they see fit & fair.

I doubt that if anyone felt like another competitor was blatantly cheating (gaining a totally unfair advantage) they would hesitate for a moment to call the offender on the violation. But things like footfaulting when in the open, falling putts inside 15' (gimme range), etc., and even drug/alcohol use are not perceived as gaining unfair advantages. It is kind of like speeding: if it feels safe and the police are not enforcing it strictly, why does it hurt anyone to go 10mph over the speed limit?

It is an interesting conundrum, IMO. We love our laid back culture, but many want strict/legalistic rule-calling. If we want an uptight culture and to be like ball golf, I suppose we would have to sacrifice a big part of our culture.

Of course, big money on the line will get the rules much closer scrutiny and adherence. :)

Thanks for not quoting the part where I said something very nice about you or even ackowledging the fact that I did at all.

All about the negative stuff.....

Calling someone a liar tends to raise the hackles. Even if you applaud them afterwards for something minor.

I wouldnt use the term liar, if he did infact say what I remember him saying then I am correct.

If he did not ever post anything in those terms, then I was mistaken. If that proves to be the case, I will recoginze my error and apologize, as I have many many times when I was wrong.

I actually 100% agree with Colin's basic idea of increasing penalties.

The reason people in NASCAR cheat is b/c the punishment is so small. One could aruge that by illegally improving a car even with the point punishment, a driver could earn more points with the illegal car.

BTW, MTL, my post was never reported and I removed it before it was because it was in bad taste. However, I'm not sure if it violated message board rules. If I post a link to a website that claims to hate you, how is that a personal attack? No one attacked you, they just stated a "fact".




The post was reported (and not by Robert), you just edited too quickly because you obviously realized that it was inappropriate to keep up.



Indeed, the jury is still out on whether posting a link to a website dedicated to the hate of someone (along with linking directly to profanity) violates PDGA DISCussion board rules. Since Colin Furrow #28003 edited out the link shortly after it was reported, we decided not to take action on it.

Furthermore, if Colin Furrow #28003 and Robert J. Leonard #21676 would kindly take their personal differences to Private Messaging or e-mail we'd greatly appreciate it, thanks.

Ah, yes, but unlike the PDGA, NASCAR can afford to pay people to ensure rule enforcement. Harsher rules without an ability to enforce them would probably only lead to less rules adherement. That would only lead to a further dwindling of respect for the PDGA.

Think of the kids you know who have parents that yell at them all the time. Kids learn to ignore their parents yelling because they get it all the time (harsh rules), but it never really means anything (less rules adherement). Also, think of underage drinking. Increasing the penalty has never done anything to decrease underage drinking. Cops busting up parties and checking out places that sell to underagers works wonders.

I wouldn't mind increasing the penalty for an incorrect score card, since that can be enforced pretty easily, and it would cut down on pouty whiners storming off after their rounds (can you imagine Phil Mickelson doing that after the Winged-Foot meltdown- a televised tantrum). I think increasing the penalty without increasing the enforcement ability of TDs would ultimately lead to a lessening of respect for the rules, in general.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gYNMBzlnL68"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gYNMBzlnL68" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

priceless

So rules aren't being called.
WHY?
What do we have to do to get players to read the rules and call the violations?


It's pretty simple, really. Read yoru rule book, know your ruleboook, and start making valid rules violation calls when you play and you will know the answer.

Rules don't get called because anyone who calls rules violations is a big fat dick-head. Try it and you'll see that everyone will call you that. Try calling a clear-cut "instant winner" slam-dunk of a call durng the PDGA Worlds that can't in any way be argued, even with a PDGA BOD member on the card, and you too can experience being singled out a dick-head and come close to getting in a fight in the parking lot after the round. If you are lucky, you will even get the bonus of havin the course TD over-turn your call because he's never read the current version of the rule book and he doesn't want to be a dick-head himself, so that you are left on an island by yourself, having shot a crappy round because of the stress, having almost been beaten up over it, all the while the rules-breaker and the BOD member will have rallied against you to raise the level of their game and shoot better roudns with the "he's a dick-head and he's picking on us" us-against-them attitude.

You might also decide that it will never be worth it to make another call again.

I know the rules. I play by the rules. I do not call rules violations. However, if you are on my card and you call a violation and I agree, I will second the call every time.

if everyone took that approach, no violations would get called ever.

if everyone took that approach, no violations would get called ever.


Kind of like how it is now.

True to my word, though, I did stand up for the "missed tee-off" call another person made on our card the last regular round at Worlds in '05. I didn't, however, make that call.

