Say that I call a foot fault on player A's drive. From Rule 803.04, Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off (which applies to a teeoff as well, see Rule 803.02B):

"F. A stance violation must be clearly called within three seconds after the infraction to be valid. The call may be made by any member of the group or an official. When the call is made by a member of the group, it must subsequently be confirmed by another member of the group. A player shall receive a warning for the first violation of a stance rule in the round. Subsequent violations of a stance rule in the same round shall incur a one-throw penalty."

If the other players on the card were not watching, then it cannot be seconded, I should say, it should not be seconded by the other players. Now, from 801.01, Courtesy:

"A. Players should not throw until they are certain that the thrown disc will not distract another player or potentially injure anyone present. Players should watch the other members of their group throw in order to aid in locating errant throws and to ensure compliance with the rules."

and

"C. Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules, such as assisting in the search for a lost disc, moving discs or equipment, or keeping score properly, etc., is a courtesy violation."

Now, the second sentence of Part A indicates that the players _should_ watch other members throw, and Part C indicates some types of courtesy violations, with the key phrase being �refusal to perform an action _expected_ by the rules". I would argue that it IS expected that players should watch other players throw, even though it says �should� instead of �must�, and my reasoning is, why include that second sentence in part A if it is not part of the rules. Since that sentence is in the Rules, it is, by its nature, a rule, and needs to be obeyed.

If I am in the shule, and I have someone in my group watching me to see if I take a legal stance, but only one other person, I don�t have to worry about my stance, because any call cannot be legitimately seconded, since no one else saw the alleged infraction. And if I did make an effort to take a legal stance, but for whatever reason, I did not, I cannot legitimately be accused of trying to circumvent the rules (Rule 804.05A(3)).

That�s long enough of a read. What do y�all think?

I think it's irrelevant. When was the last time you saw a foot fault called? Even on a stand in throw from the shule? I think it was Cong who once said this is the most ignored rule in our sport.

Now, if we're talking fantasy island, restructuring the rules to be more explicit is a mistake in my opinion. What we need is a reevaluation of the situation to determine if there is a better way to handle foot faults to accomplish the same goal (making a player play from their lie) while lessening the burden on co-players to enforce compliance.

Now, you are starting thread drift already. Do you have any opinions about how the rules could be interpreted if one of the above instances happened to occur?

I can understand, and realize, that after the teeoffs, people are going to be scattered over the hole, but I would be (and was) ticked off when I called a foot fault on the tee, with everybody there near the tee pad, and did not get a second, not because the others in the group thought that the thrower had a legal stance on the tee, but because they were not watching the thrower.

Now, you are starting thread drift already. Do you have any opinions about how the rules could be interpreted if one of the above instances happened to occur?

I can understand, and realize, that after the teeoffs, people are going to be scattered over the hole, but I would be (and was) ticked off when I called a foot fault on the tee, with everybody there near the tee pad, and did not get a second, not because the others in the group thought that the thrower had a legal stance on the tee, but because they were not watching the thrower.



As a player I have enough things to worry about without watching every other player's moves. I like the way ball golf handles it, it is up to the individual to call their own penalties.

I understand your frustration with others not paying attention. I once called a footfault on myself, after stepping over the front edge of a tee and nearly breaking my ankle - I couldn't even get a second from the group then!!
While it may be an extreme - I agree with your extrapolation/interpretation of the rules AND if it peeved you off enough - you could (within the rules) give everyone else in your group a warning for courtesy, and ask them to please pay attention the rest of the round.
As long as we are going to be self policing - then everyone (including you Jerry) needs to own up to their responsibilities and play by ALL the rules - not just the ones which are most convenient.

Typically, when someone foot faults once it is hard to catch. When it happens more than once I quietly talk to some of the other players and tell them that I might be calling a foot fault in the future and to please be observant.

I understand your frustration with others not paying attention. I once called a footfault on myself, after stepping over the front edge of a tee and nearly breaking my ankle - I couldn't even get a second from the group then!!
While it may be an extreme - I agree with your extrapolation/interpretation of the rules AND if it peeved you off enough - you could (within the rules) give everyone else in your group a warning for courtesy, and ask them to please pay attention the rest of the round.
As long as we are going to be self policing - then everyone (including you Jerry) needs to own up to their responsibilities and play by ALL the rules - not just the ones which are most convenient.



It isn't feasible to have all players in a group monitoring all other players. Speed of play guidelines stipulate that you go to your disc in the fairway and prepare for your shot.

Jerry,

I understand that what you are trying to say, even if it is a "non-rule" rule. Here's what the Rules say:

801.03 Excessive Time:
A. A maximum of 30 seconds is allowed
to each player to make a throw after:
(1) the previous player has thrown; and,
(2) the player has taken a reasonable time to arrive at the disc and mark the lie; and,
(3) the playing area is clear and free of distractions.

