stevenpwest
Sep 08 2013, 03:56 PM
A player correctly marks the lie by placing a mini-marker in front of the thrown disc. The player then takes the thrown disc and places it completely over the mini-marker. The mini-marker cannot be seen under the covering disc.

If the player has a supporting point directly behind the covering disc, the stance is legal.

If the player is stepping on the very edge of the covering disc, the stance is probably still legal. But, if the player is stepping on half the covering disc, the stance may or may not be legal, depending on where the hidden mini-marker is.

If the player has a supporting point almost 30 cm behind the covering disc, the stance may or may not be legal.

If the other players did not see the thrower place the thrown disc over the mini-marker, they would think the covering disc is being used as the marker.

The point is, the legality of a stance cannot be determined if the marker is not visible.

Should there be a rule that players cannot obscure the marker (whether a mini or the thrown disc if used as the marker)? Or, at least not the rear edge? Should players be required to, say, clear leaves off the thrown disc if it is being used as the marker?

Under the current rules, can other players require the thrower to move the covering disc?

cgkdisc
Sep 09 2013, 10:17 AM
Per 803.01A, any player can ask another player to move their "equipment" from the line of play. You have the right to ask a player not to place their disc on top of their mini marker at any time and even in front of their mini if it bothers you.

davidsauls
Sep 09 2013, 11:52 AM
If we start adding rules for such rare and obscure situations as this, I'll have to pull 3 discs out of my bag to offset the added weight of the rulebook.

davidsauls
Sep 09 2013, 11:55 AM
A player correctly marks the lie by placing a mini-marker in front of the thrown disc. The player then takes the thrown disc and places it completely over the mini-marker. The mini-marker cannot be seen under the covering disc.

If the player has a supporting point directly behind the covering disc, the stance is legal.



.....but if you want to play games, this is not necessarily true.

What if the scoundrel puts his covering disc over the mini, such that the mini is under the 3:00 position on the covering disc (as seen by the thrower)? Then the supporting point directly behind the covering disc may be several inches out of line with the mini.

stevenpwest
Sep 09 2013, 01:21 PM
Per 803.01A, any player can ask another player to move their "equipment" from the line of play. You have the right to ask a player not to place their disc on top of their mini marker at any time and even in front of their mini if it bothers you.

It actually says: "A player is allowed to request that other people remove themselves and/or their belongings from the player's stance or line of play."

Note "A player . . . the player's stance or line of play".

So, if my lie was near or behind the covering disc and it were my turn to throw, yes I could ask. Otherwise, I don't think so.

There is also:

"804.03 Interference F. Players shall not stand or leave their equipment where interference with a disc in play may occur. A player may require other players to move themselves or their equipment if either could interfere with the throw. Refusal to do so is a courtesy violation."

Perhaps the mini is a "disc in play"? In which case, the other player should not place any equipment on it. But, I couldn't ask them to move the covering disc, because the covering disc couldn't interfere with "the throw". (OK, if I were planning a skip at that spot, then I could ask.) I read this as my throw, but maybe it could be his, too.

Anyway, I doubt that a mini on the ground was what was meant by the phrase "disc in play". It might cause unintended consequences to extend it thus.

Anyway, that's stretching other rules to cover this situation when they weren't intended for it. Is there some sort of ban on obfuscation?

cgkdisc
Sep 09 2013, 02:02 PM
The rule says "a player" not "the thrower" so any player in the group at any time may ask another player to move something, typically a bag or stool, but it can also be a disc. It's not uncommon where the thrower may not see that a bag, including the thrower's, may be in the possible rollout area but another player in the group sees it and asks for it to be moved. If a player is known to put their disc in front of their lie/mini, you can ask at the beginning of the round to not do that and they have no recourse.

wsfaplau
Sep 09 2013, 03:30 PM
What if the scoundrel ........

Funny

stevenpwest
Sep 09 2013, 08:04 PM
The rule says "a player" not "the thrower" so any player in the group at any time may ask another player to move something, typically a bag or stool, but it can also be a disc. It's not uncommon where the thrower may not see that a bag, including the thrower's, may be in the possible rollout area but another player in the group sees it and asks for it to be moved. If a player is known to put their disc in front of their lie/mini, you can ask at the beginning of the round to not do that and they have no recourse.

The potential rollaway would fall under one (or two) of the three cases where a player is allowed to ask with the power of a courtesy violation to back him.

Of course, one can always ask, but most of the time the other player could legitimately say "It is not in your stance or line of play, interference with a disc in play can't occur, and it cannot interfere with the throw. Therefore I will leave it covering mu mini and you have no grounds to call a courtesy violation on me."

Perhaps another reason is warranted: To enable a player to observe compliance with the rules.

stevenpwest
Sep 09 2013, 08:05 PM
.....but if you want to play games, this is not necessarily true.

What if the scoundrel puts his covering disc over the mini, such that the mini is under the 3:00 position on the covering disc (as seen by the thrower)? Then the supporting point directly behind the covering disc may be several inches out of line with the mini.

Exactly. How can you enforce the rule?

davidsauls
Sep 10 2013, 09:21 AM
Exactly. How can you enforce the rule?

