to make a call on the rules? I was called on a excessive time courtesy violation...it was a warning. I questioned how the rule read, and was told that no on in the group had a rule book, myself included. upon further review after the round, I found this needed to be seconded, which I don't think it was. Thus, if you're going to make a call on the rules, does the rule book state anywhere you must actually have a rule book on hand?

I couldn't find anywhere in the rule book where this was stated, however, I believe it should be this way.

EVERYONE should carry and have read the rule book. But this is not the case unfortunately. It is not a rule, yet but it is a good idea. But how would it be enforced?

Basically if you don't have a rule book, you can't make a call.

Basically if you don't have a rule book, you can't make a call.


I have a pretty good idea of what's in the rule book, so when someone tries to make a phantom-rules call on me I demand that they show me the rule in the rulebook. No book, no call. :) The responsibility of finding the rule should be on the caller.

For real violations I will pull out my rulebook and start looking for the rule.

I guess what i'm getting at is, it should be a rule. In the Rule Book.

EVERYONE should carry and have read the rule book. But this is not the case unfortunately. It is not a rule, yet but it is a good idea. But how would it be enforced?


Same time you check a player's PDGA card, at check-in/registration, would be my guess, were that necessary.

I guess what i'm getting at is, it should be a rule. In the Rule Book.



I think the argument about whether you violated a rule ends when you ask the guy to site the rule number and quote the rule word for word and he can't do either because he doesn't have a rule book. That's when you say "I don't think that's what the rule is. We can take it up with the TD after the round if you think you are right." Play a provisional, if appropriate, and move on.

Basically if you don't have a rule book, you can't make a call.

Not only worng, but couldn't be more wrong.

Nowhere do the Rules require that a player have rulebook in his/her possession in order to call a rules violation, nor do the Rules at any point require that a player be able to cite the either the rule number or the rule itself in order for a call to be valid.

The Rules provide for a player (any player) to appeal or to challenge a group ruling, which necessarily includes called rules violations, either to a certified official or the TD. Since the Rules require certified officials to carry a copy of the Rules, and since TDs agree in the Tournament Sanctioning Agreement to enforce the Rules�an agreement that necessarily includes the requirement that certified officials carry a copy of the rules*�there is never a circumstance in a sanctioned tournament where a player either calling a rules violation or disputing a called violation does not have access to a rulebook should the need for one arise.

* provided that the TD does not receive permission, per the Sanctioning Agreement, to enforce a local condition restricting enforcement of that requirement. :D

Sorry, but if you try to call a rule on me without knowing the rule and penalties, I am not going to accept it. If the card backs you up, I'll throw a provisional and discuss it with the TD later, but I won't accept the call without some validation.

Clarification:
Provisional means there is some disagreement between the card and the player.
Acceptance means there is no need for a provisionsal.

Rhett and Gary are wrong on this. You do not need a rulebook to know, follow or call the rules. It may be advisable when dealing with people unfamiliar with the rules (not Rhett and Gary), but there is no provision within our rules mandating that a player may only call rules violations if they have a rulebook.

Rhett and Gary could argue all they want that I have to have a rulebook to call them on a rules violation, it would not change the pertinent facts that they violated the rules of play or that I called them on it.

If need be, we can discuss it later with the TD, or get an official right then (who must have a rulebook). But in either case the player would need to either get a ruling by an official to overturn the call, or play a provisional until it can be later decided.

That being said, I always have my rulebook with me, more because I am still learning them than in case I need to call someone on something.

I don't think we can add a rule forcing players to have a rulebook when they make a call anymore than we can have a rule forcing players to call rule violations when they see them.

We can and should absolutely require that all players have a rulebook in their disc golf bag at all PDGA events. If they don't add $2 to their entry fee and give them one. This would be a very positive development.

Rhett and Gary could argue all they want that I have to have a rulebook to call them on a rules violation, it would not change the pertinent facts that they violated the rules of play or that I called them on it.


You should actually read my post.

Basically if you don't have a rule book, you can't make a call.