Speed of play dictates that you take a reasonable time to arrive at your disc and mark your lie after the previous player has thrown, it does NOT say where you should be prior to said player throwing. You _could_ be right behind the player, not interfering, watching the player and the player's throw, _then_ you should proceed in a reasonable fashion to your lie.

How about this: All players are responsible for watching all other players in the group tee off, observing for stance violations as well as the player's throw. But, on subsequent throws, if one other player is watching another player for stance violations, then all of the other players must watch as well, or risk being called for a courtesy violation if the observing player calls a stance violation on the thrower.

Jerry,

I understand that what you are trying to say, even if it is a "non-rule" rule. Here's what the Rules say:

801.03 Excessive Time:
A. A maximum of 30 seconds is allowed
to each player to make a throw after:
(1) the previous player has thrown; and,
(2) the player has taken a reasonable time to arrive at the disc and mark the lie; and,
(3) the playing area is clear and free of distractions.

Speed of play dictates that you take a reasonable time to arrive at your disc and mark your lie after the previous player has thrown, it does NOT say where you should be prior to said player throwing. You _could_ be right behind the player, not interfering, watching the player and the player's throw, _then_ you should proceed in a reasonable fashion to your lie.

How about this: All players are responsible for watching all other players in the group tee off, observing for stance violations as well as the player's throw. But, on subsequent throws, if one other player is watching another player for stance violations, then all of the other players must watch as well, or risk being called for a courtesy violation if the observing player calls a stance violation on the thrower.



I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Isn't there a rule in place to address what you are speaking of, if a player intentionally cheats, they are disqualified.

Bill,

Just imagine how much time it WOULD take if everyone were to do this exactly as it should be!
I'm not saying "don't follow the rules", but this is just another case of rules which might need to be changed.
It already takes an inordinate amount of time (sometimes over 3 hours) to play 1 round; if we were to follow that exact protocol, you're talking 4+ hour rounds for sure.

Both Jerry and Craig have points...the solution may be to rewrite the rules to something that 1) could actually be followed and not take all week to do so, and 2) can be enforced.

Karl

Stand and Deliver seems to be the only solution that truly addresses the problem but few appear to like that option so we continue with this issue.

Aw crap Chuck, does this mean I have to AGREE with you on some issue? :eek: ;)

Karl

I think Jerry's right - this is a sport which is best "self-regulated".

Some sports are: Running, ball golf, etc.
Some sports aren't: Most team sports.

There seem to be 3 commonalities - the primary:
1) If money can be found to hire officials, then "officials do the officialing".
2) Most "individual sports" are 'poorer' and thus more apt to have self-regulation.
...and to a lesser extent:
3) If money is involved, the propensity for 'cheating' seems to increase (something tangible to gain by it).

And add to this if 3) is involved, 4) "leaving the rules up to playing competitors" is tenuous at best.

Unless we have enough money to hire officials (unlikely), we'll have to do our own (self) policing.

Karl

I never said that I liked the rules as they are.

I never said that I didn't think that the rules could stand some updating.

It is thread drift to discuss how the rules could be better written or enforced.


Let's see if we can find some commonality on one specific situation:

I call a foot fault on the thrower. I do not get a second because no one else was watching the thrower.


Do you think that the other players have any obligation under the rules to watch the other player throw? 801.01A says they should watch.

Do I have any recourse against the others in the group that were _appearently_ not holding to 801.01A ? 801.01C seems to imply that it would be a courtesy violation.

I am saying that my interpretation would be that it IS a courtesy violation, and I have given my justifications.

I welcome others' opinions, with their justifications based on the Rules as they are currently written, or with RC rulings, if applicable.

You've got a good enough argument to take to court.

The judge might toss it on the grounds of being reasonable.

Bill,

I agree with you (you DO have recourse to "call them on such").
I was just - yeah, maybe thread drift - looking past that point to a "solution"...so that you won't HAVE to envoke such in the (distant) future.

Karl

Ps: You may not end up being the 'most popular boy at the dance' but rules ARE rules and we should follow them UNTIL we come up with something better - which, in this case, is needed (at least in my opinion).

As written Bill, you are right about the obligation of players to police each other.
Without a rule change, failing to watch for compliance (with the rules) is a courtesy violation.
Courtesy is the first rule in the sport and should be given more weight by the players and the organization.

David,

Thank you for the chuckle. I wanted to know if my conclusions were reasonable.

Karl,

_may_ not be...popular? Make that _WON'T_ be popular!

ALL,

Please, all of you, don't let that reason keep you from enforcing the rules. You don't have to go looking for rules violations, but if you see one, _please_ call it!

With the way the rules are currently written, the players are responsible for policing their group, not just themselves. Don't let someone else try to make _you_ feel bad because _they_ did not follow a rule. And if you have to start small, start small, just start, and let that start build momentum.

