At a recent tournament, I came across an interesting scenario.

<ul type="square"> Playoff between two players.
No Offical is sent out with the group On the second hole of the playoff, Player A is standing behind his lie, and proceeds to pickup his disc and throws it to the person carrying his bag. Player B, after approximately 30 seconds and after he misses his putt, calls for a penalty on the Player A for a practice throw/mismarking his lie. [/list]
Questions for the group (I am confirrming my understanding and can read the rulebook): <ul type="square"> Because there was not an offical present, and not two players within the group, this call cannot be made, as there can not be a second. I am assuming this is correct? There is a time sensitivity to calling an penalty on another player. Would you consider this to be a reasonable timeframe? Does the fact that Player B made the call after he threw again, play any role in this decision? [/list] What ended up happening is that since it became a he-said he-said scenario. they restarted the playoff with the TD, myself and another adult (not sure if he is an official or not). Player A won the playoff by makeing a 45-50 foot birdie on the first hole. After I discussed this with the TD after this occurred I mentioned that there were a ton of Certified officials at the tournament and that he should have called upon one of us to be on the hole.

One final question, there was a three-way playoff for first in the recreational division, right after this, the TD requested that I stay and officiate. Since I played in the rec division (had no part in the playoff itself), I told the TD that I cannot make a ruling in this division, as I was a particiapnt.

Was I correct in that statement, or, since I was not directly involved in the playoff (and by extension out of the particular compitition), could I have made a ruling?

Thank you all for your assistance,

Steve

You cannot make a ruling in your division.

Lance is right about you making rulings within your division.

Although, it does leave the question that since the event was technically over (for you at least). Could you officiate the playoff? It wouldn't affect your place in the standings.

Interesting thought.



As for the Player A/B scenario, it was an oversight by the TD to not send somebody, a CO or not, to witness that playoff. I'd say Player B missed the window to make the call, but I haven't looked in the book yet to see if there's a time frame, although I view it like an appeal in baseball or football -- once the next pitch/play is made the appeal window is closed.

This is the kind of scenario where the zealots like to worship the rulebook and penalize the player for tossing his disc to his caddie. In my ideal world, the rules would allow for DQing the other player for being so lame. Wanting to make the call in the first place and then waiting till the he missed his putt to do so. That is very unsportsmanlike and should be DQable.

Depends on how you look at it.

Was the player called for the toss or for not marking his lie? The description is a little unclear. If he didn't mark his lie before picking up the disc then honestly it's a no brainer if it was called at the time of occurance.

The bigger issue (other than the player not knowing/caring about marking his lie before picking up the disc) is that the TD didn't send out a third party to observe the playoff.


I do agree that it is sour grapes in calling it after the miss. If you're not going to call it when it happens, that's on you.

james - you are seriously suggesting we DQ someone who calls an official rule from the official rulebook during sanctioned play?

Now here's someone who has the guts to call a rule on a friend...

(Aug. 14) - An off-duty Elko County sheriff's deputy was arrested on charges of driving under the influence of alcohol after her husband, a fellow deputy, pulled her over. Charlotte Moore, 36, a jail deputy, was off duty driving her 2004 Pontiac Grand Am on Saturday when she was pulled over by her husband, Elko County Sheriffs Deputy Mike Moore, a police report said.

In two separate accounts of the incident, Mike Moore indicated she initially was pulled over for either speeding or making an illegal turn. She allegedly left before being administered a portable breathalyzer test, the Elko Daily Free Press reported. Mike Moore pulled her over again and called for backup. He left shortly after another officer arrived.

This is the kind of scenario where the zealots like to worship the rulebook and penalize the player for tossing his disc to his caddie. In my ideal world, the rules would allow for DQing the other player for being so lame. Wanting to make the call in the first place and then waiting till the he missed his putt to do so. That is very unsportsmanlike and should be DQable.



"zealots"

You guys are making it sound like a derogatory term.

Zealot - One who is zealous, especially excessively so.

Zealous - Filled with or motivated by zeal; fervent.

Fervent - Having or showing great emotion or zeal; ardent:


I think you get the idea.

On behalf of all DGRZ everywhere, please refrain from using the word "zealot" when trying to show those who KFC the Rules in a bad light. We DGRZ do scrutinize the rules, but we are not capricious in our application of same.