I have a pretty good idea of what's in the rule book, so when someone tries to make a phantom-rules call on me I demand that they show me the rule in the rulebook. No book, no call. :) The responsibility of finding the rule should be on the caller.

For real violations I will pull out my rulebook and start looking for the rule.



I read it. You assume to know all "real" violations? What if you are mistaken? Did brow beating the guy serve any purpose? You should do the same thing either way and pull out your rulebook, shouldn't you?

I read it. You assume to know all "real" violations? What if you are mistaken?


Uhhhhhh.......if I'm mistaken the caller will pull out their rule book and show me the rule. You sure you read all of that post?

I read it. You assume to know all "real" violations? What if you are mistaken?


Uhhhhhh.......if I'm mistaken the caller will pull out their rule book and show me the rule. You sure you read all of that post?



Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiighhhhhhhhhhhhhtt! Change the premise. Good one.

He/She doesn't have a rulebook.

It is on you to show them (if the group hasn't already done so, being a phantom rule and all) the correct rule and that you did not violate it.

If the entire group or even a portion 'believes' that phantom rule and you don't show them in 'your' rulebook that it is in error, then YOU WILL HAVE TO PLAY A PROVISIONAL. That is in the rules as another poster has already pointed out.

(This actually happened this year at an NT event. So it is not far fetched or hypothetical. The burden of proving you were within the rules is on the called player, not the caller.)

Anyhoo, go ahead and get the last word in, I know you need to, particularly about rules issues....

It is on you to show them (if the group hasn't already done so, being a phantom rule and all) the correct rule and that you did not violate it.


I completely disagree with that idea. One thousand percent I disagree.


If the entire group or even a portion 'believes' that phantom rule and you don't show them in 'your' rulebook that it is in error, then YOU WILL HAVE TO PLAY A PROVISIONAL. That is in the rules as another poster has already pointed out.


Please quote the rule that says I have to scour the rulebook and prove that a made-up call is not a rule. I must've missed that one. I sure would like to know it's true for future reference.

Oh, wait. Per you, it is up to me to prove that the rule isn't there!


(This actually happened this year at an NT event. So it is not far fetched or hypothetical. The burden of proving you were within the rules is on the called player, not the caller.)


I will call a courtesy violation on anyone who makes a non-rule call on me and then insists that it is up to me to prove that the rule does not exist.

Nick, your take on this makes no sense whatsoever. It is illogical for the called player to have to prove that a rule does not exist or that the caller is calling the rule wrong. Burdon of proof is on the caller to prove the call. The caller can go to the rule they are thinking of and justify the call. The called player would be required to go through the entire book and "prove" that the rule is not there.

EVERYONE should carry and have read the rule book. But this is not the case unfortunately. It is not a rule, yet but it is a good idea. But how would it be enforced?


Same time you check a player's PDGA card, at check-in/registration, would be my guess, were that necessary.


I haven't showed or been asked to show my card yet this year and the season is over. :confused:

I haven't showed or been asked to show my card yet this year and the season is over. :confused:


I only ask to see a PDGA card if the person isn't on the PDGA roster and they don't want to pay the $5.

I usually bring my PDGA card and Drivers License.

I'm still questioned about my age and division !!!!! :eek:

I may start to carry my rule book. I sometimes forget stuff...

for nick to declare that the burden of proving you are not in violation of a non-rule or incorrect rule call is ridiculous and only backs up his statement that he is still learning the rules. in fact calling rules incorrectly could be seen as a courtesy violation. if you don't have a rulebook, then you should be sure you call the rule correctly. as has been said, if someone calls a rule on you and you aren't sure of it(which can happen even with a rule book), play a provisional if neccesary and move on.

I don't think you read all of my post either.

I said that I would not accept a call without a rule book or good knowledge of the rule. That does not mean I would not allow it to be called, or fail to play a provisional shot.

If someone with a rule book calls me on a rule, there is no need for a provisional and the call is fully accepted (without a provisional). That is unless there is still enough confusion even with a rule book to justify a provisional shot.

