Foot Faults at World by Stokely

[nate22]

read on the first page that Scott wasnt a chance to win at the time, that is BS, he was only a few strokes back with a further 9 to play. Kennys eagle didnt help his cause, but he wasnt that far off at all.

 

[bballr4567]

HQ Video from a better angle.

https://youtu.be/c-cn5Q1ocmU

First one is VERY blatant. Not even close to the mini. Second is iffy but still not close. Two feet? Nah but he isn't within 30 cm either.

 

[gcr_russell]

First one is VERY blatant. Not even close to the mini. Second is iffy but still not close. Two feet? Nah but he isn't within 30 cm either.

Not even Close? Hardly. Was that one a foot fault? Possibly, but youd have to get out a ruler. You're allowed to be 11 inches back, and at most that was 13-14", not the "2 and a half feet" that Brian Graham and Climo claim. In the game of inches you have to give benefit of the doubt to the thrower, because video evidence is inadmissable, and if they were claiming he was over 2 feet away on the second and first throws their eyesight is obviously too bad to be allowed to make foot fault calls on anyone.

 

[BrotherDave]

You notice where the spotter is standing in the background? It kind of gives you a feel for the line of play(I didn't notice it at first). After rewatching and keeping that in mind, I'd have called him for a third foot fault. He keeps planting to the left of his mini.

Don't quote me on this but you can be a little left/right of your mini. You get the width of a golf disc to throw from, not a mini's width.

 

[gcr_russell]

Don't quote me on this but you can be a little left/right of your mini. You get the width of a golf disc to throw from, not a mini's width.

Incorrect. You get to throw on a straight line from the center of your lie to the pin.

And they never claimed he was left or right of his lie, so that's almost not worth discussing. Being right about a foot fault but for the wrong reasons mean they had no license to call it in the first place.

 

[sidewinder22]

This is BS pretty much any way you look at it, on a wide open field shot behind your marker! This is like the anti-jump putt.

 

[scottstokely]

I accept that every foot fault call was correct and I was wrong for disputing them. I was only wanting to be transparent and show what happened because I have made every area of my life public. I did not mean to accuse anyone of anything, I only relayed the facts as best as I could with honesty and integrity. I am not perfect but I strive to be so.i did my best to do what just felt was right.

I did something very wrong though and I am truly sorry for this. I took away from the fact that the event in Pittsburgh was the best run disc golf event I have ever played and what the women did was the greatest act of sportsmanship I have ever seen in disc golf. By taking the spotlight off of these two things I was being selfish and for that I am very sorry.

I was wrong and I will strive to do better next time. Thank you to everyone in Pittsburgh for a great week an thank you to the women for setting such a great example. If anyone brings up the foot fault calls I will change the subject to these two topics.

 

[wmjt22]

I've not weighed in on this topic one way or the other but that is a very respectable response, Scott. Props to you.

 

[@iDiscGolf]

Good for you Scott, very admirable. Keep your head up and play to your best, I applaud you. :clap:

 

[DiscFifty]

Have to admit, it's close...but close enough to give benefit to the player.

 

[btothej89]

As the OP of this thread i feel the urge to comment one more time.

It was never my intention to strip away any players reputation, in any form or way.
All Gentlemen that took part in the whole thing are way better and more experienced players than i am. I have a respect for all of them.

Kudos to Mr. Stokely, though, for speaking up for himself and staying level headed throughout the entire thing.

Seems like different people have different opions on whether or not these calls were legit.
Anyways, as others have mentioned before,i guess we can all agree that the women and their respect towards each other and the way they handled the whole Hokom-accident showed us men how it´s done, thats real sportmanship from the ladies! :thmbup:

 

[Mr. Butlertron]

I usually let a few go before an official warning, but that's only if it's super obvious. I think a lot of people have this mindframe, but it's a luxury that I give those players nonetheless. The PDGA is way to reliant on a player's moral compass to guide them when it comes to calling infractions. I'm don't think this particular instance was a conspiracy, but what's to stop less ethical players from banning together? I know a player that claimed to be the victim of a similar situation from an event and I totally believe him.

 

[turbine712]

yeah, they were pretty clearly ****ty calls. completely bogus. two feet? please. the first one it seemed he could be off the line of play but we don't know where that is. he may have been in the second one too but that's not what was called in the video - they said he was way behind his marker. wrong. it was funny watching that guy brian defend himself on FB. he can say he called it as he saw it, but then that just means he really needs glasses.