And let the Rules Committee and the BOD know if you think that a rule should be changed. It may not happen, but at least you spoke up. And I'm not even going that far - I'm just trying to get the current rules enforced, and even there, I'm trying to start small - with one rule (stance) and in one instance (at the tee - where everybody is natually gathered).

Thanks for reading and considering.

"Visualize Rules Enforcement"---Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I have felt this frustration greatly. I had experiences last year with my whole group foot faulting at some point. Sometimes extremely obvious. I warned the whole group at one point and after that I could not get a second. Even on an obvious falling put from 15 feet (from his knees, he fell forward). After this I stopped playing tournaments for a while.

Their is one solution I can think of. Eliminate the need of a second for an "offical". If you have been certified, you should be able to call a violation without a second.

The only proper solution to this problem is to have marshalls on every hole. As long as we self-police, we will have these issues come up regularly. I look forward to the day when we have enough volunteers to have all holes covered by an independant marshall who can call violations without a second.

Judges and lawyers self-police and it doesn't work very well at all.

Mike,

Your...

Judges and lawyers self-police and it doesn't work very well at all


...unfortunately doesn't speak too well about our society in general :mad: but I think it will be WAY off in the future when we get enough "marshalls" to police us properly. In the meantime - which, I believe, will be a LONG while - we have to find a way to 'solve' this problem ourselves.

It speaks volumes about the PGA touring players (and their ethics) that they're able to do so.

Unfortunately, our society almost encourages evil actions as a way to "get ahead" - just think of all the crimes done where the punishment in barely a slap on the wrist. Because of this, "ethics" is a way-too-fleeting attribute in the general public (and such actions spill out into sports, etc.).

Karl

There are three solutions:
a) Create a culture where players are more diligent about observing/calling the rules
b) Create a police state with Marshall's following every card.
c) Tweak the rules to make them simpler to call/follow (e.g. create a stand and deliver rule)
At this point odds are even on which of the three above are more likely.

But to the original question, I think a courtesy warning for players not paying attention to a foot fault on the tee pad is allowable by the rules and as a TD I would stand behind the player making that call.

JPitt,

If something like that happens again, report it immediately after the round to the TD. If the others in the group are not paying attention, then give them courtesy violations. If they say that it was not a foot fault, and it was obvious that they were not watching, tell the TD.

Ask the TD to note your name/email address or phone number in the TD report about the problem, so that when you follow up with the PDGA about it, they will have your name and info, so they can verify that you are you.

Even if you are an official, you should not be able to singly rule on a violation in your group, or another group in your division.


Mike,

I have suggested that we start this type of process for the WDGC final round and see how it goes, but that is a tremendous use of manpower, unless we have volunteers from the players who didn't make the finals, and even if we use them, they should not be marshaling for the same division that they competed in.

just move out of the division with the players that dont follow rules.After my first novice win i moved into the advanced masters and these guys play by the rules with respect for each other. Not everybody can move to the old fellows division too bad for those.
in reallity i agree that the players that choose not to pay attention when a possible foul is in play aught to be accountable to the rules as written. A player can always suspend play and find an official to fix a situation i.e. a card of players that dont want to abide by the rules should be told to leave by the td or an official.

I understand your frustration with others not paying attention. I once called a footfault on myself, after stepping over the front edge of a tee and nearly breaking my ankle - I couldn't even get a second from the group then!!
While it may be an extreme - I agree with your extrapolation/interpretation of the rules AND if it peeved you off enough - you could (within the rules) give everyone else in your group a warning for courtesy, and ask them to please pay attention the rest of the round.
As long as we are going to be self policing - then everyone (including you Jerry) needs to own up to their responsibilities and play by ALL the rules - not just the ones which are most convenient.



Why does it have to be extreme, and not done until one is peeved off, to enforce a rule? We need to give all rules equal weight, as far as enforcement is concerned.

I'm human/imperfect. If I do something on the course I shouldn't have done, let me know, and bring the force of the rules if you have to. I understand that you are not intending to be "picking on" me, you are trying to defend the integrity of the game, which cannot defend itself.

But again, since we have let lots of rules slide for so long, we need to start small and work our way up. We seem to have it down on putting, so let's start on the teepad and get that down first, then we will work our way up to fairway shots.

Mike,

I have suggested that we start this type of process for the WDGC final round and see how it goes, but that is a tremendous use of manpower, unless we have volunteers from the players who didn't make the finals, and even if we use them, they should not be marshaling for the same division that they competed in.



The PDGA has not yet reached the critical mass level that would provide us with the manpower to have marshalls on every hole. Think of all the USGA members from local golf clubs that volunteer to work the PGA tournaments. Certainly they're not all marshalls/officials, but they have that kind of manpower due to their sheer numbers.

It will happen, one day. And it won't be a police state except to those who can't or won't play by the rules.

On the contrary, I think we have a fine society. We just don't have a justice system with any integrity. And I think the biggest problem in that is that they are in charge of policing themselves for the most part. The result is juvenile judges in PA who accept kickbacks and prosecutors who hide exculpatory evidence from defense counsel.