I have let a few folks , take provisional shot's , when the situation is gray or unclear , just in case.

let ???

Anytime the player feels that they are right and the card or call is wrong (or there is a doubt about a ruling), the player can declare that they are taking a provisional. The key is that they have to state that they are taking a provisional. and then both shots must be played to completion.

That's the thing though , some have taken provisional's , without declaring it !!! That's what I meant by let. Plus , it is also a group decision , I think.

That's a problem.

The provisional throws are covered under 803.00.C - Appeals.

... Alternatively, if the thrower does not wish to continue play under the group's majority decision, the thrower may declare a provisional. When proceeding under a provisional , the thrower shall complete the hole under both possible rulings. ...



It is used when the card can't come to a majority decision, or when the player disagrees with the majority decision.

1) The player must declare his intentions or it should be counted as a practice throw.

2) The player does not need group permission to take a provisional.

3) If the player takes a provisional, both throws must be played to completion.

That's a problem.

The provisional throws are covered under 803.00.C - Appeals.

... Alternatively, if the thrower does not wish to continue play under the group's majority decision, the thrower may declare a provisional. When proceeding under a provisional , the thrower shall complete the hole under both possible rulings. ...



It is used when the card can't come to a majority decision, or when the player disagrees with the majority decision.

1) The player must declare his intentions or it should be counted as a practice throw.

2) The player does not need group permission to take a provisional.

3) If the player takes a provisional, both throws must be played to completion.



Yes , you are correct. This was not during a sanctioned tournament , maybe that's why we let it slide that way. This guy was irate to begin with. Recking the mood of the group.

Nobody wanted to say anything , just to keep the peace................it happens , even though it is not correct.

I could have called him and ended up with a broken nose !!!!! :eek:

He should have been DQ'd :mad:

I haven't seen a rule violation so bad that calling it is worth a broken nose. :cool:

A rule is still a rule with or without a rule book. If someone calls you on a rule infraction and you think they are right but they don't have a rule book, then shame on you if you don't let him penalize you because he can't show you the rule. Like I said, a rule is still a rule with or without a rule book.

That being said, I carry two rule books with me so while I look up the rule the other person can also look up the rule. I also printed up some of the "confussing" rules from the Rules Q&A and carry them around. The two most needed are the "falling putt" rule where most people think you have to let the disc come to rest in the basket before you cross your lie and the "moving of casual objects".

It is on you to show them (if the group hasn't already done so, being a phantom rule and all) the correct rule and that you did not violate it.


I completely disagree with that idea. One thousand percent I disagree.
<font color="green"> No surprise there. What exactly do you disagree with. What are you proposing to do then, just ignore the person and keep playing, not responding because you "think" it is a phantom rule? </font>

If the entire group or even a portion 'believes' that phantom rule and you don't show them in 'your' rulebook that it is in error, then YOU WILL HAVE TO PLAY A PROVISIONAL. That is in the rules as another poster has already pointed out.


Please quote the rule that says I have to scour the rulebook and prove that a made-up call is not a rule. I must've missed that one. I sure would like to know it's true for future reference.
<font color="green"> You are talking about ignoring another player or player�s call. You can either show that they are wrong OR take a provisional. If you do neither then that would fall under this rule:
804.05 DISQUALIFICATION & SUSPENSION
A. A player may be disqualified by the director for meeting any of the necessary conditions of disqualification as set forth in the rules, or for any of the following:
(3) Cheating: a willful attempt to circumvent the rules of play.
C. A player in violation of any section under 804.05 A is also subject to suspension from the PDGA Tour. Suspension from the PDGA Tour may only be assigned by the PDGA Commissioner. A player may appeal his or her suspension to the PDGA Board of Directors. The determination to suspend, and the length of the suspension, shall be based on the severity of the action and the extent to which the player may have committed repeated violations. </font>
Oh, wait. Per you, it is up to me to prove that the rule isn't there!