KODA, what fb page was this discussion?
Thanks

 

[rhatton1]

Whilst Video evidence is not allowable -

QA 36: Is Video Evidence Allowed for Rulings?
Q:
A spectator managed to capture video evidence of some stance violations and courtesy violations like one player swearing and another drinking during the round. Can any of those video clips or snapshots be reviewed by an official to subsequently issue warnings or penalties?

A:
No. At this point, media evidence such as video, photos or audio clips cannot be used by officials or TDs for making rulings. Only direct visual accounts of possible rules infractions observed by players, spectators or officials may be used by TDs to make rulings.

There would appear to have been enough spectators watching who rejected the claims to have a reasonable objection for the TD - too late now but interesting for future and one to note.

If this were to happen again - the card calls it from a poor viewing position (which they were to judge distance behind lie) could the player request playing the hole out with provisional throws and taking the matter up with the TD after the round with evidence from the spectators who were better placed?

I'm also interested as to whether Brian Graham was appointed as an official of this specific tournament - if not surely he has no more investment than any other spectator? Despite his position within the PDGA? - i cant find info anywhere as to who the appointed officials were for Worlds.

I just likes to know my rules

 

[JC17393]

Don't quote me on this but you can be a little left/right of your mini. You get the width of a golf disc to throw from, not a mini's width.

You say "don't quote me on this" which indicates that you aren't sure you're correct, but then you go ahead and say it anyway? What does that add to the discussion?

And you're 100% incorrect. You do not get the width of either a disc or a mini. Some portion of one of your supporting points has to be making contact with the dotted line below, within 30 cm directly behind your disc.

This has been the rule in the book for decades now (since the 1990 revision).

 

[rickgz]

I think Scott is being a good sport about all of this. I met Scott when he did a clinic for my doubles league a couple of weeks ago. I went to watch the finals, and ran into Scott just before the final 9, not knowing any of this controversy, or even if he made the final 9 or not. I introduced myself, telling him how much I enjoyed his clinic, and then asked him how his day was going? He was nothing but gracious, telling me that he threw well, but not well enough to make the final 9. He was nothing but smiles and grins and gave me no indication of this issue, or that he was upset about not making the final 9. He treated me like a fan who just wanted to say hello and wish him well.

Scot, in my book you are a class act! Best of luck in your next tournament!

Rick G

 

[runningDoc]

yup the new video makes the case for legitimate footfaults better on the first two throws:




as to the "timing" of it being convenient [to push him out of the finals] its still up to endless debate.

I was coached to leave the disc (if you're not throwing the disc in the lie) on the ground instead of putting a mini because it gives you a lot more leeway (almost double the size because of the optical illusion of a regular disc being so much larger than a mini) with potential footfaults. Especially in longer open field shots where the advantage of a disc length is small.

 

[Dr.Smooth]

I suspect had he been on the other end of the rope, towards the bottom of the pack no foot faults would have been called period.

Man, what a bunch of $@#*!!. I sure wouldn't have called it. A warning first anyhow.

Scott is a big dude, a little clumsy, and has a huge hoof. I think that could be a little deceiving in the first place.

He made a good effort to stay behind his lie. And that should be good enough in terms of having adequate sportsmanship for competition.

 

[bballr4567]

I suspect had he been on the other end of the rope, towards the bottom of the pack no foot faults would have been called period.

Man, what a bunch of $@#*!!. I sure wouldn't have called it. A warning first anyhow.

Scott is a big dude, a little clumsy, and has a huge hoof. I think that could be a little deceiving in the first place.

He made a good effort to stay behind his lie. And that should be good enough in terms of having adequate sportsmanship for competition.

Did you watch the HD video from directly behind him?

Good effort behind the lie doesn't mean that he threw from his lie. All three times he just went up there and blasted his throw. He didn't step it off, didn't measure it, didn't do a practice run up. Nothing.

His first throw wasn't even close.

 

[ToddL]

I was coached to leave the disc (if you're not throwing the disc in the lie) on the ground instead of putting a mini because it gives you a lot more leeway (almost double the size because of the optical illusion of a regular disc being so much larger than a mini) with potential footfaults. Especially in longer open field shots where the advantage of a disc length is small.

That's a little shifty. Whether it's a mini or a driver, the lie is still the same. It's a line, and a line (as we all remember from 9th grade geometry) has no width. Using a larger disc because it creates an "optical illusion" is trying to fool your cardmates into letting you circumvent the rules.