James, maybe you ought to take some of your own medicine and realize that some people, after long and careful consideration, believe that all the rules are important all the time. And that following all the rules is the way you create a "level playing field" for all competitors.

You like to get your panties in a bunch acting like people who want to follow the rules are incapable of being as enlightened as you are. Maybe you should give the credit for critical thinking to those whom you ask for it from.

I think you can tell which players have thought about it because they usually make an effort to observe the rules even if they do not always succeed. Those are the players that I don't feel need to be called on it because they have demonstrated that they are aware of the rule and try to comply. It is the players that consistently fail to come close to the mark that the rule needs to be brought up. Especially on a 500 foot second drive from the middle of the fairway.

Hitting the mark is the ONLY obstacle involved in that throw. It is the single thing that the player has to give any concern to other than just ripping as hard as they can. It is also the spot where not thinking about anything but ripping a long drive will give them the biggest competitive advantage.

I have never felt that anyone won due to some footfault advantage. In fact, even if I hit my mark every time and my competitor tried to hit it and missed 33% and beat me, I would think he won fair and square. Y'all obviously feel differently. This is where our difference lies.



So write a rule that accomplishes what you propose here?

"If the intent of the golfer is outwardly trying to comply, but breaks the rule, then don't call the violation. Particularly if they are your buddy..."

I can't wait to read it.

Rhett, I'm sure that my attitude comes across as arrogant (and it probably is). However, I feel my opinion here provides a needed counterbalance to a critically thought out, enlightened viewpoint that tends to label everyone who disagrees as cheaters or people who lack or don't value sportsmanship. I'm merely arguing an alternative to that view.

Why would I want to write a new rule. We have one that works very well right now.

Didn't read back very far - but it seems James' comment speaks to both sides of the issue of calling rules.

I think we all would like to see more people know, follow, and call the rules. If I had to settle for more people paying enough attention so as to be able to identify when some player had a pattern of foot faulting - and then making a call (at least part of the time), vs not paying any attention at all and never making a call.... well I think the choice is obvious. Ideal? Desirable? Not exactly, but when so many people pay no attention at all.............

That is the point I take from James' posts.

You are ascribing the attributes of a select few "pro stance rules" posters to all of the "pro stance rules" posters.

i.e., there are only one or two people who are calling it "cheating".

Why would I want to write a new rule. We have one that works very well right now.



If interpretted in a manner that rarely if ever calls for anyone to know, follow or call it, right?

By the way, what is the term most people use for players in a game that do not follow the rules, let alone think down on those people who do?

I don't care if you never call a rule, that is on you, I do care if you try to substantiate or promote a position that says it is ok to not know, follow or call the rules. I hope I am being clear on this.

I don't want to put anyone in the position, including myself, of calling rules because I feel slighted or to prove a point; I do want to put people in a position of feeling an obligation to the sport we all say we love to protect it from those who would undermine its very foundation whether purposefully or due to ignorance.

James, if players in a tournament are playing by different sets of rules, i.e. one player observes the stance rule strictly and the other does not, then tournament results will be skewed. There must be a common denominator (the rules) so that the only factor that changes the outcome of the tournament is the different skill sets of the participants. (I am including disc choice and how one reacts to weather conditions as part of one's skill set.)

Ahhh, one of the short-comings of posting on the web. In actuality, my post wasn't meant to be sarcastic. I would have smirked if I had meant it to be so. The reality is that I have never seen either you or James play. I am sincere in the observation that there is likely to be a subset that can subconsciously hit their mark every time. If you tell me you are able to do that than I have to accept that in lieu of observing different. What I am telling you is that for me, and I assume others, that isn't a reality. We lack the mental focus to be able to do that and are required to think through our shots more carefully. If you have a natural ability to do so then you have an advantage. Good on you. :) That is going to pay off in tournaments. But... I do think it is unfair to give others, who don't have that skill, a pass.

I agree with you, it is unfair. However, just as I make the assertion that I can do it without thinking, and you say that this isn't the case for everyone, the same is true for your experience.
You say that by having to think about hitting your mark you cost yourself a few shots per round/event. Isn't it possible that you are part of a subset, and that there are plenty who can focus and not affect their shot?

Personally, I think the reason I can hit my mark is that it's in my peripheral vision, and that allows me to hit it. I've observed in other areas of life (driving a car for example) that peripheral vision varies a lot between people. Maybe that is the root cause of this...

Just curious, how do you come to the conclusion that it is "skewing the results of our tournaments." Lyle has also stated that it accounts for 3 strokes a round and that so and so was seen gaining strokes on a DVD.

I suspect that y'all are simply asserting this as fact.

