The Foot "Fault"

[charris414]

good points ... posted without thinking it entirely through and immediately those situations came to mind

 

[BlueBells]

Okay.. He's not quite hulk angry but he gets offended if I call him on something (even though I have been playing disc golf on and off for roughly 13 years). Basically what he does is a basic spin putt. His right foot is planted behind the marker. As he is putting he begins to take a step forward. This usually occurs in under 30ft. He steps forward and the left foot lands in front of the marker before the disc is at rest in the basket.

I think this statement was misunderstood. There's no way this is acceptable under 99% of circumstances (because there are always timing exceptions like huge spike putts around large trees, etc). It sounds to me like he's doing the "feldberg step" inside 30 feet. That instance of his left foot becoming a balance point with it being closer to the target than his foot in the line of play is not a show of balance until his "off-foot" is closer to the basket than his foot behind the marker. That's a violation every time, right?

 

[Steve West]

Once again with all due respect... no its not.

Second.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Once again with all due respect... no its not.

I agree it's not there in writing (2 seconds) but there are many words in our language that indicate number values implicitly such as "few." It's not 1 and it's not 5. It's probably 2 or 3. We now know that RC considers the implicit meaning of "demonstrate balance" to be at least 2 seconds. One second isn't long enough and three seconds is more than enough. Just like you had to learn the meaning of "few", the RC via the videos is clarifying the meaning of "demonstrate balance" which incorporates a time judgment.

 

[JC17393]

I think this statement was misunderstood. There's no way this is acceptable under 99% of circumstances (because there are always timing exceptions like huge spike putts around large trees, etc). It sounds to me like he's doing the "feldberg step" inside 30 feet. That instance of his left foot becoming a balance point with it being closer to the target than his foot in the line of play is not a show of balance until his "off-foot" is closer to the basket than his foot behind the marker. That's a violation every time, right?

Yes. There's no conceivable way in which his left foot contacts the playing surface in front of the marker after he's demonstrated any kind of balance. If we're picturing a Feldberg step-through putt, the disc is barely out of the hand before the left foot comes down, let alone getting to the basket or wherever. It's almost instantaneous. No question a violation within the 10-meter circle.

I mean, if he's pausing at all before the left foot comes down, in an effort to demonstrate balance, he's losing any potential benefit he intends to gain from the step in the first place. He'd be improving his chances of making the putt by eliminating it if that were the case.

 

[Harrishabitat]

I agree it's not there in writing (2 seconds) but there are many words in our language that indicate number values implicitly such as "few." It's not 1 and it's not 5. It's probably 2 or 3. We now know that RC considers the implicit meaning of "demonstrate balance" to be at least 2 seconds. One second isn't long enough and three seconds is more than enough. Just like you had to learn the meaning of "few", the RC via the videos is clarifying the meaning of "demonstrate balance" which incorporates a time judgment.

There is no point beating our heads against the wall on this, you obviously are very strong in your opinion. If anyone ever tried to call me for not remaining still for two seconds, I would hand them my rule book, say show me, then move on.

Just for the record...I was again state, this is the worst "rule" we have in the sport.

 

[cubeofsoup]

There is no point beating our heads against the wall on this, you obviously are very strong in your opinion. If anyone ever tried to call me for not remaining still for two seconds, I would hand them my rule book, say show me, then move on.

Just for the record...I was again state, this is the worst "rule" we have in the sport.

The QA section and videos are part of the official rules...so the 2 seconds is official in that sense. This QA article is the official description of how to interpret this rule.

 

[Thumber]

for inside the circle the easiest fix to this would be to change the rule such that both feet must touch the ground, behind your marker, before you may advance towards the basket. Pretty much eliminated the requirement for demonstrating balance.

I guess poor Will would have to rock back after his putt, but boo hoo. If you are in control it is no effort to place your foot back on the ground

Not sure why DG rules need be so vague and complicated at times

 

[TeeSquared]

put a marker on the ground, lift one leg in the air, try to reach down and get the marker without falling or touching the ground in front of the marker with either hand, does that not equate to demonstrating balance on your part? I think to most people that would be an example of demonstrating balance.

 

[TeeSquared]

for inside the circle the easiest fix to this would be to change the rule such that both feet must touch the ground, behind your marker, before you may advance towards the basket. Pretty much eliminated the requirement for demonstrating balance.

I guess poor Will would have to rock back after his putt, but boo hoo. If you are in control it is no effort to place your foot back on the ground

Not sure why DG rules need be so vague and complicated at times

I agree with this idea, and typically do this already, There's no reason why Will can't just put his foot down and bend down with both feet on the ground to get his marker. But, I've never seen him fall forward when doing it with only one foot on the ground. It takes about two seconds to say "demonstrating balance" out loud or in your head if you stop to think it before advancing to the basket then you're all set.

 

[Cgkdisc]

There is no point beating our heads against the wall on this, you obviously are very strong in your opinion. If anyone ever tried to call me for not remaining still for two seconds, I would hand them my rule book, say show me, then move on.

Just for the record...I was again state, this is the worst "rule" we have in the sport.

And I would say it's in the rulebook in the meaning of "demonstrate balance". Note: the thrower is excluded from making/defending a foot fault call so it's simply up to the other players in the group. Showing them the rulebook means nothing if in their judgment, you didn't take enough time to demonstrate balance before moving forward. Even on appeal to the TD, the TD might say if the one or two players making the call felt it was too fast, it was too fast. And since video evidence isn't allowed, showing a clip can't help.

So deny the two seconds all you wish. But actual tests indicate that if you hold your movement for at least two seconds before making forward contact, you're probably good in the judgment of most players. What sucks is if you have two players in your group that think three seconds is the minimum. That's an example where having that two seconds explicitly in writing can matter.

