reagarding sanctioned, PDGA play... can sportmanship include overlooking violations of the rules? is it cool to disregard violations by citing "the spirit of the game"?

From the WFDF site:
Spirit of the Game is the most important rule in flying disc sports. It is summarised in this preamble to the rules of play:

"Flying disc sports have traditionally relied upon a spirit of sportsmanship which places the responsibility of fair play on the players themselves. Highly competitive and committed play is encouraged, but never at the expense of the bond of mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed upon rules of any event, nor the basic enjoyment of play. Protection of these vital elements serves to eliminate adverse conduct from the playing field. The responsibility for the maintenance of this spirit rests on each player's shoulders."

I believe that this should be incorporated into the PDGA rulebook, as it is into the WFDF and UPA Ultimate rules.

We do incorporate this spirit in the Rules, but it is phrased differently:

803. Rules of Play
803.01 General
F. Rule of Fairness. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness.

Pat,

Almost without fail, almost every player violates at least one rule on every long hole:

801.01 C:

Refusal to perform an action expected
by the rules, such as assisting in the
search for a lost disc, moving discs or
equipment, or keeping score properly,
etc., is a courtesy violation.

Question: Is it too much of an extrapolation of the above rule to state that players are required to watch a player throw each shot, if another player is watching?

Example: Player A throws off the tie, and a supporting point goes over the edge. Player B calls a stance violation on Player A. Player C was not watching Player B throw. Is that a courtesy violation against Player C?

I hate finding these tangents in the rules. I don't look for them, but when someone brings it up, I can't ignore it, so here goes:

We all know that we seldom watch another player's footwork on fairway drives. Our lie if often far away from the away player, or we are looking for some shade, etc. We are relying on that player to self-police stance violations.

But here is the question:

If one player is watching another player's stance, do the Rules implicitly require another player to watch as well?

After all, to make a stance violation call valid, it takes two players, and although technically :eek: the thrower could count as another player (rules state that "When the call is made by a member of the group, it must subsequently be confirmed by another member of the group.", and the thrower is definitely part of the group, but that would require the thrower to be looking at the stance taken at the point of release, and if the player is not looking at their own stance, they cannot second.

So, let's hypothesize that the seconding by the thrower is optional at best. Do you infer from that Rules that you are not required to watch another player's stance, unless another non-throwing group memeber is watching, and in that case, needs another non-throwing member to watch the stance in case there is a violation, so there can be a valid call, if the second non-thrower agrees with the first?

Whew :o

Rule of fairness is really only one component of spirit of sportsmanship. It alone does not address the larger issue of sportsmanship as a whole. Courtesy, civility, honesty, could all be considered additional components of the sportsmanship concept. Following the written rules is yet another.

Take for example how some folks will get a traffic citation and others will get a warning for the same offense. Law enforcement makes these judgement calls daily. I'm not saying that's what we should do, just pointing out that this is what seems to happen in life generally. Our dilemma is whether to go along with that mindset, or crank it up a notch and hold everyone to the standard of the rules as written regardless of circumstance.

I seldom chime in on the rules stuff, but figured I would drop my 2 cents here about sportsmanship.

I found the following definitions in a dictionary;

Sportsmanship: fairness in following the rules of the game, Conduct and attitude considered as befitting participants in sports, especially fair play, courtesy, striving spirit, and grace in losing. the character, practice, or skill of a sportsman.

Sportsman: someone who engages in sports. a person who exhibits qualities especially esteemed in those who engage in sports, as fairness, courtesy, good temper, etc.

Based on those definitions I would classify good Sportsmanship or a good Sportsman as someone who;

Follows all the rules of the game.
Plays Fair
Demonstrates courtesy to other players.
Loses and wins graciously.
They have a good temper while playing.

I think that should answer the original question.

Richard

Take for example how some folks will get a traffic citation and others will get a warning for the same offense. Law enforcement makes these judgement calls daily. I'm not saying that's what we should do, just pointing out that this is what seems to happen in life generally. Our dilemma is whether to go along with that mindset, or crank it up a notch and hold everyone to the standard of the rules as written regardless of circumstance.



I think this is an excellent analogy considering the general state of lawlessness in regards to traffic laws. No matter how short of a distance I drive I am confronted with a courtesy violation on the road *every* time. I see instances each and every time of rules violations. Speeding. Lack of signals for lane changes. Running red lights. Failure to yield. Yes, this is what disc golf is like. Some people know the rules but do not care to apply them, until it is in their interest to do so as when money is on the line. Many people do not know the rules and do not care to. Most people would react negatively to being told the rules and you just may get into a fight for applying them. Disc rage. Unlike the road where the vast majority of infractions are unenforcable, on the course at sanctioned tournaments they are and should be. Why have rules otherwise? The rules should be known and should be applied consistently. Fairness or courtesy should not be in the discussion when speaking to application of the rules. Those are consideration for the creation of rules. The rules should be fair. They should invoke courtesy. Not applying the rules to be nice? Thank goodness disc golf is hardly a contact sport.

Almost without fail, almost every player violates at least one rule on every long hole:

801.01 C:

Refusal to perform an action expected
by the rules, such as assisting in the
search for a lost disc, moving discs or
equipment, or keeping score properly,
etc., is a courtesy violation.

Question: Is it too much of an extrapolation of the above rule to state that players are required to watch a player throw each shot, if another player is watching?