If it matters, perhaps you could just watch. Watch him put his mini down. Watch him put his covering disc over the mini, and pay attention to where, in relation to the covering disc, the mini is. Call a footfault if you believe he did. Let him pick up his covering disc to demonstrate that he didn't footfault. Or not.

That's for anyone who cares. Myself, I'm not worrying about something I've never seen or heard of happening, to possibly give a player several inches of extra relief, in a game where real footfaults are almost never called, anyway.

pterodactyl
Sep 11 2013, 03:32 PM
Who would care if your disc is in front of the mini? I always put mine there. The reason for that is to make sure that, in case of a disruption or delay, I don't come back to my shot and stand and throw behind a disc that I moved to the side of my mini. I've done it before and it has cost me a shot.

Ellen
Sep 11 2013, 07:58 PM
A player correctly marks the lie by placing a mini-marker in front of the thrown disc. The player then takes the thrown disc and places it completely over the mini-marker. The mini-marker cannot be seen under the covering disc.
...
If the other players did not see the thrower place the thrown disc over the mini-marker, they would think the covering disc is being used as the marker.

A "mark" by its language definition is something visible, or at least observable. References to "marking" in the rule book support the language definition of the mark being visible. I would make the argument that if you've covered your original marker and it is no longer visible, the new disc is now the marker. Which in this case is incorrect on two counts.

1 - You didn't use a mini (802.03 B)
2 - You marked your lie relative to a marker disc and not the thrown disc (802.03 B).

A warning this time. A penalty next time (802.03 G)

I think you may be able to make the argument for a partially covered mini or thrown disc, that if the covering disc is behind the marker disc and your foot touches it when throwing you have violated 801.03 A., that leaves about a 7 cm landing zone for your foot. Pretty tricky.

If marks don't have to be visible I'm going to start using my invisible minis. I have thousands, maybe even millions, and I'd like to use them up.

Ellen
Sep 11 2013, 09:17 PM
Off topic a little bit...I'm looking at the Jan, 1 2013 revision rule book and I can't find where it says my foot needs to be 30 cm behind the marker. I see that 30 cm is converted to inches in 800.03, but I don't see anywhere else.

Have I missed something?

Found it. Never mind.

stevenpwest
Sep 11 2013, 09:18 PM
Who would care if your disc is in front of the mini? I always put mine there. The reason for that is to make sure that, in case of a disruption or delay, I don't come back to my shot and stand and throw behind a disc that I moved to the side of my mini. I've done it before and it has cost me a shot.

I see no problem that needs to be addressed with a disc in front of the mini, or even partially covering the mini, as long as the back edge of the mini-marker is visible.

stevenpwest
Sep 11 2013, 09:22 PM
If it matters, perhaps you could just watch. Watch him put his mini down. Watch him put his covering disc over the mini, and pay attention to where, in relation to the covering disc, the mini is. Call a footfault if you believe he did. Let him pick up his covering disc to demonstrate that he didn't footfault. Or not.

That's pretty much how it went.

That's for anyone who cares. Myself, I'm not worrying about something I've never seen or heard of happening, to possibly give a player several inches of extra relief, in a game where real footfaults are almost never called, anyway.

You do know we're all practicing for Am Worlds 2014 all the time around here, right? Whether it's to call someone, or make sure we don't get called, we have a renewed interest in learning the rules.

davidsauls
Sep 11 2013, 10:18 PM
You do know we're all practicing for Am Worlds 2014 all the time around here, right? Whether it's to call someone, or make sure we don't get called, we have a renewed interest in learning the rules.

Oh, I'm always interested in discussing rules, dissecting rules, testing rules against unusual situations, so as to better understand them, even where they're unlikely to be called.

Though I often stop when it gets to, "there ought to be a rule addressing this". Sometimes it's okay to let the extremely rare occurrence remain in a gray area of the rules, and just hope reason and fairness prevails.

araydallas
Sep 12 2013, 05:13 PM
A player correctly marks the lie by placing a mini-marker in front of the thrown disc. The player then takes the thrown disc and places it completely over the mini-marker. The mini-marker cannot be seen under the covering disc.

If the player has a supporting point directly behind the covering disc, the stance is legal.

If the player is stepping on the very edge of the covering disc, the stance is probably still legal. But, if the player is stepping on half the covering disc, the stance may or may not be legal, depending on where the hidden mini-marker is.

If the player has a supporting point almost 30 cm behind the covering disc, the stance may or may not be legal.

If the other players did not see the thrower place the thrown disc over the mini-marker, they would think the covering disc is being used as the marker.

The point is, the legality of a stance cannot be determined if the marker is not visible.

Should there be a rule that players cannot obscure the marker (whether a mini or the thrown disc if used as the marker)? Or, at least not the rear edge? Should players be required to, say, clear leaves off the thrown disc if it is being used as the marker?

Under the current rules, can other players require the thrower to move the covering disc?


Steven, going back to your OP, what's the difference between covering the mini with your thrown disc after marking it and covering the mini with anything -- a pile of dirt, leaves, dead branches, etc.? If there's no difference (from your point of view) under the current rules, then what? I guess we do need a specific rule, like you said, that basically states, "once you put your marker down, no hiding it." To me that should be just common sense.

At some point EVERY rule has to be interpreted to mean what it was intended to mean, and also EVERY rule cannot be written to the letter to exclude what it didn't mean.