(This actually happened this year at an NT event. So it is not far fetched or hypothetical. The burden of proving you were within the rules is on the called player, not the caller.)


I will call a courtesy violation on anyone who makes a non-rule call on me and then insists that it is up to me to prove that the rule does not exist.
<font color="green"> Yes, a good ambassador and all that. They make the call. You disagree. Take a provisional or show them that they are wrong. Ignoring them, or playing holier than thou is the courtesy violation, it might also be willfully attempting to circumvent the rules of play just because you were born feeling you knew everything�</font>
Nick, your take on this makes no sense whatsoever. It is illogical for the called player to have to prove that a rule does not exist or that the caller is calling the rule wrong. Burdon of proof is on the caller to prove the call. The caller can go to the rule they are thinking of and justify the call. The called player would be required to go through the entire book and "prove" that the rule is not there.


Yes, I am all too aware that you don�t get this, nonetheless, you have four choices when called on a rule violation:
1) Accept it.
2) Dispute it and get the group to agree.
3) Dispute it and if the group does not agree take a provisional.
4) Ignore the call and play on risking disqualification and possible sanction.

Play around with the symantics, but this is not some far out position. I see now that Gary gets it. Why are you holding out? What point are you trying to make? That you are more perfect than the rest of us?

Is this how you all talk to each other on this board? I didn't mean to start a fight...jeezo....I'm over it already. Have fun!

Rhett and I have been jibing each other on this board as long as I can remember. Don't let it upset you.

jibing each other



I think more like "chastising".

It's amazing that Nick doesn't know how silly he looks. Is he actually suggesting that at any point during a tournament, he can call a phantom rules violation and it's up to the person he calls to pull out a rulebook and prove the rule doesn't exist?

No wonder Nick is known as one the most notoriously slow players in disc golf.

Innocent until proven guilty. You must offer proof of rules violation, not the other way around, you dimwit.

Jeff I can't believe you continue to waste so much energy attacking Nick. It's on par with your years of assassinating Morgan's character. What if you run into him at a tournament? What will you say then? When I read your Nick slams I reach this strange state between yawning and puking. Try that sometime. I have to be careful not to go to sleep for fear of choking to death on my own Lung-induced vomit. Blechchch. Then I could become a legend or something. Puked on his own vomit reading the PDGA Discussin Page. Nick will eulogize me with great emotion, pointing to my many positive points...okay he'll have to make something up, but who's going to argue cause I'll be dead.

"One of the great frisbee diplomats of our era...got along with everyone..." My friends will be cracking up. "He died for Jeff LaGrassa's sins..."

Ha ha. That's right buddy, my last step into heaven will be off that big fuzzy head of yours.

How silly it is to pick on Nick. Jeff is a silly silly boy.

What if you run into him at a tournament? What will you say then?



The same stuff I say here. And what did he do? He protested to the PDGA Discipline Committee for "getting into his head." Alas, it was to no avail. 'Twas another phantom rules violation from Nick Kight. :D

I have to go along with Nick on this one.

You don't have to agree with a phantom rules call, but you can't ignore it either. Any rules call is assumed a valid rules call until it is proven not to be.

If you don't think it is a real rule, but can't prove it, you must still play a provisional until the TD can make an official ruling.

Question on that:

Say the TD over-rules the non-rules rule call. If the player that got the rule called on them felt like the other player was trying to pull somehting on them to effect their game, what can that player do about it?

Kuzi just received an interesting offer in the mail from the PGA TOUR Partners Club that relates to this topic:

"Join today and get your free ($24.95 value) video: Master the Rules - Frequently Asked Questions. What is considered ground under repair? How long can you look for a ball that goes out of bounds? What is the penalty for playing the wrong ball? When can you re-drop? Watch the video and you'll make the right call for these common golf situations and many more. Hosted by Mark Russell, Chief Rules Director for the PGA TOUR, this video will help you understand and know the intriguing rules of golf much better, which can cut strokes off your score!"

This might be a good idea for our Rules Committee to possibly look into, if the funding was there. I think new players might watch a disc golf rules video to learn how to make the right call for common disc golf situations.