I have never felt that anyone won due to some foot fault advantage. In fact, even if I hit my mark every time and my competitor tried to hit it and missed 33% and beat me, I would think he won fair and square. Y'all obviously feel differently. This is where our difference lies.

On a side note, I'm not that easy to **** off, but these platitudes about sportsmanship are getting irritating. I'm sure it wouldn't be well-received, but an argument can be made that nitpicking over a foot fault 500 feet from the basket is not the highest virtue of a "sportsman."



No platitudes about sportsmanship, and by the way, I think you are a great sport based on what I read from you here :) I get my numbers currently from three DVDs I own, and numerous pictures on the web (and I still have to go through them more carefully). By and far, most foot placements are on target, that is why I used the ballpark figure of 90%. I have seen three direct foot faults by 1000 rated players in major competitions. This is just from casual perusal of DVDs and pictures with no real attempt to study. All three were in major competitions. On a personal note, I have seen dozens of foot faults in tournaments I have played in and have been beaten by players who foot faulted 6 or more times in a given round. Before someone asks why I didn't call these foot faults, well, one could say I'm not perfect either, in terms of my ability to call foot faults or my ability to hit my placement (although in the last tournament I played I believe I was 100% since I actively worked at this issue).

As to your point of how this is skewing outcomes. One of the foot faults was at the USDGC. In that tournament (I am trying to be unclear because I don't want to point fingers just deal with the problem as a whole) if the foot fault had been called there would have been a completely different outcome. Simple enough.

That is my evidence and I am starting to look actively through the footage I have to get real numbers. Keep in mind the data is limited since camera-persons don't tend to focus on the feet of the players ;).

As for nitpicking over a throw 500 feet from the pin (and since I haven't read through every post I'm guessing Nick has already replied), when I pay no attention to foot faults on my throws from the fairway I can throw about 380 feet. An emphasis on hitting my mark lowers that throw to about 300 feet. In one case my upshot is 120 feet, in the other it is 200 feet. For me that is a significant difference.

I agree with you, it is unfair. However, just as I make the assertion that I can do it without thinking, and you say that this isn't the case for everyone, the same is true for your experience.
You say that by having to think about hitting your mark you cost yourself a few shots per round/event. Isn't it possible that you are part of a subset, and that there are plenty who can focus and not affect their shot?

Personally, I think the reason I can hit my mark is that it's in my peripheral vision, and that allows me to hit it. I've observed in other areas of life (driving a car for example) that peripheral vision varies a lot between people. Maybe that is the root cause of this...



That is exactly the point. I don't know how big that subset is but if one of them beats you out on the money in a tournament then we have a problem. I don't know how it is in England, but in the U.S. when you "cheat" in a game of chance that involves money, that is looked on very harshly. They send people to jail for that. Obviously, most of this "cheating" is unintended but it certainly isn't good for the reputation of our sport. My attitude on things like this is I don't care if it is a subset of one. Take bat corking. Well, only Sammy was doing it so maybe we should just let him slide? I don't think so.

All of that aside, I just don't see the problem. In Cricket, you stand in the correct place, you bowl from the correct place, and if you hit the wicket the guy is out (please tell me I'm not that far off... :). In baseball it's the same; if the guy almost touches the bag he's out. It doesn't matter that he went around the bag thus running further than he needed to, he's out, that is the rule. In disc golf the rule is to hit your mark. No matter how you view it that makes the game tougher. Whether you had to learn it in advance and committed it to instinct, or whether you have to focus on it every throw, it is still an aquired skill. Eliminating it changes the game you are playing and that can't be denied.

As before, I agree. In tennis, a foot fault is a foot fault, regardless of whether it would have made a difference to the serve. In ball golf, if you touch the ball while addressing it with the club, it's a shot, regardless if it moved or not.
The problem as I see it is you have dedicated officials to watch for it in tennis, cricket, baseball etc
We don't have that in DG, we only have ourselves. Whilst this is the case, there is always the danger of rules abuse (no one can see), and of a conflict of interest in making a call ("you only called it cos I'm beating you" etc).

That's probably why people don't call it, they don't want to be accused of cheating themselves, ie making false calls to gain advantage.

Excellent points. I think that brings us back to the points made by Gary and others. How do we change our culture so that knowing, obeying, and calling the rules is de rigueur? So far the best suggestion I�ve seen as a TD reminder: hey, the rule of the day is� What other suggestions are there?

MIB mind erasers so we can start over. Not to be completely sarcastic, but looking at this as a realist.

Remember, a good number of people still think that even at big tourneys we are just hippies flinging frisbees...

Otherwise, having the points/rules of emphasis at events as suggested earlier sounds like the most practical. We can't make people care, but we can at least provide them the knowledge.