My whole "on-thread" point here is history shows that self-policing doesn't work in general. Take the bias factor out and have independent marshalls do the policing.

Mike,

It would be nice (to have marshalls), but you yourself said we're not up to that critical mass.
What do we do in the meantime...which, I believe, will be a LONG time?

Karl

We live with it.

I don't think it will be such a long time, but maybe I'm putting more faith in membership growth predictions than I should be.

Ex,

The problem is that the result you are looking for is counter to human behavior. We put in place rules structures to counter our natural tendencies, but we have to enforce that with... marshals/police/referees/etc. That is why Chuck, and some of us, recommend a change which eliminates the natural tendency issue. One example being given by Chuck, to stand and deliver. Any rules change to give a "fair" result can be problematic, either because it is still subject to societal behavior, or because it is subject to abuse, unless you have a referee, something we can't afford. In lieu of that, you need a change of the system, something no one seems to want. Hence my thread drift above, the only realistic solutions are denied to us by our desire not to change the way we play, by a lack of resources, and by societal behavior... :D

BTW - the notion that you would call a courtesy violation on someone for not observing a foot fault runs even more deeply against our societal behaviors. You're holding someone else accountable for the misbehavior of another player. Self accountability works somewhat, but I've had the same experience as others, "oops, I foot faulted," "no problem dood, no don't put that on the card, really."

In the end, the only real solution is a play change, anyone for the STAND AND DELIVER?

Bill,

Why don't you just go out and practice more instead of watching people's feet and trying to call penalties?

Just because you want to play by the rules doesn't mean everyone does, and soon you'll realize that you'll just have to practice harder to overcome the 1-3 stroke per round competitive disadvantage you put yourself in by playing by the rules.

I have come to the conclusion that I either have to give this advantage to my competitors or quit playing tourneys. It just isn't worth it to call rules infractions, and I refuse to *not* play by the rules as written.

Lyle,

I'm all for it! Looks like Chuck's on board. A few others. But it is only a matter of seconds when Scooter and a bunch of others will be here with votes of dissension :eek: .

Karl

My suggestion was for 'stand and deliver' strictly for pros as an added differentiating factor besides winning cash versus merch. It's not that we shouldn't follow rules at all levels. However, the more money that gets involved, the less fair the sport becomes if rules aren't followed. Such is one reason for drug testing in several big time sports.

One could argue that our current level of rules compliance by players and the limited use of marshals are in proportion to the relative financial implications of cheating. In other words, the amount of rules calling by players and the addition of more marshals will increase proportional to the increase in purses over the years. In talking with knowledgeable ball golf officials, compliance with the rules is not very rigid at the amateur level but is strictly followed by top pros, not so much because they are more honorable, but because cameras are everywhere and not following the rules could have negative financial consequences greater than what they might gain by cheating.

Well said Chuck!

I have followed this thread with interest as I have been called for foot faults and have called them as well. However, Bill has repeatedly asked us to get back to his original post and original question about the responsibility of the rest of the group to pay attention. I can't give this a simple answer. Each situation will differ. We balance the desire to make the right call and keep the game fair with the absurdity of having players running around interrupting other players (which should be a curtesy warning) and slowing play (ditto). If we are all standing together and everybody seems to avert their eyes I think you have a point. If you go sprinting out to keep an eye on somebody else's foot in the fairway do not expect me, from over 100 feet away to see the violation. Also, if I were the thrower I would admit my error (if it occurred) but caution you that if I see you moving out of the corner of my eye again that I will resist the urge to throw at you and merely warn you.

I think you are imagining a situation where you have pointed out a problem to a thrower, who is a repeat offender, and to the group. The group seems to want to ignore your warning. That may be the point where you tell the group, "Hey guys, I keep seeing [faulter] miss his mark and have been calling it. I am becoming suspicious that there is a reason why nobody will second these calls. If it happens again, I am going to get an official." This could be like that Durrell's Alexandria Quartet where each book is told from a diffrent character's perspective. Perhaps the next book would read something like, "this guy kept calling bogus foot faults on [alleged faulter] and then started threatening us because we would not go along. I was having a good round until this @#$% got under my skin. When I called him for a curtesy violation he just..." You fear the volume that reads, "Well he can call this garbage all he wants. Nobody is close enough to call a second. Just to irritate him I am going to step on my mini and let him have a meltdown. He will miss his putt and we will be even. Ha Ha." and so it goes.

Do the best you can and be reasonable.

Rhett,

I was hoping you would show up here! I didn't want to invoke your name, but I thought about you several times while I was on this topic.

You know that practicing and watching people's feet for foot faults are not mutually exclusive. If I could practice putting on the previous basket or throw a Super Class type disc back and forth to someone to stay warm while another player was teeing off, I certainly would, but the rules preclude that.

