Here's the rest of the convo for those of you that don't want to sift through the PDGA forum .......
Patrick P wrote:cgk, it amazes me that you are so profound in citing 803.07A after Mr. Schultz performed the same actions you and I have have gone back and forth discussing in several posts. I think you have simply thrown "Spirit of the Game" out the window in your assessment, while others, a top PRO player in the world, the Memorial announcers, and some 1 year seasoned AM player gets it. I can only conclude that if you were a cop you would be giving everyone tickets for going 51mph in a 50mph zone.
cgkdisc wrote:Why have 803.07 on interference as a rule if it's not followed? I talked with Greenwell today about it and he didn't realize it was a rule infraction until after Terry told him about the email I sent them. But they didn't cover it on the air later. I also got an email from our former Executive Director who had a similar incident at an event. A spotter stopped his disc from rolling into OB water back in the 1998 Can Am Finals. He successfully argued that his disc was interfered with inbounds and should be marked IB where it was touched. The other two top pros in the group grudgingly agreed based on the rule. In fact, if he wanted, it was intentional intereference and he could have taken a rethrow. This is no different from Barry "saving" discs if that's what happened.
In the case of the Memorial, the am who touched his disc in the OB area just before going in the water should have had a 2-throw penalty on top of the OB based on 803.07C. In Barry's case, both of those mentioned sounded like intentional interference 803.07A. So those players could have taken their lies inbounds where he touched their discs or taken a rethrow. That's how the rule is written and how a marshal should be calling them just like Hoeniger did in 1998. This was an NT after all with the ED right there to confirm the ruling if there was any question.
A player is allowed to stop their disc when it's about to roll OB. But they have to decide if saving their disc is worth a 2-throw penalty.
cgkdisc wrote:You have to understand that many times what I might be posting isn't necessarily how I feel about something but just how it looks like something should be interpreted in the way it's written. I'd hate to see my disc rolling into OB water to likely disappear. If there were a way to write the rule to allow a spotter or player to save their disc in these situations by maybe calling out, "I declare OB!" that would be cool. But I'm not sure how you would do it.
FYI, in ball golf the penalty is 2 shots for intentionally touching a moving ball with no distinction whether the ball is moving inbounds, in a hazard or OB. Unintentional deflection by the striker, caddie, partner or the player's equipment is a one shot penalty.
Patrick P wrote:cgk, I never said your interpretation of the rule is incorrect. However we do not live in a black and white world as you are so adamant to apply this scenario as the rule is currently written. The same can be said about current laws, rules in other sports, and life in general. We can have endless discussions about this and we can continue to cite how many examples in life of how things are written and how things should be. Even certain disc golf rules in place have a degree subject to interpretation and judgment.
The easiest point that anyone can site is in our current law system that it would be absurd for a police officer to write each and every driver who drives one mile over the posted speed limit. Did the driver break the law going 51mph in a 50mph zone? Yes, absolutely. Do you think a police officer will issue a ticket for this infraction? 99.9% no.
We do strive for absolutes and write rules as such, but unfortunately we do not live in a perfect world, and life nor a game should be played as such. I guess in the end, in your eyes, there is no such thing as the spirit of the game and that's unfortunate in your analysis.
cgkdisc wrote:How would you have ruled on these issues if you were a marshal? You cannot use the rule of fairness 803.01F because the situations are directly covered in the rules. Barry couldn't possibly knock down or catch every errant shot going OB as a spotter. Is that fair that some players get their disc saved and others don't? What rule would you use to indicate the players still get the OB penalty when Barry saves the disc from going OB even though the rule says a disc is played from the point the disc is touched which would be inbounds? You're on a slope as slippery as the banks we're talking about.
kvdiscpro wrote:agreed, but in ball golf losing a ball is no big deal, but a well beat in plastic disc is hard to lose, I would think if the rule could be written where a trained spotter could stop disc from escaping to never never land and then the spotter could just stop the OB spot for where we need to throw from no extra penalty? is this a possibility in the future. I understand the rule and have no issue with it. But seeing how losing a disc can be a big deal (bigger than a ball) then maybe we could have some Lax on the law.....just wondering.
cgkdisc wrote:Bottom line is that you can personally save your disc for a 2-throw penalty. For many people, that may be worth it. Otherwise, I don't see how allowing spotters to save discs can possibly be a fair option even if the same individual is stationed at the same spot for every minute of play which would be a rare situation at an event except maybe the USDGC.
I already talked with Gentry today about it and he wants the details for the Rules Committee to review since they are looking at rules revisions this year. I'll be interested to see if they can find a more "Spirit of the game" option that doesn't open up its own can of worms.
cgkdisc wrote:The Interference rule in disc golf and ball golf does not care where the disc or ball is located, just that it is a live shot still moving. I doubt you would want a spectator to catch your disc as it's rolling thru OB on its way potentially back inbounds would you?
Patrick P wrote:"Disc golf is a game that expects high standards of etiquette and courtesy". I intepret that statement in the rule book to supersede your ruling. That in it self is why players such as Barry Schultz is helping AM players from losing discs in the water and that's probably why the PDGA decided to make that statement in the introduction of the rule book (to formulate a basis and standard of play; i.e. Spirit of the game).
cgkdisc wrote:You're a spotter at the Memorial and stop Feldberg's roller from going in the water. Mark the shot and you're ready to give the disc back to him when he gets there. He's smiling not just because you saved his disc but saved him a throw because he knows the rules. Anthon, Nikko and Climo are ticked. They think Dave should get the OB penalty but Dave shows in the rulebook that you touched his disc inbounds so no OB. They agree that's what the rulebook says and are upset that you touched Dave's disc. How do you explain that Dave gets the OB penalty? In fact, just for more drama, Dave decides to retee which he is allowed to do because he knows he can park the drive this time.
These are the kind of calls marshals have to make all of the time. That's why the words are in writing and not simply transmitted as oral history from our forefathers of disc golf. By the way, I'm not against swinging calls toward the spirit of the game in gray areas when the wording is unclear and judgments are called for. But that's not the case for this rule and these situations.
Patrick P wrote:One can apply a logical extension that a player throwing a disc into the water is littering and therefore anyone who throws a disc into the water is subject to a courtesy violation. There, I can play the what-if game too.
cgkdisc wrote:Been there, done that. Discs not defined by PDGA as litter.
kvdiscpro wrote:good points, but why can the rule not be written that if someone stops or saves a disc then its just played as an OB shot from where he touched it. or the OB is played from where the disc would normally be played from where the disc went oB but a spotter saved the disc, just play the Lie as a normal OB.
I understand the circumstance of a disc maybe coming back in bounds, but can you not just make this rule for a shot like over water where there is no possible chance to come back In Bounds>?
Im just wondering. But I do understand the rule, and I understand that we just lose disc sometimes, but could we allow an exception for saving disc in water situations?
cgkdisc wrote:Having anyone be responsible for saving discs is inherently going to be unfair. What if there's no spotter but a player has a caddie or buddy watching. The player can send them down to watch and save their shots but not anyone else's in the group or other groups. There's no real human equivalent of say a net in the water that goes along the shoreline say 70 feet and maybe 10 feet wide out into the water. Any OB shot in that area would be caught by the net. That would be reasonably fair. But I don't think you could get that level of "fairness" for disc retrieval even with the best human spotter.
"I'm not impressed with aces of any kind. 95% of the time, they're just bad shots that got lucky and happened to hit the chains. Otherwise, they'd have sailed 50' past the hole." ~ Cydisc