Split the total field at an event so only half of the entrants plays at one time. Then, everyone gets a caddy among the half not playing. Each caddy is responsible for watching another player in their group for rules calls. How about that? You get caddies, plus 'officials' at no cost.

I agree with you, it is unfair. However, just as I make the assertion that I can do it without thinking, and you say that this isn't the case for everyone, the same is true for your experience.
You say that by having to think about hitting your mark you cost yourself a few shots per round/event. Isn't it possible that you are part of a subset, and that there are plenty who can focus and not affect their shot?

Personally, I think the reason I can hit my mark is that it's in my peripheral vision, and that allows me to hit it. I've observed in other areas of life (driving a car for example) that peripheral vision varies a lot between people. Maybe that is the root cause of this...



Bruce,

In discussing how to improve compliance it is important to discuss and figure out the reasons for non-compliance. In discussing whether you should know, follow and call the rules out at the course during PDGA events it is more straightforward I believe.

Improving compliance involves motivations or lack of motivations to know, follow and call the rules.

Complying involves observing and acting on actual compliance or non-compliance with our rules of play.

We really should not consider motivations or reasons for non-compliance when out on the course, just whether in your objective opinion an infraction occurred or not and to make the call. When you get into the game of rationalizing the other players (or your own) non-compliance is where trouble is bound to happen, as you get more skilled at rationalizing why it is not important to know or play by the rules or certainly never to call the rules.

Lyle asked, �So how do we improve compliance? TD rule reviews prior to rounds?�

That is a good practice, but in my opinion, there is only one way to yield significant results and increase compliance: and unfortunately it involves �some real work� on all of our parts, not just the PDGA BoD or Rules Committee, but each one of us.

That We All Make A Commitment, Equal Or Greater Than Our Commitment To Become A Highly Skilled Player, To Make Knowing, Following And Calling Our Rules Of Play On A Deep Personal Level; And That We Become Living Examples Of The Right Way To Be A Professional Disc Golf.

This is due to the fundamental nature of rules being unable to call themselves, leaving us to be their defenders.

As before, I agree. In tennis, a foot fault is a foot fault, regardless of whether it would have made a difference to the serve. In ball golf, if you touch the ball while addressing it with the club, it's a shot, regardless if it moved or not.
The problem as I see it is you have dedicated officials to watch for it in tennis, cricket, baseball etc
We don't have that in DG, we only have ourselves. Whilst this is the case, there is always the danger of rules abuse (no one can see), and of a conflict of interest in making a call ("you only called it cos I'm beating you" etc).

That's probably why people don't call it, they don't want to be accused of cheating themselves, ie making false calls to gain advantage.



This is the heart of the matter. Now the question is:

WHO IS GOING TO PROTECT OUR SPORT FROM THESE PEOPLE? A vast police force? Or does it start with you?

Or does it start with you?



Well, having just been for a quick refresher on the rules, no. The rules state that if the violation is called by a member of the group, it must be confirmed by another member of the group. So at the very least, it starts with me and someone else...

In any case, over here we're still struggling to force certain players to stop using their bag as a marker disc, and stop holing out by hitting the chains with a disc clenched in their fist. As you rightly suggest, we're doing it by calling them on it...

When you get into the game of rationalizing the other players (or your own) non-compliance is where trouble is bound to happen



Yes, it is best to never ask "why don't people call this rule?" or "Are there times people call this rule and other times when they don't?" Armed with this lack of knowledge, we can continue to point this out as a problem, scream about why it never gets solved, and rest until the next rehashment. It's a productive cycle.

Or does it start with you?



Well, having just been for a quick refresher on the rules, no. The rules state that if the violation is called by a member of the group, it must be confirmed by another member of the group. So at the very least, it starts with me and someone else...

In any case, over here we're still struggling to force certain players to stop using their bag as a marker disc, and stop holing out by hitting the chains with a disc clenched in their fist. As you rightly suggest, we're doing it by calling them on it...



Bruce, as soon as you have control over what somebody other than yourself does, please let us all know. ;)

What you do, is entirely up to you, is all I am saying.

So
VVVVVVVVVVVV

Split the total field at an event so only half of the entrants plays at one time. Then, everyone gets a caddy among the half not playing. Each caddy is responsible for watching another player in their group for rules calls. How about that? You get caddies, plus 'officials' at no cost.


Sweet solution with a few flaws. I had a similar idea for letting us pleebs watch the pros. Finish your round go watch the pros play. The downside is I don't see a pro hauling my cart around. On the other hand, I like your thinking!

