This happened on the first hole of the first round at the Homie classic this past Sunday:

- Myself and another person starting on hole 8 with me arrive to the tee shortly after 2min is sounded. The other 2 players on the card (who are friends) are already at the tee.

- We tee off. It is a long hole and there are larger bricks lining the back of the tee that require a significant step up if you want to take a long runup. I approached the tee from the side to avoid the bricks.

- I noticed that one of the players that arrived at the tee before us took a very long runup through a space in the brick wall.

- As I am walking down the fairway I look back and see the player move 2 very large bricks back to the location in the wall he stepped through.

- I say, "You can't do that in a tournament!"

- He says, "This is my course and I do whatever the F I want."

I could not believe that a Pro that has been playing in tournaments for years thinks that is perfectly acceptable. I also had to issue the only courtesy warning I have ever had to in 10 years of playing tournaments to the same guy that round.

If that was Cummings, I'll have to tell him I'm bringing mortar to shore up those bricks next time I pass thru town. :D

had to be at lemon lake hole 8 red course and i thought the same thing - friday the stones were moved -sunday they were back - fyi i shanked my drive and took the only 5 i had out there that day
i dont think brian c played
fly on homie

what was even funnier was the kid who locked his bag in his car and was trying to break the window to get it

thats what AAA is for , buy some new discs , call AAA and play the round

he;s probrobly still out there

As I am walking down the fairway I look back and see the player move 2 very large bricks back to the location in the wall he stepped through.

- I say, "You can't do that in a tournament!"

- He says, "This is my course and I do whatever the F I want."

I could not believe that a Pro that has been playing in tournaments for years thinks that is perfectly acceptable. I also had to issue the only courtesy warning I have ever had to in 10 years of playing tournaments to the same guy that round.



Okay, so you issued him a courtesy warning for swearing. No arguments there.

But what rule did he break by moving the large bricks near the tee pad? Please quote the rule from the rulebook and list it here for me and everyone. Thanks. :cool:

I'd say 804.05A (2) & (3) are applicable here.

I did not attempt to stroke him because I did not know the exact ruling, but I considered it to be course modification...

But what rule did he break by moving the large bricks near the tee pad?

the bricks are used to outline/extend the back of the tee pad
its extends the tee about a two feet

he should have just kicked the stone structure over - you can't be DQed for that.

"abuse of course hardware" would be the relevant phrase.

"Abuse of course hardware"

That is an amusing phrase. I will have to use this in the future!!!

A brick wall sounds like an integral part of the course and therefore can not be moved per 803.04.D.

803.05.A also disallows relief from any obstacle that is "considered part of the course".

umm, lets file it under the "being a complete and utter [censored] head!" rule.....

there are times where I am totally disgraced to consider myself part of the human race. I'd bet $$$ that [censored] wouldnt have touched those blocks in front of his mother!

A brick wall sounds like an integral part of the course and therefore can not be moved per 803.04.D.

803.05.A also disallows relief from any obstacle that is "considered part of the course".



Bingo! Thank you, Gary. :cool:

Nitpicking here. Since the "course" isn't specifically defined (in the Definitions) to include objects behind the lie, it's a grey area whether the bricks are part of the course and as such could be moved such as stones in your stance.

But because the area you can have a stance extends behind the defined teepad, his altering the defined teepad altered the potential throwing surface a player could choose from. I'd be willing to argue that anywhere that a player can choose to throw from would be part of the 'course'.

I guess it wasn't clear whether the bricks are behind a cement tee pad? If so, then the bricks are not part of the tee surface. If it's a dirt tee then they might be.

Nitpicking here. Since the "course" isn't specifically defined (in the Definitions) to include objects behind the lie, it's a grey area whether the bricks are part of the course and as such could be moved such as stones in your stance.



If this is the case Chuck, would I be able to move one of the bales of hay behind the hole at the USDGC if my disc came to rest up against it? I know that I could use the vertical rule for stance, but I don't want to. Are these bales not considered part of the course.

It was stated that these bricks were part of a brick wall. With that definition then the wall had to be built, and since it was built on the course then it is an intrical part of the course and hence cannot be moved.

A stone in your stance or run up is an impediment (casual object) and thus it can be moved.

This guy should have been accessed a penalty throw as to 803.05(E) at the time of noticed infraction.

How about a bench about 5 feet behind a concrete tee pad? If the bench is movable can a player require the rest of his group to get off the bench so he can move it to take his run - up?

Are these bales not considered part of the course?