He can raise a complaint with the TD concerning the manner the rule was called. If the other players on his card back him up, he could have a good case for DQ from unsportsmanlike conduct.

Intentionally calling a non-rule on another player with the goal of effecting their level of play isn't specifically listed as unsportsmanlike conduct, but it is a very rude thing to do.

If he is sincere and professional about the call, then it is merely a case where the caller was wrong and there shouldn't be a penalty.

I have to go along with Nick on this one.

You don't have to agree with a phantom rules call, but you can't ignore it either. Any rules call is assumed a valid rules call until it is proven not to be.




Since when? The burden should be on the person to prove the rules violation! He should have to show it in the rules book!

Why should I have to spend extra time at a tournament disproving a phantom rule? What if Nick just decides to be a dik and call a phantom rules violation on every hole? Should my whole group have to suffer through a 4 hour round while I disprove every phantom rules violation?

If you and I were on the same card how am I supposed to know that you think you know every rule? I might see something and call you on a rule infraction because I think it's an infraction. You might have more knowledge about that rule and tell me it's not an infraction, but I don't know who you are. I don't know you spend countless hours on the forums studying the rules ;). Just because I don't have a rule book (I carry two) doesn't mean you can't abide by my rule infraction call. Take a provisional and talk to the TD afterward. If you are so sure of yourself then you wouldn't have anything to worry about. :)

This isn't about whether you know me, who has more rules knowledge, etc.

If you see a rules violation, you call it. You show it to me in the rules book. We proceed accordingly.

You DON'T call a rules violation, which may or may not exist, and then expect me to search the rules book in order to prove you wrong!

If it does exist, how can you prove me wrong? :confused:

Rules still exist even without a rulebook present.

If it does exist, how can you prove me wrong? :confused:



What are you talking about, dOOD?

If there's a rules violation, YOU show me in the rules book. That simple!

You DON'T call a rules violation, which may or may not exist, and then expect me to search the rules book in order to prove you wrong!



This is what I'm talking about. You said "which may or may not exist, and then expect me to search the rules book in order to prove you wrong" If the rule exists, how can you prove me wrong. If the rule exists then it must be followed with or without the rule book.

You DON'T call a rules violation, which may or may not exist, and then expect me to search the rules book in order to prove you wrong!



This is what I'm talking about. You said "which may or may not exist, and then expect me to search the rules book in order to prove you wrong" If the rule exists, how can you prove me wrong. If the rule exists then it must be followed with or without the rule book.



This is getting annoying. For the sake of argument assume we've got a rules book. When I'm on the course, I have a PDGA rules book on me at all times.

Here's what we agree on: if you're calling a rules violation, and proven the rule exists by you showing it to me in the rules book, then we proceed accordingly.

Where we differ is that if you think you can make up a bogus rules violation, and not look it up in the rules book, and expect me to search the rules book to prove you wrong, you're out of your mind.

I think it's in the absence of a rule book that the situation exists.

If anyone has a rule book, I think the person calling the rule has the responsibility of finding the violation, not the person on which it was called.

In the absence of a rule book, all violations should be considered valid.
Unless the rest of the card is rolling on the ground laughing at the rule. :D

how could you play a provisional if no one had a rulebook and a rulebook was needed in order to call a rule.

its like being in between two mirrors :D

A rule does not need a book.

Getting the correct ruling often does.

That's where provisionals come in. You do not have to accept the rule call as final. Play both rulings and clear it up later.

A rule does not need a book.

Getting the correct ruling often does.

That's where provisionals come in. You do not have to accept the rule call as final. Play both rulings and clear it up later.



Amen.

A rule does not need a book.
Getting the correct ruling often does.
That's where provisionals come in. You do not have to accept the rule call as final. Play both rulings and clear it up later.

i know that, silly. my point was to the folks who were saying without a book one couldnt call rules. one ofthem said good idea, play a provisional instead. but a provisional is part of the rulebook, hence my comment.

get it now? aaaaah, jokes are sooooo muchless funny when they have to be explained :D

A rule does not need a book.