Anyway, I wasn't talking about me playing by the rules, I was talking about what should happen to other players if they are not playing by the rules. :)


Lyle, you sly dog you, all those words about societal behavior, I bet you, at the least, lean more toward the NORML crowd than against, from reading your post.

Regardless, back to the point. You said, "You're holding someone else accountable for the misbehavior of another player." That's close - I'm holding someone else accountable for _confirming_ the misbehavior of another. If I was holding Player B accountable for Player A's foot fault, then Player B would have consequences as well, regarless of whether or not he observed the alleged misbehavior of Player A. I am not doing that, I am only _proposing_ that Player B be accountable for confirming/denying a misbehavior claim on another player.

Hope that makes sense.

All,

So, I guess I have to start with the group I am playing in. If it is obvious that they are not into enforcing certain rules, then they are giving themselves a competitive advantage, and as long as what I do to counter that competitive advantage does not give me _more_ competitive advantage that they are gaining, then I what I do is OK, right? The idea of the rules is for everyone to compete equally, except for natural ability. So, if in order to compete equally, I have to streeeeetch the same so-called "rules" that everyone else is streeeeeetching, I have not gained an advantage, so, in essence, we have informally amended the rules to fit our group.

That's not cheating, is it? I mean, that's not pencil whipping, or using an extra-heavy putter is a strong wind, it's just not worrying about where my plant foot is on a fairway drive, or where _exactly_ my foot is when I am stretching to throw out of the schule. Some rules are obviously more important than others, right?

*sound of crickets chirping*

Still not right on Lyle's point. You are not holding player B responsible for Player A's misbehavior, you are holding Player B responsible for not following the rules.

I agree that it is unreasonable to expect someone to see a foot fault from more than 30 feet away, but when the group is together I would expect the group to be paying attention. Everyone on the card has a responsibility to pay attention to the other players and watch for rules compliance. Failure to do so is a violation.

The problem with not following or calling the rules is there can be no consistency to competition when the rules are not called equally on all cards. I have never seen a division get together at the beginning of a round and discuss which rules they were not going to call, so I hope that everyone planned to call all of the rules.

First, go look at the annual sportsmanship award notification Brian posted. Now if that award was worth, say $10,000, you'd be half way there.

Second, I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with an old dog calling me a sly dog... :)

Third, Gary, you're too darn smart for your own good, or mine for that matter.

While you're correct, it's a rule, the use of the rule as is essentially plays out as follows, if you don't help to enforce this rule by observance - and follow through - I'm going to punish you. Being a good American, and a good conservative, you should know that doesn't fit the societal norms of our culture. We're much more likely to rebel against such a situation than to comply. It's sort of like the Third Reich, notice I didn't use the NZ word, requiring it's citizens to support a repugnant law, to turn in the innocent because of their "religion." It's a rule, but a poorly structured or used rule (in this situation).

If I create a rule that says, you must pie anyone who swears while playing a PDGA sanctioned round, it's a rule, but few will carry it out.

Fourth, multiple infractions are common in such situations - here I'm referring to out o bounds' post - but I'm pretty confident that after the first call, you will lose your enthusiasm for the situation and keep your YAP shut. Take Rhett, now Rhett, has a mouth that is almost, but not quite, as big as mine. I read through the posts and situations that led to Rhett deciding to keep his mouth shut about such things.

There is a cultural issue here that can't be ignored. In theory, Ex is right on, in our culture it doesn't fly. If we paint the world in black and white, it is clear what should be done, but that doesn't fit what happens in America. Let me counter that by asking someone to invite Switzer Dan to this dance. Dan will tell you clearly that punishing someone for not observing foot placement would fly very well in Switzerland. A completely different culture where telling someone off for jay walking is the norm and expected. It would also work in Japan, but it doesn't work in America.

You guys are fighting the "American way." The benefit of that is that we are a very independent society that is inventive and blah blah blah (read that, the greatest thing since apple pie). But making something like this work - as a self regulated action - or punishing others for not regulating won't work well. The proof is in the pudding, does it work well now?

So, Stand and Deliver anyone?

*sound of crickets chirping*



That would be my son snoring and keeping me up half the night, darned teething!

The problem with not following or calling the rules is there can be no consistency to competition when the rules are not called equally on all cards. I have never seen a division get together at the beginning of a round and discuss which rules they were not going to call, so I hope that everyone planned to call all of the rules.



That is a very naive hope. Refer to my previous post and realize that in order for you to stay internally consistent you must sacrifice the strokes to your competitors on a non-level playing field. Gary, I'm pretty sure you're a lot like me and can't level the field by arguing against penalty strokes or unfavorable lies for yourself when you know you've earned them.

That is disc golf now.

Despite Lyle's protestations and dishonest debating technique of comparing the stance rule (which simply defines how to play the game of disc golf and is supposed to level the playing field) to Third Reich anti-semite laws, it still comes down to following the established rules of the game.

Or not. Which is where we are now.

