Interference

[biscoe]

Your starting point seems to be that leaving equipment behind the lie is somehow approved or proper or correct. But all the rules say is



they don't give any prescription as to where that is. And where interference 'may occur' will vary based on terrain, shot etc. Certainly for tee shots and fairway shots somewhere behind the lie probably is the optimum place for the least chance of interference. But for an uphill putt, stuff behind your lie is in the premium zone for interference.

i am not arguing that the rules as written allow for it. i am arguing that the rules would make more sense if equipment that is sitting in a perfectly reasonable spot is treated as part of the course rather than randomly penalizing a player unlucky enough to have a disc roll back and strike it.

 

[krupicka]

810 Interference
G. Players must not stand or leave their equipment where interference with a disc in play may occur...

-------

After the previously thrown disc comes to rest, players have no control over where they leave the marker. It stays at the lie. Therefore, the rules already differentiate between the marker (or disc in play) and all other equipment. Otherwise, we would all have to remove our markers before anyone putts.

However, MTL is arguing that the rules intend for markers to be treated exactly like all other equipment.

His assertion is what is causing the ambiguity, not the rule itself.

i thought the discussion is on this rule "810.F: If a player or their equipment interferes with their own throw, the player is assessed one penalty throw. The disc is played where it first comes to rest. See 810.E for intentional interference."

There is no ambiguity here.

 

[biscoe]

It interfered with the disc.

as opposed to the equipment which was left 6 inches away and not struck by a randomly rolling disc? sounds like the 2 meter rule to me- random penalty. a player could leave his bag 1000 feet away and be unfortunate enough to be penalized.

 

[krupicka]

The old rule left ambiguity as to whether or not a player should attempt to move his own equipment in the event that his own throw was about to strike that equipment. Now it's pretty clear. Just get it out of the way regardless of wherever you left it.

 

[ILUVSMGS18]

Just get it out of the way regardless of wherever you left it.

Since I play courses that the rough can be really hard to navigate by myself, having a bulky bag on my bag just increases my risk of injury, or possible damage to the course, I will leave it in an open area, usually somewhere near where I went in, which in most cases is the edge of the fairway. Say I throw a shot and it miraculously hits a tree and rolls and hits my bag, but I'm in the middle of brambles, and can't get out in a super quick manner, I should get penalized? Definitely a random penalty, that probably only adds to a bad score already on that hole. Your idea is good on paper, but has the ability to be controversial especially in the example I gave.

 

[krupicka]

Since I play courses that the rough can be really hard to navigate by myself, having a bulky bag on my bag just increases my risk of injury, or possible damage to the course, I will leave it in an open area, usually somewhere near where I went in, which in most cases is the edge of the fairway. Say I throw a shot and it miraculously hits a tree and rolls and hits my bag, but I'm in the middle of brambles, and can't get out in a super quick manner, I should get penalized? Definitely a random penalty, that probably only adds to a bad score already on that hole. Your idea is good on paper, but has the ability to be controversial especially in the example I gave.

And how many times has this happened to you? (Not getting stuck in the brambles, but hitting your bag on an errant shot while trying to throw out of them). If it's more than once either you are really unlucky or you need to find a better place to put your bag.

We all can dream up plenty of what-ifs. It's not hard. The current rule encourages players to think about where they leave their bag and put the onus on them to make sure it is out of the way.

 

[IHearChains]

i thought the discussion is on this rule "810.F: If a player or their equipment interferes with their own throw, the player is assessed one penalty throw. The disc is played where it first comes to rest. See 810.E for intentional interference."

There is no ambiguity here.

The question is, are markers and discs in play treated the same as all other equipment?

Can someone be asked to remove their mini (or disc in play) from the area before another player throws, on grounds that it may interfere? And be issued a courtesy warning/violation if they refuse?

 

[IHearChains]

The current rule encourages players to think about where they leave their bag and put the onus on them to make sure it is out of the way.

But there is no choice where to place the marker. So you can't "make sure it is out of the way".

 

[ILUVSMGS18]

And how many times has this happened to you? (Not getting stuck in the brambles, but hitting your bag on an errant shot while trying to throw out of them). If it's more than once either you are really unlucky or you need to find a better place to put your bag.

We all can dream up plenty of what-ifs. It's not hard. The current rule encourages players to think about where they leave their bag and put the onus on them to make sure it is out of the way.

I've seen it happen once, and have heard of it happening another time. I suspect that if I play enough I'll eventually have it happen to me. I was simply pointing out the flaws in your thinking.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

Really? I'm on tee of the next hole and a disc from another fairway hits my bag, I should be penalized? There's at least once where I was sitting behind the tee box on my hole waiting for my turn to throw when i dove out of the way at the last minute to avoid being hit by an errant shot from another hole. Player next to me got a big welt. That player should be penalized?

Well, to be a little more up front, I don't like the interference rule at all as it relates to equipment. Players don't put things on the course for the purpose of gaining some advantage in the off chance that their disc might ricochet off something, or roll behind them, and hit their equipment and provide them with some advantage by mitigating the damage to their score from an errant shot. I don't think a player should have to worry about moving their marker disc, thrown disc, mini marker, cart, towel or anything else after they throw. If a competitor thinks that the equipment is placed such that the thrower can thereby gain an advantage, the objecting player should object prior to the throw, just as the thrower can ask his/her competitor to move their equipment.

But, if there is going to be an interference rule, it should apply to, at least, everyone in the thrower's group IMO. I could go for an exemption for those playing a different hole or waiting at the next, current or previous tee area.