Getting the correct ruling often does.

That's where provisionals come in. You do not have to accept the rule call as final. Play both rulings and clear it up later.


A new tournament strategy: call a foot-fault on the first throw of the tourney. If no one has a rule book, pick out your nemesis and call a phantom rule on him/her on every throw. By the time they've played the infinite number of provisionals, they'll be arm-weary and unable to beat you!

:D

A rule does not need a book.
Getting the correct ruling often does.
That's where provisionals come in. You do not have to accept the rule call as final. Play both rulings and clear it up later.

i know that, silly. my point was to the folks who were saying without a book one couldnt call rules. one ofthem said good idea, play a provisional instead. but a provisional is part of the rulebook, hence my comment.

get it now? aaaaah, jokes are sooooo muchless funny when they have to be explained :D



It doesn't hurt if they are at least a little funny to begin with either...

There is nothing silly about Gary's post, it is as straight forward as possible in explaining the disjunction between those who feel only rulebook carrying folks can call rules and those who feel anyone with a working knowledge of the rules can make calls.

Folks are so terrified of making calls in the first place this is just one more hinderence.

First, I would say that there should be no card of advanced of pro players where there is no rule book within the group.

I would have to say that when there is no rule book available, any seriously called rules violation must be treated as real.

If a rule book is available, I would place the responsibility of finding the rule on the caller.

I would not require that the caller be able to find the rule at that time, but before the end of the round. Play a provisional and continue the round whie the caller finds the rule.

First, I would say that there should be no card of advanced of pro players where there is no rule book within the group.

I would have to say that when there is no rule book available, any seriously called rules violation must be treated as real.

If a rule book is available, I would place the responsibility of finding the rule on the caller.

I would not require that the caller be able to find the rule at that time, but before the end of the round. Play a provisional and continue the round whie the caller finds the rule.



Pat would call that "silly". /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Just funnin' ya Mr. Brenner.

I would call it silly as well, but having thought about being on both sides of a disputed call, I can't think of a fairer method.

No animosity should be involved, and it really should never come up since there should always be at least one rule book among 4 players.

Becky, that's a good idea. Even if it does not become a best-seller, it would be a good tool for the organization to have.

I was just given a rule book to carry. :)

why would i call it silly? first, i carry a rule book. second, i encourage prolific use of provisionals.

btw, (this is for everyone not just nic) the funniest thing to me iswhen i call a rule and everyone yells back "no way, thats not a rule". i usually let them pile on me a bit, and often offer a bet (which they usually decline) before whipping out my book. i love their expression when i say "well i have a book right here so let me show you the rule" talk about jaws dropping.

usually has to do with moving sticks, etc, that are partially in front of the lie. coupla weekends ago a few holes after explaining thet rule to some ams, another guy on our card blatantly moved a big ol pile of stiff that his disc was in the middle of. i calledhiom right away, especially cuiz we had just talked about it. so he claimed he moved it cuz there were mesquite thorns. hahaha... i got to show him the rule about unsafe lies :)

Will we be getting an updated Rule Book with our 2006 renewl? The one I have is a few years old.

yes

Nothing , Substantially New , for 2006 ?

a couple of things

Anything Major ?

Anything Major ?



depends on your definition of major :p

Elimination of using a mini , always ?

2 Meter Tree Rule , not enforced ?

Basket closer than 10 meters from OB ?

Jump Putting ?

Elimination of using a mini , always ? <font color="blue"> no </font>

2 Meter Tree Rule , not enforced ?
<font color="blue">up to td </font>
Basket closer than 10 meters from OB ?
<font color="blue"> no</font>
Jump Putting ?


<font color="blue"> no changes</font>

anything else i can help you with? :D

Cool !!! Thanks again Keith. :D

Oh , one other thing Keith.

I heard that , even if part of your disc is inbounds and the other part is Out of bounds , it is considered OB ?