Oh, you got a little one! I can understand the teething keeping you awake, since that can make them a little cranky, but you got the crib in your room? I can't remember ever hearing a baby's snoring from another room.

I have to agree with this guy. I currently play Am3 but when I called a falling putt the other day the other guy on the card was like "dude this is am three no one calls that" and refused to 2nd the call on that of any subsequent foot faults or falling putts.

The problem with not following or calling the rules is there can be no consistency to competition when the rules are not called equally on all cards. I have never seen a division get together at the beginning of a round and discuss which rules they were not going to call, so I hope that everyone planned to call all of the rules.



That is a very naive hope. Refer to my previous post and realize that in order for you to stay internally consistent you must sacrifice the strokes to your competitors on a non-level playing field. Gary, I'm pretty sure you're a lot like me and can't level the field by arguing against penalty strokes or unfavorable lies for yourself when you know you've earned them.

That is disc golf now.

Despite Lyle's protestations and dishonest debating technique of comparing the stance rule (which simply defines how to play the game of disc golf and is supposed to level the playing field) to Third Reich anti-semite laws, it still comes down to following the established rules of the game.

Or not. Which is where we are now.



Ouch! Let me say that again, OUCH!

If in any way I compared the stance rule to anti-semite laws, I truly apologize! Now, who was that commented on dishonest debating techniques....


My goal was to point out that rules, that is bad rules or misused rules, will not be followed. I used an extreme example to make the point abundantly clear, or at least so I thought. Rhett's notion that it is as simple as obeying the rules is... what was it the man said... Oh yes, naive. I like the concept that it is as easy as obeying the rules, I like the concept that for the greater good we should all participate, I like Star Trek - although I notice that while greed and all those awful human characteristics are supposedly gone, they still showed up in every episode - but my observation is that it doesn't work that way. Right now, it feels like wishful thinking, O.K. for some it's belligerent wishful thinking, but still.

Ignoring reality is sort of like watching banks give millions to people without jobs and thinking that somehow they were going to pay it back and everyone would get rich. It seemed like a good idea...

You can't force people to be something they aren't, You can make a rule and enforce it (something we can't do) or you have to change the situation so that people want to obey the rules in place (something we're unwilling to do).

Oh, you got a little one! I can understand the teething keeping you awake, since that can make them a little cranky, but you got the crib in your room? I can't remember ever hearing a baby's snoring from another room.



Crib in my room hah! he sleeps with me! We're doing that whole touchy feely nurturing thing, sort of like my posts here.... :D

BTW - there is a simpler solution that goes unmentioned here that would fit both what Rhett and Ex want. Eliminate the "second" requirement.

The reason for the "second" requirement is to keep it fair. That is, I can't call you for a foot fault on my own because I hate your stinkin' guts and want to punish you, without the direct approval of the rest of the card. This is probably unnecessary. Calling any rules violation in this sport is tough, even if you hate someone on your card. If Ex could have called the violation without a backup, and you could clearly see where the player was, it's a done deal, you move on.

Keeping abuse in check, i.e. I can call you any time I want is: 1) retaliation if you're full of horse dooky (running through the back of your mind), 2) the TD and attending Marshals, 3) the rest of the card simply watching and calling the TD over if it's obvious you are making hay, 4) the already discussed reluctance to call a violation anyway.

In an attempt to make sure that we don't abuse each other many of our rules call for a second opinion. I think this is for the most part unnecessary. In the real world, away from disc golf, events often occur outside of public scrutiny and the consequences are sever. In a tournament you're playing with three to four people right there, and another 50 to 200 just a few hundred yards away. The scrutiny is huge and hence the pressure against public cheating intense. Yes it will still occur, it does now, but we usually catch it (ask the DC). There is just way to many eyes out there.

So, getting back to Ex's original question, beyond enforcing the courtesy rule more rigorously, eliminate the need for a second. Yes, a rules change, but not one that changes how we play.

BTW - you do run the risk of an exceedingly unscrupulous player judiciously using the rules to shave (or add) that one stroke he needs to win. I'm guessing such a player wouldn't last long. After the beating he'd get in the parking lot, he'd reconsider his actions. Even more so, if we think the "second" requirement is all that's keeping such a player from cheating, we are indeed naive.

I have to agree with this guy. I currently play Am3 but when I called a falling putt the other day the other guy on the card was like "dude this is am three no one calls that" and refused to 2nd the call on that of any subsequent foot faults or falling putts.



Larry, if I am on your card, you'll get the second if needed; that is, if I haven't already called the foot fault first.

No Rhett, it isn't wishful thinking, it is a simple fact.

In order for the rules to be enforced equally across all cards, all of the rules must be enforced. There is no other option that levels the playing field.

I do not agree that societal norms prevent players from acting with integrity and honesty while on the course. If players know that playing by the rules is what is expected and that all cards will be doing the same, they will uphold all of the rules.