Please feel free to the word "n*zi" or the words "storm trooper" for those individuals who are using the Rules in order to foment disharmony, such as in the example that James stated above.

I am a Rules Zealot, and not ashamed of that fact, and I hope that I have caused others to ruminate the Rules with my postings, and not to cause others to point the finger at the ones who attempt to enforce the Rules, which are by themselves defenseless, instead of the Rules violator.

If I have caused problems here, I apologize.

Of course I am serious. Y'all envision a sport where rules overrule everything, even good sportsmanship. I envision a sport where rules are used as a tool under the guidance of good sportsmanship. Sportsmanship and fair play is the ideal, not some anal worshipping of the written word.

In my imagination of the act, since I didn't witness it, no freaking advantage was gained, and anyone looking to win a tournament by making that call is a chump in my book and I have no problem banishing chumps from a real sport.

And please spare me all those lame "analogous scenarios" where real advantages are gained. Those are different scenarios, and almost every sporting person can instinctively tell the difference. That is basically my point.

Bill, no offense is aimed at anyone on a personal basis. I apologize if I offended anyone personally. I don't however apologize if I have offended anyone's values related to this topic.

If I read the example correctly, the player was standing at his lie---presumably, had not thrown his intended shot---when he tossed disc to his caddy. Would this not make his toss to his caddy his legal shot....and everything afterwards, practice shots? Or improper play of hole, since he didn't play out from the throw to his caddy?

Off the top of my head, I don't think there's a time limit on most penalties. If a score on a hole was recorded wrong, it can be corrected anytime before the card is turned in. Or even afterwards (with additional penalties for mistotaling). Exceptions for stance violations (or is it just falling putt).

Is there a category for rules zealots who wish to argue rules down to the fine point, to focus our understanding and perhaps lead to clarification and re-writing of rules....but think discretion and sportsmanship should be used before calling rules, such as "practice throws" that are pretty clearly not "practice"?

James, ;) how naive you are for thinking that we could be expected to act intelligently with respect for our fellow golfers. This is a cutthroat professional sport and if I can interperate the rules to say you're a big sissy that wears Army boots then so be it. To heck with the REAL game.

Here you go, Chuck, a comparison to ball golf : Tiger marks his ball on the green and tosses it to the caddy half way across the green. You see it all the time, and there is absolutely without a doubt no difference in what player A was doing except to the "nazi" trying to gain an advantage without earning it. To call this a violation (providing it didn't travel 2 meters) is to litter the game with diseased inferrence.

no need to overreact skipper. the rule says what it says. my question is simple: how and where do we draw the line between rules that must be applied and rules that are optional depending on circumstance?

in the absence of such guidance, a player must call the rules. otherwise why even bother to have a rulebook?

this is not about being a stormtrooper. its about the delta between the written rules and the applied rules. we should all beable to agree that it would be in the longterm interest of the sport for the delta between the applied and written rules should be eliminated.

actually, for me this is one more reason we need to seperate the majority of our existing events from those that are truly competitive. make the rules for "typical" events more lax, or apply them sporadically if you want... but in top competition it no longer works.

Here you go, Chuck, a comparison to ball golf : Tiger marks his ball on the green and tosses it to the caddy half way across the green. You see it all the time, and there is absolutely without a doubt no difference in what player A was doing except to the "nazi" trying to gain an advantage without earning it. To call this a violation (providing it didn't travel 2 meters) is to litter the game with diseased inferrence.



The only problem with that analogy is that it isn't against the rules to throw your ball to your caddy after it is marked. Now if Tiger marker is ball and then putted it(similar to throwing your disc) to his caddy, then that is a stroke and would for sure be called. As someone who has played ball golf tournements (real tourneys, not some rec tourney) the enforcement of the rules is just as strict if not more strict than disc golf.

Tossing a ball in ball golf isn't a type of competitive shot either since it has to be struck by a club. Tossing a disc at any other time than from your lie was perceived by the Rules Committee to possibly be a way to determine the effects of wind at that moment. Of course, I'm not sure what you learn by tossing a 175g overstable T-Rex even with a 10m toss into the wind?

exactly. if his club touches the sand in a trap its a stroke. when Michelle Wie was off on her drop by an inch she was nabbed.

question for all: is sportmanship making unilateral decisions to override a rule on your card only? or is it following the Rules of Play explicitly?

how and where do we draw the line between rules that must be applied and rules that are optional depending on circumstance?