I'm not sure that "refusal" to perform an action is the same thing as failure to perform an action. If someone is asked to look for a lost disc or watch a player who has been foot faulting and refuses to do it, that it one thing. If someone is asked to second a call and says "I didn't see it" that is something else altogether. So my short answer to your question is "no," I would not consider it a courtesy violation under the rules for the person to have not watched the footing or whatever unless he (or she) was asked to do so and refused.

To imply that the expectation is there and hence any failure constitutes a refusal seems to me to fly in the face of the most logical meaning of the word "refusal." The rule could have been written to say "anyone failing to perform an action expected by the rules" but it wasn't.

That's my interpretation anyway, fwiw.

(Incidentally, I've been on some holes where benches, bushes or enclosures around the tee box would make it nearly impossible for all four other players to be in a position to observe the thrower.)

When you overlook a rules violation you are giving that player a competitive advantage over the player whose violations may not have been overlooked. That seems neither fair nor sportsmanlike.

When you overlook a rules violation you are giving that player a competitive advantage over the player whose violations may not have been overlooked. That seems neither fair nor sportsmanlike.



Yep, you said it. I guess I don't see much of a quandry in Call/Don't Call.

Unlike others, I believe that the sense of honor, fairness, and even sportsmanship goes beyond MY CARD. In other words, it is VERY unfair for me as a fellow card player to let stuff slide. The people on the other cards are expecting ALL of us to use the same rules. It isn't MY PERSONAL call to say that the people on my card are beyond the rules.

Only one of two things are possible:
1. The violating player is AWARE of the violation and is intending to gain an advantage by not following the rules.

OR

2. The violating player is NOT AWARE of the violation and not telling/teaching/calling the violation still results in the same advantage.

Surprise! The result is the same. Call it in order to be fair to all.

Is there a kind/ nice/ appropriate way to make these calls? EVERYTIME if you try.

Ron Pittman

From the WFDF site:
Spirit of the Game is the most important rule in flying disc sports. It is summarised in this preamble to the rules of play:

"Flying disc sports have traditionally relied upon a spirit of sportsmanship which places the responsibility of fair play on the players themselves. Highly competitive and committed play is encouraged, but never at the expense of the bond of mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed upon rules of any event, nor the basic enjoyment of play. Protection of these vital elements serves to eliminate adverse conduct from the playing field. The responsibility for the maintenance of this spirit rests on each player's shoulders."

I believe that this should be incorporated into the PDGA rulebook, as it is into the WFDF and UPA Ultimate rules.


Here Here Kudos my good man. I love the simplicity of it and the expression of comaradery that should be our ultimate (no pun intended) goal.

Without digging through rules for this post, I can say I've finally figured out the "offsides" rule for US soccer (football everywhere else).
If a player is in advance, toward the opponent's defended goal, of the ball while his/her team is in control, that player is offsides IF it's determined, by judgment of the official, that the player is there for a decided advantage. If no INTENDED advantage is gained, there's no call.

Things such as practice throw (while simply returning a disc toward the bag, away from the hole), movement of trees, bushes etc (it is a judgment call already, according to the rules), and a few others I can't come up with right now need to be addressed as "judgment of intent" calls. Foot fault...well, I dunno...if you're warned about a foot fault, even if only one person saw it, that should be a clue to not do that any more. A mention, not given as an official warning, can accomplish a lot. IMO

If, by my interpretation, a player is breaking a rule and gaining an advantage to score better, I WILL make a call and hope that the rest of the group and eventually the TD will agree. However there are some rules that, if broken, still have no bearing on the violators score. Example: My best friend is guilty of a falling putt infraction quite often. Sometimes, not everytime, on a good putt he will not demonstrate balance behind the mini and just continue his momentum forward to retrieve his disc. ( you know who I'm talking about Pat..did he do it at all at Crowley?) I don't feel he's really scoring better by doing it so I quit trying to tell him even discretely, but I will tell every Am player I see doing it that it is something they could get called on. I just don't choose to call it unless he's really falling forward after putting. Bad sportsmanship?

Only one of two things are possible:
1. The violating player is AWARE of the violation and is intending to gain an advantage by not following the rules.

OR

2. The violating player is NOT AWARE of the violation and not telling/teaching/calling the violation still results in the same advantage.

Surprise! The result is the same. Call it in order to be fair to all.




Third possibility: no advantage is gained.

Example: tossing disc into bag, 2 feet away but in direction of basket. I'm not calling a practice throw on this.

You're right, though, that players must be fair to all cards. I've seen a group offer leniency where, if it were a 1-card division, I could live with it....but totally unfair to their competition on another card who might not get the same favor.

You're right, though, that players must be fair to all cards. I've seen a group offer leniency where, if it were a 1-card division, I could live with it....but totally unfair to their competition on another card who might not get the same favor.


Here's a scenario with a dilema: tournament has an Open div. with 5 cards. We get the call made on the second card that a player tossed his disc down on his bag while behind his lie and the violator brings it to me, the TD, and wants a ruling on whether it should be a stroke. Would I be out of line, knowing that this call is rarely made, to go to players on other cards and ask if they observed anyone on their cards doing the same thing? If I were to do so and get the response of "yeah sure" or " I think so, but I'm not exactly sure they were behind their lie" from more than one competitor, would it be a bad ruling to say the original offender does not have to count the stroke since the rest of the field didn't? Do I have to give him the stroke for having the unlucky twist of fate to have played on the same card as the Rules Narc (Pat's term) while the rest of the field didn't have that problem?