My comment about the "course" not being defined in the rule book has to do with the status of items behind the tee. How far behind the tee should we consider it part of the "course?" The bales are in front of the tee so the fact they may be behind a thrown disc doesn't mean they are not part of the course any more. I'm not saying I have the answer on this. Just exploring the nature of how you think we should handle items behind the tee in relation to the rules. If the bench isn't anchored, I would think a player could actually ask players to get off the bench and move it for the run-up.

803.05 Obstacles and Relief
A. Obstacles to a Stance or Throwing Motion:
Players must choose a stance which results in the least movement of any part of any obstacle except as allowed for casual obstacles by 803.05 C. No relief is granted from park equipment (such as signs, trash cans, picnic tables, etc.) as
they are considered part of the course.



The question is whether the obstacle is casual or permanent. Park equipment is generally considered permanent, even if it is movable (such as a trash can).

You are only allowed to move casual obstacles that are not between the lie and the hole.

If the bricks were part of a purposefully constructed wall as opposed to an impromptu stack, I would have to think that they are more part of the course than casual obstacles.


803.05 Obstacles and Relief
C. Casual Obstacles:
A player may obtain relief only from the following obstacles: casual water, loose leaves or debris, broken branches no longer connected to a tree, motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, players� equipment, spectators, or any item or area specifically designated by the director before the round. Obstacles may not be moved if any part of the obstacle is between the lie and the hole.

I've had a drive end up 40 feet BEHIND the tee. On that sad occasion, the area behind the tee was part of "the course".

Nitpicking here. Since the "course" isn't specifically defined (in the Definitions) to include objects behind the lie, it's a grey area whether the bricks are part of the course and as such could be moved such as stones in your stance.



The original post states that the bricks line the back of the tee. That makes them part of the tee and thus part of the course in my book.

Strange that 804.05(2) doesn't include the word "alteration".

The rules can be confusing to the point that it makes situations like this difficult for a player to enforce. Even after 2 days of debate on the MB by several people knowledgeable in the rules, it is still hard to determine whether this was a strokable offense or not. It was my gut feeling that the rules were violated, but to actually prove that during the round through the rule book would be counterproductive to my goal of shooting well in the tournament by creating a huge argument and distraction...

I don't see any difficulty personally. Only a lawyer would argue that bricks lining the back of the tee are not part of the tee, and then only if it suits them.

As to not having to deal with this during a round, I understand that. Least confrontational would be to note it and inform the TD that the player altered the tee box.

It's amusing to note that the player said that it was his course and he could do what he wanted. Why then did he put bricks at the back of the tee if they need to be removed to tee off? Poor course design by stupid people is a bad combination.

Personally, I'd apply the common sense rule. Did the guy modify the course to gain an advantage? Did anyone else have that advantage?

Many things are gray, but some are black and white. This one is black and white.

Beeee, I fail to see what part of that was hilarious

The part where the guy who 'owned the course' hid a cross country runner's shoe in a tree and stole a gatorade from their cooler.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that part...

Sounds like increased security at the mental institution is in order. How do these guys get out?

Beeee, I fail to see what part of that was hilarious



<font color="red"> It was MTL's post! ROTFLMAO! </font>


he should have just kicked the stone structure over - you can't be DQed for that.




http://img3.glowfoto.com/images/2007/10/18-1708045673T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=18-170804L&amp;y=2007&amp;m=10&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=5673&amp;srv=img3)

<font color="red"> It was MTL's post! ROTFLMAO! </font>

he should have just kicked the stone structure over - you can't be DQed for that.


Then the others should have kicked the "stone kicker" right where it hurts, its not part of the course, you cant get D'Qed for it!!!! MMMUUUUAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA :p

�Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are.� - FDR

�Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.� - Douglas Bader (British WWII Pilot)

�Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are.� - FDR

�Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.� - Douglas Bader (British WWII Pilot)



So out of context.... Those are talking about justification for things done during war. I mean really, how often do you end up at a brothel in Thailand during a disc golf tournament? Not often enough, that's how often.

I know what they were originally spoken about or i wouldnt have used them. I can see a correlation. I wouldnt want to push my thoughts about it, but, I feel they surely adapt to the conversation at hand. Think more loosely.

also, there surely arent enough trips... :o

I was wondering if anyone knows what place the "brick layer " finished in that event.? I was not there , but i'd bet I know.

I think Josh C's quotes are absolutely in context. There is a rule that the guy did not think he was breaking. If he was a man of principle he simply would not have done what he did.