 

[Steve West]

Well, to be a little more up front, I don't like the interference rule at all as it relates to equipment. Players don't put things on the course for the purpose of gaining some advantage in the off chance that their disc might ricochet off something, or roll behind them, and hit their equipment and provide them with some advantage by mitigating the damage to their score from an errant shot. ...

But would they put things on the course for the purpose of gaining some advantage if there was not a rule against it?

I know I would.

It would just be part of the strategy; stupid not to. Not just to reduce risk on my throws, but to mess up other players' throws.

I am glad it is not allowed. That would not be a fun part of the game.

 

[roblee]

Maybe no ambiguity but there is interpretation. "Interfere" does not equal "Touch" as pointed out in post #2. Lots more likely to interfere with your hand trying to move a mini versus letting a disc roll over it. I can't imagine a competitor that would consider penalizing someone because a rollaway touched their marker. It's interesting to analyze this original question but does anyone really think this is how the rule was intended & should be applied? The Q&A does not address this under Interference or Equipment. I'd like to see the Rules Committee look at this.

 

[JoakimBL]

You were saying that the vagueness should be clarified. As a I said above."I think it's intentionally vague. Leaving it as just "equipment" instead of a long list of items takes out the chances of missing something odd or unforeseen."

If the intention was your own discs and minis to not be considered in this, it would have been listed. As you said, it's not hard to add that exception. The fact it's missing leads to my interpretation that it's intentionally missing and therefore considered equipment.

You have very high expectations of the RC. There are way too many examples of rule updates having unforeseen consequences or wording that does not equate to the intention of the rules to make an assumption like that IMO. I think it is a 100 times more likely that the RC never thought of this possibility when formulating the rule.

 

[JoakimBL]

But, if there is going to be an interference rule, it should apply to, at least, everyone in the thrower's group IMO. I could go for an exemption for those playing a different hole or waiting at the next, current or previous tee area.

Which would open up the possibility of the thrower intentionally throwing a disc at their opponents or their equipment. Would you like to rethink your position?

 

[rhatton1]

It seems the instinctive thing to do was to snatch the marker out of the way. Why write a rule that goes against that? Is it worth the extra words and complication to make an exception to allow something that a lot of players think should not be allowed?

It wouldn't be my instinct and I have never seen anyone do similar. It was his reaction to it that made me think of this in the first place. I don't think the vast majority of players would see the marker as being equipment in this scenario. As IhearChains has argued you have no control over where to put that marker and there are a number of reasons you may not be able to move it before it is struck (showing balance/doubles play etc)

For me that marker is the same as any other player in the groups disc lying on the floor until the point your disc has stopped moving of it's own accord and then the marker should be removed from the playing area.

The rules dictate that you have to use some marker (thrown disc or mini) to mark your lie. There is no way you can then fairly be penalised for having followed the rules.

 

[cheesethin]

So, what of other players' discs laying in the fairway between the thrower and the target? Are those "equipment" that those players should be taking care to not be in a place where interference might occur? If I make a throw and my disc strikes my cardmate's disc, do I have a case for an interference call against him?......

...Good question. It would seem adding "except discs in play" would be warranted..

The question is, are markers and discs in play treated the same as all other equipment?....

QA-INT-1 appears to be relevant to this issue:

QA-INT-1: My disc was stuck in a tree far above two meters (with the two-meter rule in effect), when another player's throw knocked it to the ground. Where is my lie, and am I subject to a two-meter penalty throw?

The disc is played relative to where it first came to rest. Since that was clearly above two meters, you are subject to a penalty throw just as if the disc had stayed in the tree. As for the player whose throw knocked your disc down, the interference rule does not apply when the interference is caused by a competitively thrown disc.

This seems to say that thrown discs can't interfere with each other. It still leaves the status of mini discs up in the air.

 

[roggenb3]

I've seen people try to move equipment out of a discs way more times than I can remember. Some successful, some not. Never once have I seen a player try to move their mini out of the way.

If a mini counts as equipment, there would be constant penalties.

Imagine a 5 player card, and everyone is within 20 feet. Whoever putts first has a significant chance of hitting someone else's mini if they clank the putt. What are the other players supposed to do? They literally cannot, by the rules, move their mini before they throw.

 

[krupicka]

I've seen people try to move equipment out of a discs way more times than I can remember. Some successful, some not. Never once have I seen a player try to move their mini out of the way.

If a mini counts as equipment, there would be constant penalties.

Imagine a 5 player card, and everyone is within 20 feet. Whoever putts first has a significant chance of hitting someone else's mini if they clank the putt. What are the other players supposed to do? They literally cannot, by the rules, move their mini before they throw.

There seems to be a theme repeated here that unintentional interference by a players equipment on another players throw results in a penalty. Where are you all seeing that?

The only penalty is for a player's equipment on their own throw. 810.F

 

[cheesethin]

...Imagine a 5 player card, and everyone is within 20 feet. Whoever putts first has a significant chance of hitting someone else's mini if they clank the putt. ...

Side track: What's with retrieving your thrown disc and mini-marking it BEFORE it is your turn to putt? Not saying I think it's wrong, and I've seen it on tournament coverage, just wondering what the thinking behind it is?

 

[rhatton1]

Side track: What's with retrieving your thrown disc and mini-marking it BEFORE it is your turn to putt? Not saying I think it's wrong, and I've seen it on tournament coverage, just wondering what the thinking behind it is?

Speed of play. Mark it before your turn whilst someone else is messing about, you can then just step to your lie and get on with it.