Would I be out of line to ask the rest of the div......?

As TD, if this was called during the round and appealed to you, I think you should uphold the rule as written. Failure to do so is a path to chaos.

In my opinion, the player making the call has earned whatever disdain he gets from other players for making such a silly call.

From this discussion, it would be nice if the rules would be tweaked. Perhaps to say a "practice throw" (from away from the lie) must go 2 meters....and that an act from the lie that is clearly not an attempt toward the basket, such as dropping a disc in a bag or to the side, is not a "throw". Or something.

Take for example how some folks will get a traffic citation and others will get a warning for the same offense. Law enforcement makes these judgement calls daily. I'm not saying that's what we should do, just pointing out that this is what seems to happen in life generally. Our dilemma is whether to go along with that mindset, or crank it up a notch and hold everyone to the standard of the rules as written regardless of circumstance.



I think this is an excellent analogy considering the general state of lawlessness in regards to traffic laws. No matter how short of a distance I drive I am confronted with a courtesy violation on the road *every* time. I see instances each and every time of rules violations. Speeding. Lack of signals for lane changes. Running red lights. Failure to yield. Yes, this is what disc golf is like. Some people know the rules but do not care to apply them, until it is in their interest to do so as when money is on the line. Many people do not know the rules and do not care to. Most people would react negatively to being told the rules and you just may get into a fight for applying them. Disc rage. Unlike the road where the vast majority of infractions are unenforcable, on the course at sanctioned tournaments they are and should be. Why have rules otherwise? The rules should be known and should be applied consistently. Fairness or courtesy should not be in the discussion when speaking to application of the rules. Those are consideration for the creation of rules. The rules should be fair. They should invoke courtesy. Not applying the rules to be nice? Thank goodness disc golf is hardly a contact sport.



I really like your analogy! It is unfortunately all too correct!

I have never been privy to the reasoning for rules changes, but I recollect changes in practice throws were made so as to describe true throws made in anger, or willful discourteous actions. As with all rule writing they did their best trying to exclude everything no reasonable person would ever consider a practice throw, but they obviously never anticipated the type of person who would consider tossing your disc three inches forward after marking it a practice throw. If they did consider this type of person, they figured they could never address every inane interpretation, and rightfully assumed reasonable people would outweigh them. For the most part, the RC was right, and we rarely see these completly frivolous claims in actual tournaments.

[/QUOTE]
Third possibility: no advantage is gained.

Example: tossing disc into bag, 2 feet away but in direction of basket. I'm not calling a practice throw on this.

You're right, though, that players must be fair to all cards. I've seen a group offer leniency where, if it were a 1-card division, I could live with it....but totally unfair to their competition on another card who might not get the same favor.

[/QUOTE]

I will concede that there may be no DIRECT or immediate advantage gained.

This particular example has been beat to death on another thread. Stick with Duke's Addendum - Quit throwing back to your bag from your lie, Dang It!

But, on the larger scale -- a few precedents are established; By not calling these "no immediate advantage" violations we are declaring that the rules are discretionary, and that as a player you won't always call the rules, and there ya' go.

I contend that this discretionary approach to applying the rules is why the person that calls the rules violation is branded as the bad guy. (or guy-ette)

Pat is on to something. Good sportsmanship flows from a level, fair playing field.

We are fighting a growing MYTH that it is un-sportsmanlike to call a violation. It is time to bust the myth.

Thanks,
Ron Pittman

Well said.

Or maybe the next rules revision can include descriptions of every single silly or freak occurrence that can possibly happen in a tournament. Then I'll need an extra cart just to carry the epic, which should include a 30-minute "time out" proposition so I can dig through all the "putting a disc down" and "extra time for diarhea" provisions to find the foot-fault rule.

Or maybe good judgement will prevail most of the time, and we can survive the occasions when it doesn't.

On the other hand, poor judgement on the part of the players that do not know the implications of their actions in light of the current rules, shouldn't prevent the players that doo know the rules from enjoying a round of competitve golf.

Should he have to hold his tongue when he sees something that is clearly against the rules, but does not represent a dramatic competitive advantage gained by the offending player?

Doesn't that aggravation amaount to a competitive disadvantage to the player that knows that a rule has been broken but not punished properly ?

looks at my scores from last weekend - it sure seemd like a disadvantage for me :D

Doesn't that aggravation amaount to a competitive disadvantage to the player that knows that a rule has been broken but not punished properly ?


With all due respect, Gary, you want sympathy because your blood pressure is rising because you didn't call that guy for tossing his disc down on his bag???? I know you're a responsible hard working guy and we're glad you're making the sacrificies that you are, but I'm going to have to disagree that this is MY problem. Now we're just exchanging jabs here and I know they can get out of hand, but I want you to know I realize the rules support you and not me. I just don't like the spirit of some of the interpretations of the written words.

Just between you and me, I don't agree with all of the rules interpretations either. I don't even agree that the interpretations I come up with myself are completely fair. I have had extended conversations with members of the rules committee about some of them, but as a state coordinator and a marshal I feel obligated to enforce them as written.

I really do feel guilty if I don't call obvious infractions whether any competitive advantage was gained or not. The rules are not that complicated, players can learn them in a day and follow them if they are careful. I see it as disrespectful to the game and other competitors to not care about following the rules.

