This came up recently at a tournament. Disc lands under a Log. Can the player stand on the log to throw.

1. An official ruled that the player could.
2. Wouldn't the playing surface be the ground.

The official sighted the rule of verticality being the guiding rule.

This came up recently at a tournament. Disc lands under a Log. Can the player stand on the log to throw.

1. An official ruled that the player could.
2. Wouldn't the playing surface be the ground.

The official sighted the rule of verticality being the guiding rule.

The rules don't define the playing surface.

The rule of verticality explains how to measuer 1 meter when the playing surface is sloped.

The closest answers you're going to find are in the Rules Q&As. Somewhere in there they're talking about bridges and they say something like, "So, if you land on the bridge in bounds you play it on the bridge, and if you land under the bridge in bounds you play it under the bridge." There is also the crack in the ground Q&A that is fine with you playing on the ground above and behind your lie when the disc is in a crack too narrow to get into.

So, I don't think the rules offer a clear answer. My brother Jon thinks in that case you should give the player his choice. Jon is probably right. I could write the brief either way.

I read that one and didn't feel it was clear enogh.

Here's a similar question posed to the RC and an unofficial response.

So today I threw a roller into a ditch that had a lot of large old tree limbs. The area is not considered OB but in order to take a stance a person would either have to stand on a tree branch or out of the ditch. There is no safe way to put your foot under the branches to have your foot on the ground. My question is two fold.

1) since the tree limbs cover the ground in this area and are too heavy to move and will not move in stepped upon or jumped upon would it be a stance violation to stand with one foot on the branch directly behind your lie and the other foot on th ground?

2) could the tree limbs be considered the playing surface or would they be considered obstacles and a player would have to take relief from such obstacles?


Response:

The first thing to do is to determine what constitutes the playing surface. Depending how the branches are configured in that ditch, the playing surface may be the branches themselves, or the ground below them. Generally, the ground is the playing surface. Your lie is always on the playing surface.


If it's not possible to get your foot underneath the branch, then it should be okay to consider the top of the branch to be the playing surface and to place a supporting point there. It's hard to say for sure without seeing the ditch and the branches.


You can mark your lie on the line of play up to 5 meters back (see 803.5.C.2) with no penalty, so if you can find a reasonable stance that way, that's the way to go.


-Conrad

Thank you.

The quoted rule 803.[0]5.C.[(]2[)], deals with Casual obstacles, and I wouldn't consider a log that is large enough to stand on to be "casual".

I agree. A log is not a casual obstacle, but it is also not a playing surface. Therefore one takes the nearest lie behind it.

as an official, I would have ruled like in playing from a point in front of a tree where you can not take a stance, the marker is moved directly back behind the tree so that a stance can be taken. If the disc slid under a log and a stance can not be taken, the marker would be moved directly back (up to 5m) until a legal stance can be assumed. The rule of verticality comes ito play on a slope from a ob position or near a ob where 1 meter can be taken in order to take a legal stance. I do not believe the rule of verticality would come into play in the situation described.

The rule of verticality does not apply to this situation. Discs are always marked and played on the playing surface directly below the disc. You are not allowed to go the higher playing surface in the case of stacked playing surfaces.

A fallen log is technically loose debris even if it is several feet in diameter. I would go for it being a casual obstacle (unless it is obviously a feature of the course design).