Using your judgement, guided by an inate sense of fair play.

You act as if this is impossible or if it is possible, it is some tainted vice. Simply recognize that it is possible and that it is a good thing.

question for all: is sportmanship making unilateral decisions to override a rule on your card only? or is it following the Rules of Play explicitly?



Sportsmanship is a value commonly held by most people. They know what it is even if they cannot articulate it. You may enter into rational discussion. That discussion may end up concluding "sportsmanship is blindly worshipping the written word." In fact, I bet you do. However, at the end of the day, you can never eliminate that inate sense held by most people. It will always win out.

Individuals, the public, society at large always knows when someone gets the shaft, or when someone gets something they don't deserve. They are also suspicious that things are less than they could be when people spout off the impotent excuse of "well them's the rules, and we have to follow them cause without them, there'd be chaos."

In other words, you know sportsmanship has been violated when the common person is left with a bad taste in their mouth. When you only violate the written word, but not the spirit of sportsmanship, very few people feel amiss. That is the simplest way I know of to describe the concept.

so when i declined to call foot faults on six of ten drives in a two hole stretch on saturday, was i using using my judgement and applying my sense of fair play? four of the drives were made from in front of the marked line (one of them by almost a meter) and two were taken from two feet to the left of the box - righties throwing two-fingers - and definitely provided an advantage by creating a more favorable line.

i did not make the calls because i am a wimp when it comes to peer pressure. i felt crappy about my decisions then and i feel crappy about them now.

how that all equals true sportmanship is beyond me. a true sportsman would look down, see his foot placement, and stroke himself without waiting for a Rules Narc to step up.

Jim,

I hope you don't play BG, as the sense of sportsmanship there is much different than that demonstrated by your thought that the rules should be enforced differently based on intent. BG uses the idea that one does not attempt to gain an unfair advantage by usurping the rules, even if they do not intend to do so. It is such a prevelant idea that most players will call infractions upoin themselves, and when that does not occur and they get upset when it is called, they ususally are upset at themselves for making the error.

The only place where I can think of intent being brought into play in BG (I am sure there are others), is at the tee when one accidentally touches their ball at address and knocks the ball off the tee. They are allowed to place the ball back on tee withoput penalty. However, there is definitely no competitive advantage gained from this process.

In my opinion, this is an ideal for any sportman to live to.

Chuck,

While I agree that throwing a tee bird 10M on an approach may not show much, what throwing their putter 6 ft on a 36 ft putt? Could that not tell you how the wind is going to take the disc? Not trying to pick a fight, just curious as to your opinion.

Steve

There you go again. Your counter to the idea that good judgement exists is to give a ridiculous scenario that very few people would ever criticize you for calling. The fact that no one thinks twice about one, but very few people call the other should give you pause. Maybe it should be the topic for discussion. The ideal of sportsmanship might become more apparent in that discussion.

I agree that test putting could make a difference and that's why the rule is there and the somewhat arbitrary 2m for any throw and no tolerance for throws in the direction of the target.

. my question is simple: how and where do we draw the line between rules that must be applied and rules that are optional depending on circumstance?

in the absence of such guidance, a player must call the rules. otherwise why even bother to have a rulebook?





One element of this discretion is whether or not a competitive advantage is gained. In my opinion, foot-faults should be called---a player gains a competitive advantage by missing his spot, even if it's the advantage of just not worrying about it. I don't call them, because it is more or less accepted tradition not to. Same thing with time limits. On the other hand, when a player tosses his disc a few feet to his bag, whether forward or backwards, I see no particular advantage gained, so it strikes me as unsportsmanlike to hit him with the letter of the law.

How far is too far? I don't know. How much contact is a foul in basketball, or pass interference or holding in football? Accepted tradition? Read the "traveling" rule in the basketball rulebook, then watch a game.

It seems that the discussion over whether Player B is a[insert negative perjorative term here] for making the call and whether those who would condemn Player B as such for merely seeking to enforce the rules has taken us just a bit astray from Steve's original query.

First, I think a good point was made in questioning the issue of Player A's lie. Steve, its not clear to me whether there was a violation of play which is morally easier to enforce. If Player A threw his disc towards his caddy he midsplayed the hole. That's easy. Player A should be penalized. I am assuming that you were really bringing up the issue of the alleged practice throw and not any other type of issue. Is that correct?