I hope that someone will always make the call if I fail to follow the rules, even if it is just a foot fault on an open fairway drive.

I appreciate that, Gary. As a matter of fact I'm getting where I'm enjoying these exchanges. Nothing personal is ever intended by me. I promise.

Signed,
Ann Tagonist /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I had a player warn me of a stance violation during the Majestic this year. I was attempting a 8 or so foot straddle putt in the wide open (just a quick toss in, not a difficult putt by any means and i normally don't straddle). I was behind my marker, but instead of having 1 foot directly behind the marker, I had the center of my body behind my marker. I wasn't leaning to one side or anything, just perfectly straight but a foot wasnt directly behind the marker. I made the putt, and on the way to the next hole the player told me of my infraction and gave me a warning, saying I would have to be stroked next time. He said the other 2 players were shuffling in their bags and not watching so he wouldn't have had a 2nd anyway, but I'm glad he was nice about it and actually informed me I was breaking the rules as I had no idea that I did.

It's not an official warning without a second by another player or official. It was just instructive conversation. If it was an official warning, you would have had to rethrow with a legal stance.

See Pat, I can be a zealot also. ;)

On the other hand, poor judgement on the part of the players that do not know the implications of their actions in light of the current rules, shouldn't prevent the players that doo know the rules from enjoying a round of competitve golf.

Should he have to hold his tongue when he sees something that is clearly against the rules, but does not represent a dramatic competitive advantage gained by the offending player?

Doesn't that aggravation amaount to a competitive disadvantage to the player that knows that a rule has been broken but not punished properly ?



Personally, I don't think it has to be a "dramatic competitive advantage"---I think any reasonable competitive advantage warrants a call. All foot faults, even on open fairway run-ups. All stance violations. Any practice throw that's anything like a "throw". (The open fairway foot-fault is because, if a player is sufficiently concerned about not foot-faulting, it affects his run-up and throw).

It's where there's no competitive advantage, or other good reason, other than to use a rule as a weapon, that I disagree with.

A lot of people quote ball golf rules and customs, but my background comes from team sports, particularly baseball and basketball. Most rules in baseball are cut-and-dry---you're either out or not----but if they called basketball rules exactly as worded, there'd be 87 traveling calls per game, and games would last 17 minutes until enough players fouled out.

Disc golfers, as a group, have overwhelmingly voted with their actions to be lenient with certain rules---notably, stance violations and time limits. I don't think it's just not having the courage to make the call; the fact that players are so upset when called indicates they want to play by a "live and let live" philosophy.

Personally, I'd like to see the culture change to where calling a foot-fault is expected, and no different than telling a basketball player he stepped on the line and was out of bounds (which is normal even in pick-up play). As often happens, I seem to be in a minority on this---on the course, not the discussion board.

A lot of people quote ball golf rules and customs, but my background comes from team sports, particularly baseball and basketball. Most rules in baseball are cut-and-dry---you're either out or not----but if they called basketball rules exactly as worded, there'd be 87 traveling calls per game, and games would last 17 minutes until enough players fouled out.

Personally, I'd like to see the culture change to where calling a foot-fault is expected, and no different than telling a basketball player he stepped on the line and was out of bounds (which is normal even in pick-up play). As often happens, I seem to be in a minority on this---on the course, not the discussion board.


Baseball has a strike "zone". Every umpire has his own interpetation of where the ball needs to be to be in it. We couldn't afford the luxury of sending out an umpire with every group so we make it the groups responsibility, and just like the umpire's vision on the zone can change so could the foot fault in relation to each player's position on the fairway.
To call all the rules in basketball would shorten games to 17 min. and to encourage every player to make every call he thinks he can would turn our normal 2.5 hour rounds into 5 hour rounds.
Foot faults usually occur on longer shots where a player needs a run up. The challenge of these shots should be to negotiate the tree and keep it off the sidewalk, not whether you accidentally step three inches off the line behind the mini when you were trying to keep from twisting your ankle on that rut.

Don't take me wrong here, I do want foot faults called when a player is leaning out of brush and can't get a good stance without pulling the plant foot away from the lie, or when the other foot is slightly in front of the plant foot. Also, blatant violations I would call would be when a player is trying to make a long arcing shot sometimes you'll see them step 12-18 inches outside the line just because their mind has them starting the disc out on a wide line and their run up seems to conform.
These are instances where I might point it out to the offender by showing him his the marks on the ground made by his feet.

The baseball strike zone is interesting because they pretend to be calling it absolutely. But the culture is not to call strikes above the belt, regardless of what the rule says. Years ago baseball instructed the umpires to call it as written, but the players went ballistic as strikes were called across the chest. After a few weeks, umpires adjusted back to the accepted standard. Sort of like the way we call, or don't call, foot-faults.

I did says "most rules" in baseball are cut-and-dry. There are exceptions. A strike is when a player attempts to hit the ball ("offers to hit", I think is the exact phrase). Not breaks the wrist or bat crosses the plate. A batter can square to bunt, leave his bat over the plate, and pitch be called a ball if he didn't actually attempt to bunt it. Attempt. Like intent. Like whether a practice throw was an intent, or just tossing a disc to the side to get it out of the way.

Which is why I can live with gray area, and players not calling the 3-inch foot-fault you mention, but calling the 2-foot open-field foot-fault.

