I throw my disc and it lands under a pine tree, towards the center, that is probably 20 feet in diameter. The basket is on the opposite side of where the disc went in to the tree. How far do I have to maneuver my way in there to throw? Can I stand on the outer edge of the tree, behind the disc, and throw a tomahawk over the top of the tree to the basket? Thanks to all who reply...
PEACE

Yes, with an unplayable lie penalty. Otherwise, you have to play from under the tree if you want to avoid the penalty.

Thanks Chuck...if I decide to maneuver my way in there how close does my foot have to be to the disc when I throw?

The same as you would for any other lie. On the line of play, within 30cm of the disc or mini marker.

In other words, you gotta wriggle all the way in there and get some body part behind the disc.

And find a position that results in minimal movement of the obstacle after you take your stance. Meaning that you can move things that are not between the hole ane the lie to get into the tree, but once you get to your stance, you should not be holding anything out of place with any part of your body.

...but once you get to your stance, you should not be holding anything out of place with any part of your body.



I agree with this, but only for foliage that is between you and the basket. However, foliage behind you that is bent due to your presence inside of the pine tree does not (in my opinion) constitute breaking the rule. The idea is not to "back in" to the foliage, clearing a path for your throw.

As a large (i.e. fat :eek:) person, I find it difficult to not disturb the foliage--but I do try--if I am in the middle of a young pine tree with lots of little branches. But if the bent foliage is behind me, and moved due to my being there, and I tried to minimize such disturbance, then I feel I am well within the rules.

Displacement happens, it just needs to be minimized and done to avoid gaining an undue advantage that goes against the spirit of the rule.

Cheers,
Steve

I got one for you guys. This past weekend we played in a C tier event with winds 20-40mph. A buddy of mine said he had a 4ft putt go into the chains,blow back out,hit off his chest and go back into the chains and stay in the basket. He and his group looked at each other in awe. They counted it as they did not know of any ruling to discount it.

Any rules violation?

Deano... :confused:

803.07 A is the closest to this. As long as the deflection was unintentional, then you made the right call that the disc is played where it landed, which is in the basket. The rule specifies deflection off "another player" although it looks like here's a case where the Rules Committee could replace 'another' with 'any' since if it's an unintentional hit, I don't know why it shouldn't be played the same way.

In the PGA rules I know they can not double hit the ball.

I have seen this on TV,lob wedge out of thick grass.

I didn't think we had that written.

Deano... :cool:

I think the DG equivilent (a double throw or redirect with the hand) would be captured in 803.07. Would a poor shot that bounced off the players shoe count as a double hit or interference in ball golf ?

I think the DG equivilent (a double throw or redirect with the hand) would be captured in 803.07. Would a poor shot that bounced off the players shoe count as a double hit or interference in ball golf ?



Yes. The most recent time I saw this happen was to Jeff Maggert in the Masters, and he was playing well at the time, in the lead pairing. He was in a fairway bunker close to the lip, chose a club that was not lofted enough. When he hit the ball, the ball hit the lip of the bunker, and came back and hit him in the chest. 2-shot penalty. OUCH!

The most famous double-hit incident was T.C Chen at the 1985 US Open. Chen was a relatively unknown Taiwanese golfer at the time, played beautifully the first 3 days, tying the 36-hole and 54-hole record low scores for the U.S. Open, and also carded the first albatross (double-eagle) in U.S. Open history that week. However, in the final round, he didn't play so well, and his score was marked by an 8 he got after he double-hit the ball on a chip shot. He received a 2-shot penalty, and ended up losing the U.S. Open title to Andy North by one shot.

Chap

I did about the same thing last year at the Graceland Open. After missing a par putt off the basket, I was frustrated and picked up my disc, slammed it into the bottom of the basket and it instantly popped right back out at me, then without thinking my body just reacted and my hand swung up to block my body and knocked the disc back into the basket. I couldn't believe what had just happened, and I gladly took the double bogey for being such an idiot... :D

On putting obstacles, is it illegal to be leaning against and obstacle such as a tree trunk in order to gain better balance for the putt? Further more is it illegal to hang on to and obstacle to assist in leaning around said obstacle to putt?

On putting obstacles, is it illegal to be leaning against and obstacle such as a tree trunk in order to gain better balance for the putt? Further more is it illegal to hang on to and obstacle to assist in leaning around said obstacle to putt?




Rule Question: Maintaining balance while putting
Question

"I have a good rules question for you involving the stance rules. A player uses an object (in this case a branch) behind him to maintain balance for a putt. First, would this be considered "full control of balance"? Second, could you argue, if the branch is not so large that the players body weight will not move it, that it is a violation of 803.03 D and or 803.04 A because they could have moved the branch less by not hanging on it? Thanks for any input."

Response

The question can be boiled down to: Can a player hold on to an object behind his lie to maintain balance while throwing/putting?

Applicable rules:

* 803.04 (Stance)
* 803.05 (Obstacles and Relief)
* 804.05 (Disqualification and Suspension)

Discussion:

The rules do not require that you maintain your balance while putting. You can have a grand mal seizure as long as you don't step ahead of your lie. At the time you decide to step ahead of your lie is when you have to demonstrate balance. This is simply to prove that you are not committing a falling putt, such that you would not be able to stop yourself from falling forward due to the motion of your putt. Grabbing a branch is merely acquiring another support point, which is perfectly legal, as long as it is not ahead of your lie.

Holding on to something BEHIND your lie is not prohibited by the rules, provided that the tree that the golfer is using as a supporting point is in-bounds (803.03.A (3)).

The branch must not be moved, or else the player would be in violation of one or both of 803.04.D and 803.05.A, which require you to take the stance that results in the least movement of objects that are part of the course and which prohibit you from moving a branch to "make room for a throwing motion".

Conclusion:

A player can hold on to something behind her lie, in certain circumstances, without violating the PDGA rules. In general that which is not prohibited by the PDGA rules is allowed, provided of course, that the action done by the player is not considered "a willful attempt to circumvent the rules of play". (This, of course, is cheating!)

Other Comments:

Many members of the committee have actually tried to hold on to some object behind their lie, while leaning forward to throw or putt. In our opinion this action makes the ensuing throw/putt MORE difficult to accomplish.

The PDGA Rules Committee

Carlton Howard, Chair
John Chapman
Conrad Damon
Harold Duvall
Joe Garcia
Jim Garnett
Rick Voakes

I got one for you guys. This past weekend we played in a C tier event with winds 20-40mph. A buddy of mine said he had a 4ft putt go into the chains,blow back out,hit off his chest and go back into the chains and stay in the basket. He and his group looked at each other in awe. They counted it as they did not know of any ruling to discount it. Any rules violation?




Check this out. Looks like you can sue if you get hurt in the process:

1995 -- In July, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court upheld a $40,000 verdict against the Fort Kent Golf Club. Jeannine Pelletier had sued because, on the first fairway almost 10 years ago, she hit a golf ball that struck a railroad track that cuts across the fairway, and the ball bounded back and hit her in the face.

For some reason the defendant in Pelletier v. Fort Kent Golf Club, 662 A.2d 220, 224 (Me.1995), didn't argue that a golfer assumes the risks inherent in the sport. Maybe Maine law is different from most states'.

The course rule was that you could take free relief from the railroad tracks. She did not have to play the ball where it lied in that case.

I will generally take an awkward stance to the point of lying down and sticking my foot under a tree before I will so much as allow my shoulder to be displacing a small twig on the tree behind me.

I mean a wooden twig, not my brother-in-law.