Maybe someone who's taken the appropriate philosophy course more recently than I have could find a better way to say this, but "What are rules for, anyway?"

If I see a violation, I call it. But I admit that when I am playing I don't spend a lot of time watching other players' feet for foot faults, etc. Usually, I am watching their discs fly - which I consider one of the more beautiful things on Earth.

OTOH, I can't even recall the last time I competed with someone who I felt was intentionally gaining an unfair advantage by violating the rules. It does happen, I know, but it seems rare. (Hopelessly naive and inexperienced player that I am.)

If I competed in a hypothetical sport that didn't have any rules, and the rules were being created, it seems to me that a primary, maybe the primary, "mission" of the rules would be to create fair competition.

Since I have not once in 7 years of competition play knew or felt that someone was gaining an unfair advantage on me due to breaking rules, the current situation satisfies that primary mission for me as a player.

If you concentrate on landing your foot on the LOP and within 30cm of your mark on fairway runups, every single person that "doesn't think it matters" has gained an unfair advantage on you as they are basically executing a tee shot with no regards to their footing.

That is fact.

Now, whether you "feel like" they have an unfair advantage is another story altogether. :)

BTW, at Worlds in Iowa where my story took place, the violation was moving an obstacle betweent the lie and the hole. Pretty straightforward and as "slam dunk" of a call as you can come across.

But back the question of why rules aren't called: it's because even when you call the obvious ones you are an ******* for it. I've only called a foot fault in competition once (stance behind a tree and missed the mark by two feet to, of course, the good side), so don't let my message board persona make you think that I am calling rules violations left and right out on the course. That couldn't be further from the truth.

I'll argue that players that ignore their footing on a fairway run up aren't really gaining an unfair advantage over me because I rarely think much about it myself. I put in many hours of practiceto get to that point, and I check my accuracy whenever the condition of the turf leaves and indication of where I pivoted.

They are competing on an unfairly even playing field because the appear to lack the skill to hit their mark, but don't waste any effort trying.

They are gaining an unfair advantage over players that are learning to play within the rules and must still think about thier foot placement to get it right.

Oh, if someone was routinely doing that, Rhett, I think I would notice and say something. Which is not necessarily the same thing as "calling it," because that only works if others are watching at just the right moment. If I think someone is doing it but others aren't noticing it, I'd rather let the violator know what I think I see than talk to everyone else secretively and spring it on him the next time we all see it.

I agree with your perspective on how people would act toward someone who went around calling such things all of the time. I'm not saying someone should call out those kinds of things regularly, or should not, except for having learned that with things like foot faults, pretty much everyone has to be watching to make and get a call supported. If you notice a foot fault and "call it" but the others cannot support your call because they weren't watching, well, what was the point? And pretty much everyone is watching the disc instead, usually.

I guess the point of my post was that even if calls aren't made, the very existence of the rules, however frequently applied, does a lot - in and of itself - to make play fair.

Except for when I marshal, I think I've overall called more rules violations on myself than on others. You can bet that if I see my foot planted a foot wide of the proper place on an approach, I'd call it.

If I think someone is doing it but others aren't noticing it, I'd rather let the violator know what I think I see than talk to everyone else secretively and spring it on him the next time we all see it.

I agree with your perspective on how people would act toward someone who went around calling such things all of the time.


The entire tone of your post proves my point. You think extremely negatively of people that call valid rules violations. You use terms like "talk to everyone secretively and then spring it on him" and also point out how if anyone were to actually have the gall to adhere to rule 801.01, then yes everyone would think they were an ******* for good cause.

In my rules story at 2004 Worlds, I did not make any rules calls before the incident in question. I did not sneak around "secretively" and try to spring anything on anyone. I was just playing and trying to have a good time. Then out of the the blue, I see a guy in my division pick up a rather long obstacle that extended out between his lie and the hole for quite a distance, and then proceed to drag an very large section from in front of his lie to behind his lie. I had to go say something.

Like I said, I didn't "sneak around". I wasn't calling all infractions like i am supposed to do per PDGA Rules of Play 801.01. I simply saw what I believed to be an egregious violation of the rules, and called it.

It is the culture of disc golf that prevents rules calls from being made, and it does not appear that the culture will be changing any time soon. :p

I don't want to go through all of that again, but there was really no way to argue against the call that Rhett made, and he was soundly chastised for making it and sticking to his opinion when the call was improperly reversed. I can understand his current position on the rewards of calling blatant rules violations, even calls made within your own division.