There is a difference in ball and disc golf over just about every other sport.....golf requires the player to police themselves and other sports require refs to call fouls.

I have never seen a football player call pass interference on themselves, or a batter call for a strike, but I have seen disc golfers call penalties on their lies. Yes ball and disc golf depend on others as well for rule keeping, but for the most part, competitive play is without officials. The rules even go so far as to imply that you are not an official within your own group, everyone in the group is an official. This does not mean that we should relax our standards because football, soccer, baseball, basketball players, etc. can effectively cheat until they are caught by the ref. I believe the opposite is true, our game should hold to a higher standard of honor. Don't get me wrong, but team sports has a different mind set, a lot of teams push the boundaries whereas we try to enforce them.

Along that same mindset, we have a rule on fairness that is a basic part of our game. At times we should remind other players of the rules, because they may be close to breaking them. At other times we need to enforce them because they are receiving an advantage, realized or not. A great example is the one Pat brought up about someone standing with one foot outside the box for a two finger flick shot. If there is no advantage, why break the rule? In Pat's example, why have one supproting point outside the box? The reason is the line changes, sometimes very significantly and that is a competitive advantage. ($0.04 inflation)



A lot of people quote ball golf rules and customs, but my background comes from team sports, particularly baseball and basketball. Most rules in baseball are cut-and-dry---you're either out or not----but if they called basketball rules exactly as worded, there'd be 87 traveling calls per game, and games would last 17 minutes until enough players fouled out.

A great example is the one Pat brought up about someone standing with one foot outside the box for a two In Pat's example, why have one supproting point outside the box?



Rule 803.02 states that at least ONE of the players supporting points must be in the teeing area.....not both.

Nope, it says both.....

A. Play shall begin on each hole with the player throwing from within the teeing area. When the disc is released, at least one of the player's supporting points must be in contact with the surface of the teeing area, and all the player's supporting points must be within the teeing area. If a tee pad is provided, all supporting points must be on the pad at the time of release, unless the director has specified a modified teeing area for safety reasons. If no tee pad is provided, all supporting points at the time of release must be within an area encompassed by the front line of the teeing area and two lines perpendicular to and extending back three meters from each end of the front line. The front line of the teeing area includes the outside edges of the two tee markers. Running up from behind the teeing area before the disc is released is permitted. Following through in front of the teeing area is permitted provided there is no supporting point contact outside the teeing area when the disc is released

Agreed on the self-policing vs. impartial-umpire point. I was more interested in pointing out shades-of-gray where, despite the precise wording of the rule, it is possible to decide that a certain action warrants a rule call, while another is insignificant enough to not call. Or to just warn, as you mention in your last paragraph. There have been some opinions stated that every single rule should be called absolutely as written, and I see that as not the case in other sports, even with impartial referees.

Foot faults usually occur on longer shots where a player needs a run up. The challenge of these shots should be to negotiate the tree and keep it off the sidewalk, not whether you accidentally step three inches off the line behind the mini when you were trying to keep from twisting your ankle on that rut.



But isn't part of throwing a legal shot to run up, plant your size 11 within one foot of the mini and then get it around the tree and off the sidewalk?

If you can't get some part of your 12" long foot to land on a line within 12" (30cm) of the mini, then you should just stand flat-footed and throw. (Another option is to wear swim fins or clown shoes to make it easier.)

Is it fair if you ignore even trying to land your foot in the right place, but I actually expend some effort to be a man and obey the rules?

In trying to hit the mark, I have to look away from the target line for a fraction of a second. You just run up willy-nilly and land somewhere in the vicinity. If I miss my line by 18" 120 feet down the fairway and hit a tree because I'm worried about the mark and you miss the tree from the same spot and beat me by a stroke is that fair to me?

Why not just be an honest golfer and try your best to obey them and take the consequences when you miss the mark? If you don't break the rule, you won't be called on it.

Foot faults usually occur on longer shots where a player needs a run up. The challenge of these shots should be to negotiate the tree and keep it off the sidewalk, not whether you accidentally step three inches off the line behind the mini when you were trying to keep from twisting your ankle on that rut.



I have to agree that part of the challenge of making a good shot is missing the tree and the sidewalk, but it also includes hitting your mark on release.

On another line, please don't let me believe that you missed your mark by three inches in order to purposefully miss the rut that was in the middle of your mark. If that is true, you have purposefully circumvented the rules to gain a competitive advantage and should be disqualified.

Learning to hit that mark in any situation is part of being a skilled disc golfer.

Foot faults usually occur on longer shots where a player needs a run up. The challenge of these shots should be to negotiate the tree and keep it off the sidewalk, not whether you accidentally step three inches off the line behind the mini when you were trying to keep from twisting your ankle on that rut.



I have to agree that part of the challenge of making a good shot is missing the tree and the sidewalk, but it also includes hitting your mark on release.

On another line, please don't let me believe that you missed your mark by three inches in order to purposefully miss the rut that was in the middle of your mark. If that is true, you have purposefully circumvented the rules to gain a competitive advantage and should be disqualified.