 

[JC17393]

for inside the circle the easiest fix to this would be to change the rule such that both feet must touch the ground, behind your marker, before you may advance towards the basket. Pretty much eliminated the requirement for demonstrating balance.

But not eliminate the falling putt...or it would effectively legalize it. How soon after requiring only that both feet must touch the ground behind the marker would we start seeing NFL sideline style toe drags as players let their momentum take them forward toward the target? Is that really an improvement?

put a marker on the ground, lift one leg in the air, try to reach down and get the marker without falling or touching the ground in front of the marker with either hand, does that not equate to demonstrating balance on your part? I think to most people that would be an example of demonstrating balance.

If you pick up the marker without advancing or attempting to advance, sure. But what about instances where you are on one foot, you reach down to pick up your marker and then your next motion is forward? I just got up from the desk and tried this about ten times. Five where I stood on one foot, picked up the marker and then brought my back foot down again behind the mark. Easy, no problem. The next five I stood on one foot, picked up the marker then tried to straighten up and "balance" on one leg so that my next move was forward weren't so easy. In fact, I stumbled forward on all but one attempt, and the fifth time where I didn't stumble, it would have been far easier to put the other foot down instead of standing on one leg wavering. Definitely wouldn't consider myself balanced on the stumbles, though, and that's what I envision a lot of players doing if the marker pick up was the demarcation of fault or no fault.

 

[Harrishabitat]

And I would say it's in the rulebook in the meaning of "demonstrate balance". Note: the thrower is excluded from making/defending a foot fault call so it's simply up to the other players in the group. Showing them the rulebook means nothing if in their judgment, you didn't take enough time to demonstrate balance before moving forward. Even on appeal to the TD, the TD might say if the one or two players making the call felt it was too fast, it was too fast. And since video evidence isn't allowed, showing a clip can't help.

So deny the two seconds all you wish. But actual tests indicate that if you hold your movement for at least two seconds before making forward contact, you're probably good in the judgment of most players. What sucks is if you have two players in your group that think three seconds is the minimum. That's an example where having that two seconds explicitly in writing can matter.

What are these test that you keep mentioning? Are you actually on the rules committee? if the rules don't specify a period of time how can anyone actually make a determination "you didn't hold still long enough". When I put both of my feet are at rest on the ground and usually I don't have any forward motion in my putt... so in your determination I have to remind still for... one one thousand, two one thousand?

How can I as a player know what the rule is if I go to my rule book and its not there but someone in my group ways... no this not correct because I saw a video online that said there needs to be a two second count. I can understand the addition of the q&a section because its printed in the rule book, but in no logical world should a online video be an official rule. This is insane.

And I would argue against all your supposed evidence. Watch any major or nt event and the pros don't hold for this supposed two second count. Are you telling me that this two second thing is official when its not being used by our top level pros with certified rules officials and tournament directors and even members of the governing body present.

 

[Thumber]

But not eliminate the falling putt...or it would effectively legalize it. How soon after requiring only that both feet must touch the ground behind the marker would we start seeing NFL sideline style toe drags as players let their momentum take them forward toward the target? Is that really an improvement?

I see your point.

Edit: Following a putt inside the circle, both feet must be in contact with ground, behind the marker, and the player must be at rest.

I think this would eliminate toe drag falling putts

 

[Harrishabitat]

I see your point.

Edit: Following a putt inside the circle, both feet must be in contact with ground, behind the marker, and the player must be at rest.

I think this would eliminate toe drag falling putts

I completely agree. I simply can't understand why the RC doesn't go to something like this instead of the ambiguity it has now. Both points of contact behind the lie and come to a complete rest. No more of this vague demonstrating balance and the supposed 2second count... that event the pros don't abide by.

 

[TeeSquared]

If you pick up the marker without advancing or attempting to advance, sure. But what about instances where you are on one foot, you reach down to pick up your marker and then your next motion is forward? I just got up from the desk and tried this about ten times. Five where I stood on one foot, picked up the marker and then brought my back foot down again behind the mark. Easy, no problem. The next five I stood on one foot, picked up the marker then tried to straighten up and "balance" on one leg so that my next move was forward weren't so easy. In fact, I stumbled forward on all but one attempt, and the fifth time where I didn't stumble, it would have been far easier to put the other foot down instead of standing on one leg wavering. Definitely wouldn't consider myself balanced on the stumbles, though, and that's what I envision a lot of players doing if the marker pick up was the demarcation of fault or no fault.

no one said it had to look pretty, and i agree a stumble forward is a fault, but on the successful fifth attempt, by the time you reached down, grabbed your marker, straightened back up and swung that foot forward, two, probably three seconds had passed... at that point your step forward is legal, right?

 

[ScottyLove]

DISCLAIMER: didn't read whole thread....

I would advice folks to never use the term "foot fault". I don't believe it is even mentioned in the rule book. (I haven't check this week, but I read it often)

I prefer Stance Violation. Probably nit picky on my part, the but the whole idea is picking at nits now isn't it?

 

[Harrishabitat]

no one said it had to look pretty, and i agree a stumble forward is a fault, but on the successful fifth attempt, by the time you reached down, grabbed your marker, straightened back up and swung that foot forward, two, probably three seconds had passed... at that point your step forward is legal, right?

Some people would say yes legal... some would say no illegal... great rule huh?

 

[joecoin]

Nope.

PDGA Rules of Play 802.04 Throwing From A Stance

PDGA Rules of Play 800.02 Definitions

This means you have almost 12 inches to work with, I can see that being enough room to 'fall' into.

 

[Harrishabitat]

This means you have almost 12 inches to work with, I can see that being enough room to 'fall' into.

But at what point are you demonstrating balance?