Dead branch under disc (behind and front) ... moveable?

[jdebois]

If this is a dead branch: -----------
And this is the disc: O
And the lie is like this: -------O-------
(Where some of the branch is behind and some is in front)

Can you move the branch out of the way so that you can have a comfortable stance?
(I've heard varying opinions on this from many different people)

[ck34]

No. Read the Rules Q&A: Obstacle to Stance and Flight Path

In this case, you can take relief by moving back on the line of play to the closest point where you don't have to step on the branch. There's no penalty unless you have to go back more than 5m.

[rhett]

This should be explicitly spelled out in the rules as it is probably thee most misunderstood rule there is. (Stance is violated more, but most people understand that rule and simply think it doens't matter.)

[jdebois]

No. Read the Rules Q&A: Obstacle to Stance and Flight Path

In this case, you can take relief by moving back on the line of play to the closest point where you don't have to step on the branch. There's no penalty unless you have to go back more than 5m.

So is this 5m awarded every time? For example if you have a good stance right behind your lie but a good run-up is not available, are you able to go back up to 5m to find a good run up?

[ck34]

Key words: "...to the closest point..."

You can only go back as far as needed to not step on the branch. You only get up to 5m with no penalty if that's how long the branch is behind the lie. Of course, you can go farther back or to the side if you want to take the 1-throw (or more) Unsafe Lie penalty.

[sandalman]

you can however step on the branch. if somehow the branch was more than 5M in direct LOP behind the disc (the disc somehow got under the branch (aka telephone pole)) then the only penalty free option would be to place a support point on the branch.

[ck34]

Even that's not totally true. If the branch-like object is big enough like a telephone pole, you could argue that you can go back as far as needed without penalty to get off of it by using the large solid object rule 803.03E.

[rhett]

But if it's a bent branch as you expect from a tree, stepping on it at all would probably make it roll and move the part that is ahead of your lie, resulting in an instant yet uncalled penalty.

[gnduke]

wouldn't that fall under incidental contact ?

[jdebois]

Could you technically break-off the portion of the branch that is behind the disc?

i.e. if the layout was like: -------O---------
and you broke it off at the disc to look like: O--------

This way you could clear some room for a run up without moving the un-moveable portion of the branch.

[ck34]

Interesting angle but you would need a laser cutter to snip the back portion to avoid moving the front piece. In addition, I think you could be called on 803.04F which prevents purposely damaging anything during the round, even if behind your lie.

this came up at am nationals, with a dead branch about 1 inch in diameter and 4 feet in length that was behind my disc but angled to the left such that the front part was slightly ahead (ctp) of my disc. i resolved the problem by marking my disc (after saying i thought it would be illegal to move it) and placing my foot where my disc had laid (lied?).

based on your no destruction rule, could grabbing some grass to check the wind be called a rules infraction?

[rhett]

wouldn't that fall under incidental contact ?

Please quote the "incidental contact" rule. I am unaware of one in our sport.

[junnila]

based on your no destruction rule, could grabbing some grass to check the wind be called a rules infraction?

Dumbest question ever. I am gonna try to stroke someone on it this weekend. I hope I don't get punched. LOL!

[jdebois]

I thought it was a good question actually ... if you can't break a dead branch why can you remove living grass?

Dumbest question ever. I am gonna try to stroke someone on it this weekend. I hope I don't get punched. LOL!

If you see any landscapers mowing the grass, call the police and tell them someone is vandalizing the Park

[junnila]

Kicking the dirt is actually a much better way of reading wind. I thought it was a dumb question because of how wide interpretations of the rules have become.

[tbender]

If you see any landscapers mowing the grass, call the police and tell them someone is vandalizing the Park

Every step taken during a round alters the course....

[jdebois]

Interesting angle but you would need a laser cutter to snip the back portion to avoid moving the front piece. In addition, I think you could be called on 803.04F which prevents purposely damaging anything during the round, even if behind your lie.

The reason I asked this question is b/c I've seen this come up a bunch lately and I've seen it handled differently nearly every time. So next time it happens I'd like to at least know what I am talking about. It seems like the Rulebook isn't clear enough, so in order to support my case I would have to reference the Q & A section of the Rules or perhaps even a message thread ... i.e. someone would have to take my word on it right? I could see where this would be a problem.

If it happens to me I am going to put my foot on the branch where it meets the back of the disc and break off the moveable piece without moving the un-moveable piece and hope that nobody nails me for destruciton.

Every step taken during a round alters the course....

thanks for the poetic response. reminds me of: "you can't step in the same river twice"

[dischick]

And the lie is like this: -------O-------

a couple weeks ago at the MI state finals mike raley was called on this one. so with the knowledge fresh in mind,
while i was spotting at am nats, i saw this exact thing come up, but it was not up to me to make a call. i quietly pointed it out to some dude who was standing there, but he looked at me as if i did not know what i was talking about, i am just a dumb girl who doesnt know a thing abou tdisc golf, lol. he should have taken my words more seriously, cuz home boy in his group had a much easier lie after movin the stick.

i agree that the rule book is not very clear or easy to read in some sections. i have read it, more than once. when something comes up, i usually just say it rule 802.14 or whatever number sounds right at the time.

[dischick]

based on your no destruction rule, could grabbing some grass to check the wind be called a rules infraction?

i wouldnt say this is a dumb question (no question is dumb), but it is kinda interesting in a funny way. i haev never thought of that as being illigal, for i am one to pull grass outta the ground to check the wind. but, if it is illigal to pull the leaves off of a tree, wouldnt that fall under the same category?
it would be funny as all heII to call someone on this....

it should just be mandatory that we have the wind mph flags on baskets at tournaments like they did at the USADGC.

[prairie_dawg]

wouldn't that fall under incidental contact ?

Only if the contact is during the throwing motion

[sandalman]

no, there is a rule that requires a stance that minimizes movement of any branches, etc. there, tippytoe is ok, but flatfooted in not.

[sandalman]

dischick, i agree that this rule is not often called correctly... but the rulebook is actually quite clear on this one.

[dischick]

i agree its clear on this one, but there are some things in teh rule book that are not very clear and it sounds like jibber jabber when you are reading it. maybe its just me.

[Parkntwoputt]

So what if there was a twig (small branch) that was sitting just behind your lie, within 1 footprint, and you are intending to putt, ie not moving your plant foot at all. The small branch is causing your foot to roll unsteadily.

Do you,

1) Sweep the small branch away with your foot to give you a solid footing?

Or

2) Take relief (up to 5m) behind the lie to insure steady footing?

[rhett]

dischick, i agree that this rule is not often called correctly... but the rulebook is actually quite clear on this one.

One rule says you can never move anything between your lie and the hole.

Another rule says you can move impediments to stance and throwing motion.

This specific case come up a lot and is ruled differently each time. It would be good to state it explicitly in the rule book that if an object extends both in front and behind the lie that you cannot move it. It's not a WHFO scenario.

[dischick]

so the branch is between the lie and the hole, therefore you can not move it?

so the branch is in the way of ones stance, so you can move it?

are there rules that trump other rules?

[stevemaerz]

Chuck,

I don't see this free relief up to 5m option being used very often. (maybe twice in 18 yrs). The 30 cm directly behind my lie rule is the one I'm always concentrating on when I take my stance. My question is when can you and when can't take this relief? I often shift my front foot backward (up to 30cm) to avoid standind on large tree roots, rocks and odd depressions. I'm wondering if all along I could've moved back 2 or three feet. How about an instance where your lie is very close to a tree and you have major difficulty in throwing without hitting a tree in your backswing, midswing or follow through, any free relief available there?