Okay, I didn't word it correctly. If the rut is immediately behind your lie where you are required to plant then yes that would be wrong. What I wanted to say was the rut three feet back of the mark that you were trying not to hurt yourself on causes you to make a little change in your run up and you miss your mark by three inches. Or for any reason you miss your mark by two to three inches ( everyone has done it ) must we really see a need to impede progress of play with call after call. Is it really important to worry about that miniscule miss. I for one think not.
Don't bother trying to convince me that you're never guilty of this. I'm not that dumb, even though I was wrong about all supporting points....yada yada.
I guess they made the point of saying "at least one" before they said "all" so as to prevent the classic Jump Throw from being used. :D

I won't bother to try and convince you of anything, but I do always check to see if I hit my mark for my own benefit.

I rotate on the ball of my plant foot and it usually makes a recognizable little circle in the grass. I very rarely miss my mark and have spent a lot of practice time developing that ability.

Learning to hit that mark in ANY SITUATION is part of being a skilled disc golfer.




A miss is a miss, it doesn't matter that it is 3 inches or 15 inches.

I know it sure would be nice to have an extra three inches when that big tree is in my way or my disc is next to a bunch of loose rocks. It would be great to not have to worry about hitting my mark, but I prefer to play by the rules.

It saddens me that others don't feel the same.

I won't bother to try and convince you of anything, but I do always check to see if I hit my mark for my own benefit.

I rotate on the ball of my plant foot and it usually makes a recognizable little circle in the grass. I very rarely miss my mark and have spent a lot of practice time developing that ability.


I'm saying everyone has done it and you're agreeing when you say you very rarely miss your mark. I feel I very rarely miss it also. My question to you would be do you, when that rarity happens and you catch it, tell your fellow golfers of the infraction and insist on the warning being given and a rethrow taken? If you don't I believe by your own words you cheated. Must we really be so worried about it if it is obviously not an advantage?

Learning to hit that mark in ANY SITUATION is part of being a skilled disc golfer.




A miss is a miss, it doesn't matter that it is 3 inches or 15 inches.

I know it sure would be nice to have an extra three inches when that big tree is in my way or my disc is next to a bunch of loose rocks. It would be great to not have to worry about hitting my mark, but I prefer to play by the rules.

It saddens me that others don't feel the same.


Respectfully I would have to disagree, discette. I feel there is a difference between 3 in. and 15 in. I would not have any problem showing my competitor his violation if his foot print is 15 inches from the mark. On the other hand I would not be so concerned with 3 in. Again, I call on the spirit of the game.
It's not so much a need to have a literal interpretation of every instance as it is to be able to intelligently and fairly discern violations from minor human inperfection.

I generally say 'I foot faulted' when I foot fault (foot slip off front of the tee rarely, usually a fairway run up). Only once has someone agreed and seconded me, and it was oddly to my advantage. I had already said it a few times during the round, and noone had seemed to notice. I slipped off the front of a tee, shanked OB, and said 'I foot faulted', and someone actually seconded me.

Nope, it says both.....

A. Play shall begin on each hole with the player throwing from within the teeing area. When the disc is released, at least one of the player's supporting points must be in contact with the surface of the teeing area, and all the player's supporting points must be within the teeing area. If a tee pad is provided, all supporting points must be on the pad at the time of release, unless the director has specified a modified teeing area for safety reasons. If no tee pad is provided, all supporting points at the time of release must be within an area encompassed by the front line of the teeing area and two lines perpendicular to and extending back three meters from each end of the front line. The front line of the teeing area includes the outside edges of the two tee markers. Running up from behind the teeing area before the disc is released is permitted. Following through in front of the teeing area is permitted provided there is no supporting point contact outside the teeing area when the disc is released



The above says all supporting points. I don't see where it says that a foot in the air (which isn't a supporting point) that is outside of the box is a violation. So a one foot in interpretation would be correct. The other foot can't be in contact outside the teeing area. Am I missing something?

For example, I've seen some video from USDGC, Worlds or a Marshal Street event where a right handed player stands to the right side of the box and takes one step to the front right corner with the right foot and plants it and throws as the left foot rotates in the air with the follow through. At the time of release it could still be outside the box described above but it isn't a supporting point. I don't think this is a violation, is it? Am I :confused: on this one?

Nope, it says both.....

A. Play shall begin on each hole with the player throwing from within the teeing area. When the disc is released, at least one of the player's supporting points must be in contact with the surface of the teeing area, and all the player's supporting points must be within the teeing area. If a tee pad is provided, all supporting points must be on the pad at the time of release, unless the director has specified a modified teeing area for safety reasons. If no tee pad is provided, all supporting points at the time of release must be within an area encompassed by the front line of the teeing area and two lines perpendicular to and extending back three meters from each end of the front line. The front line of the teeing area includes the outside edges of the two tee markers. Running up from behind the teeing area before the disc is released is permitted. Following through in front of the teeing area is permitted provided there is no supporting point contact outside the teeing area when the disc is released



The above says all supporting points. I don't see where it says that a foot in the air (which isn't a supporting point) that is outside of the box is a violation. So a one foot in interpretation would be correct. The other foot can't be in contact outside the teeing area. Am I missing something?

For example, I've seen some video from USDGC, Worlds or a Marshal Street event where a right handed player stands to the right side of the box and takes one step to the front right corner with the right foot and plants it and throws as the left foot rotates in the air with the follow through. At the time of release it could still be outside the box described above but it isn't a supporting point. I don't think this is a violation, is it? Am I :confused: on this one?


No you're right, Don, as long as the foot outside the box comes off the ground before releasing the disc it is a legal throw.

I won't bother to try and convince you of anything, but I do always check to see if I hit my mark for my own benefit.