No half and half rule ? If any of the disc is touching OB , the whole disc is considered OB ? Is this true ? :confused:

No, If any part of the disc is touching <font color="blue">(or over)</font> IB, it is IB.

It just seems that now the line will be OB instead of IB.

<font color="blue">The "or over" part leads to the slippery slope of multiple or stacked playing surfaces, and that gets fairly confusing. As the rules were written (I haven't seen the new rulebook yet),
the IB/OB vertical "plane" extends upwards until it meets another playing surface. Normally this is like an IB bridge over an OB creek, or IB playing surface over an OB culvert.</font>

Oh , one other thing Keith.

I heard that , even if part of your disc is inbounds and the other part is Out of bounds , it is considered OB ?

No half and half rule ? If any of the disc is touching OB , the whole disc is considered OB ? Is this true ? :confused:



what gary(gnduke) said

Thanks !!!!!

My understanding of the OB rule is for this purpose (among others I'm sure):
(It's come up in a couple of tournaments here) If you throw out over an OB area, that is marked with a fence, posts, wall,etc. and it hits that OB line marker, on the OB side of course, and stays OB then it is marked where it first went OB, NOT where it hit the OB marker, as was the case before.
That's how I see anyways,
-mikew

Makes sense. I'll wait for the 2006 rule book !!! Thanks for clarification though.

Disc has to have touched Inbounds !!!! Not just the OB line.

anyone know if the 2006 rule book that is online is already printed and available in hard copy?
2006 PDGA Rule Book (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2006/PDGA.2006.rulebook.final.pdf)

anyone know if the 2006 rule book that is online is already printed and available in hard copy?
2006 PDGA Rule Book (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2006/PDGA.2006.rulebook.final.pdf)



Each new and renewing member will get a copy with their membership card and other items.

That's beautiful :D

Cool...............Thanks !!!!!

anyone know if the 2006 rule book that is online is already printed and available in hard copy?
2006 PDGA Rule Book (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2006/PDGA.2006.rulebook.final.pdf)



Each new and renewing member will get a copy with their membership card and other items.



When i go to the PDGA Pro Shop and click on renewal, here is what it says i will receive:
-- -- -- --
2006 RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP

Renewing members receive:
2006 Member Card
PDGA Magazine
PDGA Sticker
Election Ballot
Official PDGA communications
-- -- -- --

there's no mention of a 2006 Rule Book. Jon, do you know for sure that we will receive a copy simply by renewing?

anyone know if the 2006 rule book that is online is already printed and available in hard copy?
2006 PDGA Rule Book (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2006/PDGA.2006.rulebook.final.pdf)



Each new and renewing member will get a copy with their membership card and other items.



When i go to the PDGA Pro Shop and click on renewal, here is what it says i will receive:
-- -- -- --
2006 RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP

Renewing members receive:
2006 Member Card
PDGA Magazine
PDGA Sticker
Election Ballot
Official PDGA communications
-- -- -- --

there's no mention of a 2006 Rule Book. Jon, do you know for sure that we will receive a copy simply by renewing?



Well... I got one...

Which is nice 'coz I lost my old one.

I also recently got a letter encouraging me to renew my membership as soon as possible...

and informing me that my membership will run out in January of 2009.

That tickled me.

anyone know if the 2006 rule book that is online is already printed and available in hard copy?
2006 PDGA Rule Book (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2006/PDGA.2006.rulebook.final.pdf)



Each new and renewing member will get a copy with their membership card and other items.



When i go to the PDGA Pro Shop and click on renewal, here is what it says i will receive:
-- -- -- --
2006 RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP

Renewing members receive:
2006 Member Card
PDGA Magazine
PDGA Sticker
Election Ballot
Official PDGA communications
-- -- -- --

there's no mention of a 2006 Rule Book. Jon, do you know for sure that we will receive a copy simply by renewing?



ANYTIME the rules are reprinted the pdga gives the new rules book to ALL of THEIR members...
since i've been playing it happened in 97 in 02 and now for 06

keith