I don't want to go through all of that again, but there was really no way to argue against the call that Rhett made, and he was soundly chastised for making it and sticking to his opinion when the call was improperly reversed. I can understand his current position on the rewards of calling blatant rules violations, even calls made within your own division.



BTW - for those of you who don't remember, getting chastised means in this forum. I remember one set of posts about Rhett calling a rules violation on another card. Rhett got a major dose of harassament here for this. There were a ton of comments about this hippie freak who couldn't keep his nose out of other people's business. Personally I was offended, not that I'm a hippie, but as a card carrying member of Freaks Of America, I resented being placed in the same group with Rhett. :D

Nonetheless, Rhett is correct, we have a problem and I see no way to fix it. BTW - I've had the same situation. Three of us made a call on a player on another card for moving brush that extended beyond his lie (actually it was the lie of another player). We got a lecture about keeping our noses out of another player's business with an attitude of I'm going to kick your backside. Not a lot of fun. It took a third party to calm the guy down and when it was said and done, no warning, no penalty.

BTW - the call was legit, the player had a misunderstanding of the rules, he thought because some of the stick was between the lie and the Tee box, he could move it. The branch was large with the leaves still on and the disc was lying on top of the leaves.

Still no response from Terry on how he seems to have assumed that since a rules call was made, someone must've been being a "Rules Dick" about it.

Still no response from Terry on how he seems to have assumed that since a rules call was made, someone must've been being a "Rules Dick" about it.



I wonder if Terry is coming to Tejas soon. I certainly hope so because I will light a joint, crack open a beer, and blow the smoke in his face and laugh because he cannot enforce "the rules" or lack there of. Unfortunantly i can't light up a cigarette anymore because that would be legal. :D

Still no response from Terry on how he seems to have assumed that since a rules call was made, someone must've been being a "Rules Dick" about it.



I wonder if Terry is coming to Tejas soon. I certainly hope so because I will light a joint, crack open a beer, and blow the smoke in his face and laugh because he cannot enforce "the rules" or lack there of. Unfortunantly i can't light up a cigarette anymore because that would be legal. :D



You are the PDGA.

Still no response from Terry on how he seems to have assumed that since a rules call was made, someone must've been being a "Rules Dick" about it.

Rhett's Not an R.D.

No such assumption made, Rhett. "R.D." and the B-word, and the N-word, and many, many others, aren't in my usage-lexicon.

It's A Different Rule

If you'll notice, my comments about secretively getting people together were specifically directed at getting everyone to watch for the next foot fault, somehow without alerting the player doing it. My preference in that case is usually to say to the player that I think he's routinely foot-faulting, rather than calling it the first time I see it, because the odds that I have anyone else watching at the time to back up my call the first time it comes to my consciousness are very poor.

If I were to call it and get no back-up, very likely, that sets a more negative tone and accomplishes nothing more than just noting the fact to him. Now, if I saw it and looked up and saw the other two players on the card staring at the player's feet, and then our eyes met, and we nodded . . . well, if not too much time had gone by, sure, I'd call it then.)

I understood that your situation was different, it was a different rule. The player moved an obstacle that he should not have, and that movement was seen by all - there was no disagreement on that fact, right? No comparison. (Unless you're one of those handful of rude guys from "Tejas" who live too close to Crawford and, thus, have forgotten - or never knew - what nuance is. For those same guys, I did not just say that everyone from Texas is rude. :D

Stopping Rather Than Waiting And Calling

Now, I've seen people starting to move an obstacle** that they should not move many times, and each time been successful in alerting them to the fact that they should not - before they did. Again, that would be my preference.

Case Study: On This Rule and How Many Don't Know It, Both

** In fact, while marshaling in a DGLO a couple of years ago I was watching the third-from-the-lead card play Monster Hole 3, and for some reason, a previous night's storm I think, there was a rather large and obnoxious branch lying on the ground near where a lot of the drives headed for the Championship basket were landing.

One of the players landed on a small piece of that branch, which extended beyond his disc toward the pin, and, as he stooped to move it, I said to him: "You can't move that." I'd rather stop the rules violation before it happens than have to call it. He asked why, and I explained. Then, just for fun, I asked him and the other three top Pros what their understanding of the rule was. Only one of them - Kenny - knew the rule correctly.

The player who I stopped asked me if I would let the next two cards know that, so that they would not have an advantage over him if their whole group didn't know and landed there. Some of them did. I alerted them, as well. Presumably, they all know the rule now.