I rotate on the ball of my plant foot and it usually makes a recognizable little circle in the grass. I very rarely miss my mark and have spent a lot of practice time developing that ability.


I'm saying everyone has done it and you're agreeing when you say you very rarely miss your mark. I feel I very rarely miss it also. My question to you would be do you, when that rarity happens and you catch it, tell your fellow golfers of the infraction and insist on the warning being given and a rethrow taken? If you don't I believe by your own words you cheated. Must we really be so worried about it if it is obviously not an advantage?



I have said earlier that I hope someone is watching as I throw and will make the call if I fail to hit my mark. I don't care whether the result is to my advantage or not. If I failed to release the disc in accordance with the rules, I have no right to use the original throw and should be required to throw properly.

Unlike others, I believe that the sense of honor, fairness, and even sportsmanship goes beyond MY CARD. In other words, it is VERY unfair for me as a fellow card player to let stuff slide. The people on the other cards are expecting ALL of us to use the same rules. It isn't MY PERSONAL call to say that the people on my card are beyond the rules.




I would just add that "my event" could be substituted for "my card" here. Since some awards (point races) and qualifying for some events (such as nationals, no?) are based on cumulative points, and points are awarded for each person you finish ahead of at an event, ordinals are important even if a player is not "in the money."

Also, regarding PGA examples, while it is true players are expected to police themselves, they do not do so exclusively. I saw an event where Tiger Woods was warned for deliberate play by an official. I saw another event where a person watching television reported a violation, officials watched the replay, and retroactively penalized the player. Sergio certainly didn't stroke himself for signing the wrong score. Conversely, I've been at PDGA events where a TD sees a violation but says, "I'm leaving it to the card to deal with" or "I can't do anything unless they call it."

Nope, it says both.....

A. Play shall begin on each hole with the player throwing from within the teeing area. When the disc is released, at least one of the player's supporting points must be in contact with the surface of the teeing area, and all the player's supporting points must be within the teeing area. If a tee pad is provided, all supporting points must be on the pad at the time of release, unless the director has specified a modified teeing area for safety reasons. If no tee pad is provided, all supporting points at the time of release must be within an area encompassed by the front line of the teeing area and two lines perpendicular to and extending back three meters from each end of the front line. The front line of the teeing area includes the outside edges of the two tee markers. Running up from behind the teeing area before the disc is released is permitted. Following through in front of the teeing area is permitted provided there is no supporting point contact outside the teeing area when the disc is released



The above says all supporting points. I don't see where it says that a foot in the air (which isn't a supporting point) that is outside of the box is a violation. So a one foot in interpretation would be correct. The other foot can't be in contact outside the teeing area. Am I missing something?

For example, I've seen some video from USDGC, Worlds or a Marshal Street event where a right handed player stands to the right side of the box and takes one step to the front right corner with the right foot and plants it and throws as the left foot rotates in the air with the follow through. At the time of release it could still be outside the box described above but it isn't a supporting point. I don't think this is a violation, is it? Am I :confused: on this one?



I think you answered your own question. If the foot is in the air it is not a supporting point and I think can be in the air at the time of release wherever the thrower wants it.If the foot hits a tree or tee sign or something outside the box on some kind of crazy swing I think it would become a supporting point and therefore be in violation.

On the run ups- I have struggled with missing my mark and have been called for it on shots where there is no advantage. I simply step 6" to the left. I am left handed and tend to be left-centric. When concentrating and not overthrowing I can pretty much keep this in control. Its never a problem where there could be an advantage as I focus on my mark. Its those long open holes where my second shot ( I have a classic puss arm) is a long one, where I have tended to miss my mark.

You are right you only have to have one supporting contact in the box, but the thing that started this whole discussion was a player thowing a two-finger flick with one foot in the box and one foot out of the box. The outside foot was not lifted, it was a supporting point and it was outside the box. This is clearly a foul. The rule would probably best be explained by stating that ALL supporting contacts must be in the tee box. A lifted foot is not a supporting contact.




The above says all supporting points. I don't see where it says that a foot in the air (which isn't a supporting point) that is outside of the box is a violation. So a one foot in interpretation would be correct. The other foot can't be in contact outside the teeing area. Am I missing something?

For example, I've seen some video from USDGC, Worlds or a Marshal Street event where a right handed player stands to the right side of the box and takes one step to the front right corner with the right foot and plants it and throws as the left foot rotates in the air with the follow through. At the time of release it could still be outside the box described above but it isn't a supporting point. I don't think this is a violation, is it? Am I :confused: on this one?

Learning to hit that mark in ANY SITUATION is part of being a skilled disc golfer.




A miss is a miss, it doesn't matter that it is 3 inches or 15 inches.

I know it sure would be nice to have an extra three inches when that big tree is in my way or my disc is next to a bunch of loose rocks. It would be great to not have to worry about hitting my mark, but I prefer to play by the rules.

It saddens me that others don't feel the same.


Respectfully I would have to disagree, discette. I feel there is a difference between 3 in. and 15 in. I would not have any problem showing my competitor his violation if his foot print is 15 inches from the mark. On the other hand I would not be so concerned with 3 in. Again, I call on the spirit of the game.
It's not so much a need to have a literal interpretation of every instance as it is to be able to intelligently and fairly discern violations from minor human inperfection.