And I have thicker skin and longer patience than Rhett does. I know I am fighting a very long term battle against very stiff odds, but if I don't who will? If I am consistent and insistent, others may eventually join the fight. I am not worried over losing a stroke or two (or ten) because I am following the rules. I honestly would prefer to lose an event by following the rules than win by cheating.

And if you are going to call foot faults, you have to call them when they help the offending player too.

In a status-quo world, Gary makes the best point. A thick skin and persistence will work with time. For example, you could start a club and give out tags or stickers, "I belong to the Rules enforcement club and I'm carrying... a rules book."

$10 to join. Sign me up Gary.

This may seem like typical Lyle larking but I'm serious. This is one way to make your point Ex and to begin a process and i will help with such a plan. I might even recommend a Yahoo group.

If you have a group of hard core believers, first you've got a support group so that guys like Rhett who do care don't feel ostracized, they can get support from the group. Second, word gets out and suddenly if you're not calling you're at a disadvantage.

BTW - this problem is mainly a less than Pro problem. I've seen Pros call these things. Again, they know where their advantage lies and they use it.

Lyle, you mean a group like the "Disc Golf Rules Zealots"?

After the beating he'd get in the parking lot, he'd reconsider his actions.



That right there is quite an effective deterrent....to calling obvious "slam-dunk" rules violations during a tournament right now.

Des Moines Worlds 2004, the best event I've ever played in, Advanced Masters division. The card ahead one hole ahead of mine tees off while we are about one-third downt he fairway spotting. (There was a long tee that you walked back to from where you entered the hole.) One guy lands up against a plastic drainage tube that had been there all week. My card is pretty close and jokes that he is OB because he is just past this thing, with his disc landing such that the tube is between the disc and the hole and also runs along snaking behind the disc also.

The thrower evaluates his lie, then picks up the tube and drags it completely out of the way.

Me and a Texas guy go up and tell the guy he can't do that because he moving an obstacle between the lie and the hole. Then PDGA BOD member Bruce Brakel is on the card and starts making statements like "it's on the ground, it's not an obstacle to the flight of the disc." Whatever. Tension and anger build. We mark the card and agree to talk to the TD after the round.

The TD, "Old Man" Wallis, hears us out and says something like "that's not in *my* rule book" and rejects the ruling. No penalty.

A group is brewing in the parking lot talking about the long-haired guy from Cali and how he's an [censored] and should get a beating.

I manage to get to my car before the mob froths up enough to erupt.


Yeah, so it was a slam-dunk violation at a PDGA Major. I now just give up the strokes to my competitors because I play by the rules and I know many of them don't. That is the reality of it. I could get beat up over it, but I can't see every card so I'm still giving up strokes to some guys on other cards. Why should the guys I can see be held to a higher standard than those I can't?

My hope is that the people I play with will see me take my penalties and proper non-ideal lies, and hopefully they will maybe consider doing the same. But they probably just think I'm a chump...

Lyle, you mean a group like the "Disc Golf Rules Zealots"?



Yes, but you've got to globalize it.

a) It needs some cache and a hook with a token recognizable item that guys can carry on their carts/bags. You want players on your card to know what your response is going to be.

b) You need a flop thread where members and others can come and complain and build comradeship and strength to go into the fray.

The token makes it easier. Players see it, they might hate you, but they'll be more careful and when it happens, they will have been expecting it. You can also use it like a talisman to ward off evil players. Simply hold it up as they come after you and you will make them laugh if nothing else.

I'd make a charter - Members of the Disc Golf Rules Zealots agree to obey the rules, and they agree to hold other PDGA members and tournament players to the same level of accountability, no matter how difficult or unpleasant another player may be. They agree to walk away if the situation is combative, but to follow up with the TD or DC. They agree to continue to support the DGRZ even if they do not win every battle; a motto or business line - "I obey the rules... and I'm packing heat... the rules book," - and a simple logo - Cheating with the red circle slashed through the middle or something better.

Read Rhett's post. I remember this when this occurred. Rhett was hot and rightly so. This isn't unique, it's happened to me. Same exact thing, a guy in all his good intentions illegally moving an obstacle for a woman. Three of us saw it, we all yelled "stop!" He was ready to go and wanted to fight right there. It takes basket balls to keep on after that.

We got very much a mind your own card message and on and on and on.

Even TDs don't want to deal with it and I've seen that more than once. A TD who knows the rules were broken and just doesn't want the hassle.

BTW - I haven't played tournaments in a couple of years but am beginning to plan for it again. One thing I'm adding to my round is the following comment.

I've been on a number of cards where at the start of the round one player said something like, "I don't worry about X," where X is drop in's from 4 feet - followed almost immediately by another player saying, "hey, I obey that rule!" From that point out you've got two players irritated at each other and an unpleasant card. Soooo, before anyone says anything on this card, I obey all the rules, that way I don't have to guess and we can avoid unpleasantness. I realize that some might disagree, but this is the easiest way for everyone to enjoy the round.