Did Player A make a practice throw? Of course he did. He really should have known better. The rules do not seem to provde for a warning on this. I have warned players, especially new players, on this. This discussion had one benefit. I now know that I really should have stroked those players. I do not think this is appropriate but that appears to be the rule. Right here, I think that this should be similar to a foot fault. Warning for first offense and stroke thereafter. But, that's not the case. There is no warning.

The real problem, as pointed out above, is that nothing happened. "What?" you say. Well, we all know about the conundurum of the bear defecating in the woods. If Player A admits that he made the toss, then I guess it happen. However, if he denies it, there is nobody to witness the event and it simply did not happen. I think the TD should not have started the playoff over but should have insisted that the ruling cannot be made absent a second but that somebody will be present for the rest of the playoff.

Finally, is Player B everything he has been assumed to be? I am on the fence on this one. I doubt I would have made the call at the time he did it. His timing is very poor but he is entitlted to make the call and based on the scenario it was the correct call. Also, Player A is very inexperrienced or very foolish. He should have known better than to toss his disc as he did. Now that I have said all that I probably know the guys. I better watch my step next time I play in Wisconsin. /msgboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

How about we get to a place where other players don't get angry when someone enforces (or even mentions) a rule infraction, no matter how apparently minor?

When we get there, we can start discussions about self-policing.

I do not get the impression that Player B would have made the rule violation call if they had made their putt. They waited to apply the rules only when their play was poor and not when the infraction occured. This is unsportsmanlike behavior.

I think that the majority of rule infractions should have a time constraint and that should be when the next player takes their throw and/or up to the full amount of time available for the next player to throw. As it stands could you call a rule infraction on the last hole of the round that occured on the previous hole? For the first one of the round as the 18th hole is being played? Could you call someone for a rule infraction which occured during the round prior while in a playoff? I do not think that you should be able to do any such thing. Once Player B chose not to make the rule infraction call and decided to make their putt I believe that they should not be able to make the call after the results of their play failed to meet their expectations. I missed my shot so now I should try to enforce a penalty that makes my opponents harder. Is that fair consistent or courteous? No. It is inconsistent and malicious. It is not using the rules to ensure fair play, it is using the rules arbitrarily to make ensure unfair play by decreasing the competitiveness of the opposing player.

Or he didn't want to get in an argument about it if it didn't matter anyway.

Dave,

You know me that, although a stickler for the rules, I am one who does give a fair bit of leeway, especially when it comes to the kids.

In this case, Player A has played in a number of events and is generally familiar with the rules (in other words, he should have known better). Player B, however weaselly it was, was justified in making the call.

My initial concern was more about the timing of the events. After I thought about this a bit at the tournament, I realized that there was no way a valid call could be made, per the rules. I mentioned this to the TD after the replay was completed, and he was somewhat in agreement with me.

In talking to both of the kids after the tournament, both of them we're actually pretty cool about it after it occurred. It was just an unfortunate scenario to occur at a generally well run event.

Steve

Bender,



Although, it does leave the question that since the event was technically over (for you at least). Could you officiate the playoff? It wouldn't affect your place in the standings.




That was my thought exactly. I made the decision to remove myself from the decision (even though I found out that due to my height, I may have prevented a friend from getting stroked, the big dummy decided to not measure a close call on the two meter rule :D).

Thank you,

Steve

so when i declined to call foot faults on six of ten drives in a two hole stretch on saturday, was i using using my judgement and applying my sense of fair play? four of the drives were made from in front of the marked line (one of them by almost a meter) and two were taken from two feet to the left of the box - righties throwing two-fingers - and definitely provided an advantage by creating a more favorable line.

i did not make the calls because i am a wimp when it comes to peer pressure. i felt crappy about my decisions then and i feel crappy about them now.

how that all equals true sportmanship is beyond me. a true sportsman would look down, see his foot placement, and stroke himself without waiting for a Rules Narc to step up.


Not overreacting, Pat. Just adding color to the picture being drawn. Those tee boxes on most of those holes were treacherous with ruts and loose rocks and the temps were marked with signs that were not a full 2 meters apart. I understand your delima with making a call on some of those foot faults, but I personally feel you made the right choice not to make an issue out of it. Did you bring it up at all? Did you try when it couldn't be mistaken as a warning to let any repeat violator know? This would not have been too much to ask of any of them to try to watch out for this.