I am getting tired of reading this BS of "calling in the spirit of the game", the spirit of the game is to play by the rules, if your off the mark and the acceptable 30cm by an extra 3 inches, then you are not playing by the spirit of the game, in fact by your standard I could tee off 3inches beyond the Tee box, or putt 3" closer to the basket. I try to call everything I can, that is the only way to play in the spirit of the game, anything else and your just cheating yourself, other players and the game.

Amen brother and sister.

Just play by the rules. It's much easier than trying to figure out just how far you can fudge. The "spirit of the game" is to know the rules and play by them.

I have NO problem telling someone that their stance isn't right if they are fudging in a big pine tree, none what so ever. It's the rules.

Like my mom always told me "cheaters never win and winners never cheat". :D

Learning to hit that mark in ANY SITUATION is part of being a skilled disc golfer.




A miss is a miss, it doesn't matter that it is 3 inches or 15 inches.

I know it sure would be nice to have an extra three inches when that big tree is in my way or my disc is next to a bunch of loose rocks. It would be great to not have to worry about hitting my mark, but I prefer to play by the rules.

It saddens me that others don't feel the same.


Respectfully I would have to disagree, discette. I feel there is a difference between 3 in. and 15 in. I would not have any problem showing my competitor his violation if his foot print is 15 inches from the mark. On the other hand I would not be so concerned with 3 in. Again, I call on the spirit of the game.
It's not so much a need to have a literal interpretation of every instance as it is to be able to intelligently and fairly discern violations from minor human inperfection.



I am getting tired of reading this BS of "calling in the spirit of the game", the spirit of the game is to play by the rules, if your off the mark and the acceptable 30cm by an extra 3 inches, then you are not playing by the spirit of the game, in fact by your standard I could tee off 3inches beyond the Tee box, or putt 3" closer to the basket. I try to call everything I can, that is the only way to play in the spirit of the game, anything else and your just cheating yourself, other players and the game.


I wouldn't be surprised to have you say that you know you never miss your mark just so you can back up the attitude you're claiming is the proper spirit to have. I would also feel that you probably are just like me and don't bother with the little 2-3 inch miss. If you argue that you always call a foot fault on any competitor that misses his mark by this minute fraction I wouldn't believe you because you would have lost every friend you made playing the game with. Noone is that picky or should they be, and everyone has missed their mark by a fraction at least twice per round on average IMO.

I believe it is up to each player to police thier own game. If you are getting called, then you are too sloppy...For example, I always make sure and check my foot divot after I make a run-up fairway approach shot. I am always surprised at how dead on the human body can be. I very very rarely see a divot outside of the line of sight or behind the 11 3/4" limit of my mini.... If you are trying to run up and hit the spot, you will. It is up to you to make it happen. Otherwise stand still...

You know what, I don't want to argue this point. You're right. All rules should be followed to the letter. Every group should have an impartial arbitrator to help with the inevitable disagreements in defining that letter.
If you call every foot fault you see no matter how small then more power to you. You are truly the sportsman we all should aspire to be. I'll have to work on it, though.

Personally, I don't call foot faults unless they are very obvious.... I still check my own divot on every approach out of habit. That way, if I get called for a fault I already know if they have a real reason to call it. If there are wrong I immediately point out my divot. If not I make sure it doesn't happen again.

Personally, I don't call foot faults unless they are very obvious.... I still check my own divot on every approach out of habit. That way, if I get called for a fault I already know if they have a real reason to call it. If there are wrong I immediately point out my divot. If not I make sure it doesn't happen again.


Obvious being maybe 12 - 15 inches?????

I call anything further away then a foot and anything 1cm over the mark (very easy to tell since the mini or disc moves)

I don't foot fault because I stand still on almost every throw, except a few from the tee box in which I kow the stride length and hit the mark. Also 12 in. is very easy to know where it is, and when your competitor is that far away then it is pretty freaking obvious. I called someone last tournament for being 16 inches away, he asked how I knew it was 16 ins. I grabbed my tape out of the bag and showed him with his divot. All three players in my group were amazed I called the distance dead on, the player who through that far away didn't even know he had to be within 30 cm. So he thanked me and asked what hapened next.

The one area where we SHOULD strive to be like ball and stick golf is self policing of the rules. There should be no need of a referee trailing along with a group. Everyone should be playing by the rules as a matter of course.

Not too long ago, Jesper Parnivik signed an incorrect scorecard and was DQed. There was no whining, no crying because he knew that it was a DQ-able offense. Those tournament have REAL money on the line. I bet it doesn't happen again.

The one area where we SHOULD strive to be like ball and stick golf is self policing of the rules. There should be no need of a referee trailing along with a group. Everyone should be playing by the rules as a matter of course.

Not too long ago, Jesper Parnivik signed an incorrect scorecard and was DQed. There was no whining, no crying because he knew that it was a DQ-able offense. Those tournament have REAL money on the line. I bet it doesn't happen again.


I have no problem with what you're intending to say, Anita, but I've been a golf enthusiast since I picked up a club in '67, and I want to point out that in most PGA tournaments there are a half dozen or so officials scattered out on the course during play to be on hand for any decision that might be needed, and even though a player might know exactly what a given ruling might be, he'll still ask for an official to be present so that he can avoid the same fate that Jesper did. I said in most tournaments they do this, but in the majors they try to have an official per group to walk the entire round with them. The need is there because of the variances in interpretation.