Last point,

Isn't Bruce Brakel the "I think the PDGA is breaking the rules guy?" You mean, he doesn't know all the rules, all the time? No really? All my reality is illusion, I'm devastated, Oh Bruce, how could you.

Lyle,

That idea had been tossed around back in Atwood's day. At the time it was a bagtag that said "Yes I mind". I'm guessing you can figure out the question.

It may be time to actually carry through with the idea. Guess it does not need anything as serious as a DGRZ number, but a bagtag or mini would be good.

Know any good sources?

...but a bagtag or mini would be good.

Know any good sources?



DiscDiva has laser engraved bag-tags now.

Has it really got to that point that we some sort of external identification that we are players who actually _believe_ in playing according to the rules, and want everyone else in their group to do the same?

Why not just wear a shirt with a bullseye on the back, with the name "RICHARD" over it?

Have to be a collared shirt.

Then lets make it a green shirt, so we will have a collared green!

best be careful discussing leafy green things here.

best be careful discussing leafy green things here.



one would think the hippie lettuce would incline people to be more open-minded; but alas, happy cabbage does not fix a person's lack of appreciation for the responsibility we each have to play by the rules. nor does alcohol...

is anyone confident that the rules are enforced consistently across the board? I'd like to see more people follow the rule that you should not break from the group and mark your disc if it is possibly OB -- but it seems like the group tends to spread out rather than all travel to each player's lie...

collared greens -- with
<font color="green"> "PDGA Play: The Rules Rule. Any questions?" </font>
sound good.
you'd have to be someone versed in the rules like Gary to wear it ...

I try to make a point to accompany any player whose disc may be OB to the area to act as a witness on their behalf. According to the rules, if they move the disc prior to the OB status being determined by the card, the disc is considered OB by rule (803.09.D).

If I see them moving ahead, I remind them not to approach their disc without someone else to verify the OB status.

thanks for the feedback, Gary. I've noticed on long, wooded holes, sometimes a player will try to advance to an errant disc location as a way of speeding play -- but it can lead to scenarios where OB could be involved...

I am not sure how many players know that rule you cited -- and how often it is enforced... Have you seen it come into play at a major event?

Only once. The hole had a tight beginning and then opened out with water on the left after the woods. The hole was also on the left further around the OB. The shot in question hit the woods on the left early as did a few others off the tee. People were looking for discs on both sides of the fairway. His disc penetrated more than we expected, and the water was closer off the fairway than we expected.

The result was that the player had marked the disc 1M from the water near the basket edge of the woods and picked up his disc before anyone else saw where it ended up. The area he was standing in was kind of marshy/reedy and there was some question exactly where the OB line should be. Which led to the discussion, which led to the rule being brought up and called.

I saw it more often when it was part of the 2M rule.

best be careful discussing leafy green things here.



It's OK to discuss it, just don't show a picture of a PDGA-approved disc with a representation of it on it, right Hero? :D

I don't personally think that someone should post a pic of a disc with it on it, but I don't think that they should get dinged for it, unless they continue to do it. Just have the mod remove it and move on.

Has it really got to that point that we some sort of external identification that we are players who actually _believe_ in playing according to the rules, and want everyone else in their group to do the same?

Why not just wear a shirt with a bullseye on the back, with the name "RICHARD" over it?



First, I think Gary's bag tag idea is a good one. Second, I think the answer to your question Ex, is, why are we having this discussion? The sport has a problem, and it isn't leafy green stuff we're talkin' bout.

Whenever this comes up, we go round in circles with Rhett being jaded, someone saying we should do somthin' everyone agreeing that the culture doesn't help, and nothing getting done.

Take a look at issues within' our culture as a whole. Who would think we'd need MADD to tell people not to drive home drunk and kill other people? Who'd think we'd need John Stewart to tell CNBC to do their job? Who'd think we'd need congress to tell AIG that giving bonuses carved out of taxpayer dollars is stupid?

As me boss says, common sense isn't so common. So, in answer to your question, yes, I think it's time for a tag, a Richard shirt, the hat that says, "It's the rules baby!" or best yet, the shirt that says - I call the rules because every stroke I give you helps me to win! Know the rules.

Rhett, how much are the Tags?

In case anyone is interested, I got a response from Conrad Damon, who is now the Chairman of the Rules Committee, and, summarizing what he said, it is not a courtesy violation to not notice another person's throw, even if doing so does not give another player the benefit of you having the opportunity to second the call.

You can ask other players to pay better attention, but if they don't, you have no recourse, unless they explicitly say "no", then you can give them a courtesy violation. But if they don't say "no", and go on ahead not paying attention, there is nothing you can do, unless there is evidence that there is collusion among them, or it is obvious that they are selectively enforcing the rules.

I don't think that this counts as an official ruling, since it is not in that section posted that gives rulings, but it does give an interpretation.