Tossing a ball in ball golf isn't a type of competitive shot either since it has to be struck by a club. Tossing a disc at any other time than from your lie was perceived by the Rules Committee to possibly be a way to determine the effects of wind at that moment. Of course, I'm not sure what you learn by tossing a 175g overstable T-Rex even with a 10m toss into the wind?


I know that tossing a ball is very different than tossing a disc, but I have absolutely no doubt at all that both actions were done with the same intentions and results.
It hasn't been stated how far the disc traveled to the caddy, but I'm presuming it wasn't more than a couple of feet. Everyone knows that a throw of any real distance ie. more than two meters is a penalty from anywhere. This player, however was standing behind his lie thus making any projection a competitive stroke in the eyes of many of you. I personally would have no problem discerning that his gentle toss of 2 ft. to his caddy would not be his intended shot nor would it have given him a reading on the wind or any other some such advantage.

There are some rules in ball golf also (been playing since '68) that have bothered me as being absurd. If your on the green and a pitch mark (small hole made by a ball landing on the green) is bothering your shot at all you are allowed to fix it, but if someone dragged his cleats (intentional or not) and made the grass stand up ragged and ununiform right in front of the hole you're not allowed to fix that. Another one is in some majors it is difficult to hit the narrower fairways so when you do hit it you should have an advantage over anyone that doesn't, yet if your ball comes to rest in a divot ( a hole made by the swing of the club) you're penalized by being forced to hit out of it instead of taking a simple drop no closer to the hole onto some grass.
My point is that rules can get ridiculous. We have the power to write and right them. :cool:

You know me that, although a stickler for the rules, I am one who does give a fair bit of leeway, especially when it comes to the kids.




Kids...'nuff said. I am sure both kids learned a valuable lesson here. The rules are the same whatever the age. However, our questions regarding the carelessness and motivation of A and B are all answered instantly. What started as a rules lesson has turned into a fable. Your instinct for giving "leeway" is appropriate with these players.

and two were taken from two feet to the left of the box - righties throwing two-fingers - and definitely provided an advantage by creating a more favorable line.



I recently asked about this specifically...the drive must be taken FROM the marked tee area, but doesn't have to cross the front vertical plane of the tee area. So, yes, that was a blatant violation.

We've drifted away from the other part of the dilemna---sending a twosome out, anytime, but especially for a tie-breaker. It's an invitation for trouble.

In the "reasonable" department---not specifically the letter of the law---at least send a player, even the author who was part of the division, along to act as a witness, sort of a non-playing "member of the group" for rulings such as O.B. Finer parts of the rules, such as this throw back to the caddy, could be appealed back to the TD, but would no longer be a "he said, he said" as to the facts of what happened.

If a player projects a disc more than two meters to his bag or caddie, another player has every right to call them on it. As a TD, I would have no choice but to uphold the call.


From what I recall, Tim Mackey was stroked during Pro Worlds 2001 for tossing a disc to his bag during a round.

...and in the sportsmanship category, I would want to think that these 2 players would want to determine who the <u>better</u> player was that day...since neither apparently had a competitive advantage...thus the tie.

Yes, I chose my words carefully as to open the most doors for RZ DISCussion! :D

skpper, i did bring it up in the first round. one time in the first round i pointed out joe martin's blatant fault to willy and without hesitation he agreed. we did not make it official though. later in the same round, after a slew more i announced something like "ok guys, we really need to clean up our footwork on our drives", but after the usual dark looks everyone went back to not caring. i did not push it. i've only had two events in MGM, but i am beginning to conclude that the division is by far the least concerned with a literal interpretation of the rules.

You might be correct but hey get the division abbreviation correct young one it is MPG. :cool:

:)

dang, its hard to find the list of abbreviations! i'm still looking :D

i've only had two events in MGM, but i am beginning to conclude that the division is by far the least concerned with a literal interpretation of the rules.



Wait until 2009, and you will see a difference if we ever get grouped together! :D

From what I saw at Pro Worlds the MPG division seemed to want to play by the rules....

i've only had two events in MGM, but i am beginning to conclude that the division is by far the least concerned with a literal interpretation of the rules.



Wait until 2009, and you will see a difference if we ever get grouped together! :D


And I'll leave it to you youngsters to battle it out while I move UP!!!!! :D