When you get into the game of rationalizing the other players (or your own) non-compliance is where trouble is bound to happen



Yes, it is best to never ask "why don't people call this rule?" or "Are there times people call this rule and other times when they don't?" Armed with this lack of knowledge, we can continue to point this out as a problem, scream about why it never gets solved, and rest until the next rehashment. It's a productive cycle.



Obviously you did not read the entire post James. I said there "IS" a time to consider such things, but out on the course during competitive rounds is not that time. That is the time to follow and call the rules you know without involving all of the rationalizations.

Go back and read it again.

Bruce, as soon as you have control over what somebody other than yourself does, please let us all know.


That's easy. All I have to do is reply to one of your posts, safe in the knowledge that you're compelled to respond. Go on, leave the keyboard alone, you know you can do it! :p

While I like Nick's overall view I think it could be added to. Here's my suggestion - put some teeth into being an official with the following ideals: It is the job of all officials to call the rules. Any given tournament has to have several officials (just based on the number of officials out there). Empower the officials with the backing of the PDGA (make them essentially playing Marshals). Build a "don't give a darn" attitude within this group so they think it is more their job to call the rules than not to. Make them meet before the tournaments they play in and review what their job is. Then have them support each other so that when one gets called out, and one will, the other officials (and TDs) step up and point out, that official is doing his/her job. Have all officials sign a code of conduct contract (not my idea) that has them agree to uphold the rules and play by them, and make keeping their officials status contingent on that. Give them official status within the organization that allows them to punish those who consistently break the rules (much the same as Marshals have). Finally, make them answerable to the Marshals (or TD if no Marshal is present) for their decisions and actions to ensure fairness and impartiality. Finally, give them a cool shirt to wear (O.K., I just want a cool shirt :)).

Someone out there is going to point out... what happens on cards where there is no official? Eventually, people will figure out that if they're on a card with no official, and then get on one with an official where all their violations get called, they will lose to the guys for whom they didn't call violations in the last round. It won't take long for the culture to, at first resentfully, embrace rules calling as the norm.

A similar tactic was used with the Texas State Police a few years ago. The service was going to pot with little internal or external support. They built a culture of pride in the position and empowered the troopers and now it is considered the best police force in the state (and one of the best in the country). The officers have great pride in being impartial and doing their job 100% correctly.

Interesting that you would compare PDGA officials to the Texas DPS. Must they wear sunglasses and generally be rednecks?

Lyle,

The reason I don't support a "Police State" approach is because it relies on the premise that someone has to be watching you and be ready to call you on a violation in order for you to learn and follow our rules of play. Having 2 or 3 officials with the attitude you describe or one I would promote will not result in a fair situation for all due to them not being about to be everywhere at once.

Now having 2 or 3 non-playing officials in addition to everyone trying their best to follow and call the rules would be a step in the right direction.

I believe it has taken us this long to build a "who cares" culture concerning rules, so it will likely take some time to build a "we care" culture (as opinions expressed here clearly indicate). Progress will not be marked by giant PDGA initiatives (though that can't hurt) it will be marked by more and more players choosing to take pride in their sport and learn, practice following and feeling more comfortable calling our rules of play.

Interesting that you would compare PDGA officials to the Texas DPS. Must they wear sunglasses and generally be rednecks?



I need a hat.

i agree with everything James has said. loosening the foot-fault rule is the solution to this stupid nit-picking BS. if the rules committee can eliminate the 2M rule they can create a foot placement rule that will allow for smoother play. hitting an invisible line behind your disc is just a tad ridiculous.

yeah, go ahead and bash away. say i don't have any sense of right and wrong. IT' S MY MOTHA-F'N OPINION. when y'all are playing on the NT, you will share my beliefs, but since it seems the only people who have beefs with the footing rule are junior-miss Pro 2's and ams, they don't carry any water.

D@mn Mikey, That has so many hooks it's more like a trot line than a troll post. :cool:

Unfortunately that weak bait will draw plenty of hits.

It's looking like Mikey's New Year's resolution was to make as many enemies as possible around the country.

just wanted to give y'all something to chew on. eat up, supper's gettin' cold.

speed of play, is what i'm talking about here. do we need arguments over foot faults every other hole and continuous re-throws when we can change the rule to "12 inches either side of the mini" and save some bickering? don't you hate the NFL and NBA where officials have too much power over how games are decided?

Thanks for not bashing. except for Lung. what the heck happened to you, i had a great time in your group at worlds and now you wanna be the Pro 3 version of Tricky Dick Nixon Kight?

D@mn Mikey, That has so many hooks it's more like a trot line than a troll post. :cool:



To bad his bait is in a different Ocean from the rest of us...

The Sea of Tranquility to be exact. Hope one day you find it!

Not even a ripple.