Balled up Disc

[robdeforge]

How much more official do you want than the response from the Rules Committee?

in case you'd like to read a thread filled with people that think you're wrong: https://www.reddit.com/r/discgolf/comments/vhcvlv/confirmation_from_rules_committee_that_throwing_a/

some highlights include

They're wrong.
If words have meanings, and rules are intended to be read logically, this Q&A directly contradicts the rulebook.

The standards for PDGA approved discs are clear. And the standards for a throw are clear. It makes literally no sense for a legal disc, with a legal throw to be temporarily illegal because it was held wrong. Either the equipment is usable or it's not. Either the throw is allowable or its not. But some combination of wrong disc and wrong throw making the disc temporarily illegal, but not permanently, is an absurd interpretation 813.01.

It is not possible to craft a definition of "modification" that would prohibit a balled up blowfly, but wouldn't allow ever disc that's been tacod on a tree to be challenged.

And why the **** does this interpretation hinge on "saucer shaped"?? Nothing in my bag is shaped remotely like a saucer.

Post when they make an actual rule about it.

As stated many times in this thread, this is nothing but a seriously overreaching usage of the rule. If following common usage and definitions for words is a thing, then the stated rule has nothing against this. Again, join the person who wrote the Q&A in your crusade against the blowfly and post when they make an actual rule. My Elevation Binx bends down about 75-80° when I hold it normally, that would be illegal according to this interpretation.

Disc manufacturer approval guidelines ≠ rules for players

Did they officially update the rules or is this the new head of rules guy making decisions through tweets again?

I still feel like this is the PDGA rules guy misinterpreting the rules as they are currently written. If they want this to be the rule they need to update the rules. Would not second a call on it as things stand.

It's clear that the PDGA wants this to be illegal, but at the moment it's shoehorning this situation into a rule that doesn't fit. Just make a new rule.

I continue to disagree that a temporary modification is even possible. Especially if you don't add or remove material. Somebody on the rules committee objects to this due to their personal preference and they have absolutely tortured the language of the rule AND the English language in general to support their preference.

 

[txmxer]

too much hand wringing over nothing.

 

[robdeforge]

too much hand wringing over nothing.

agreed. especially because matt bell doesn't even throw blowflies anymore.

if anything, it's just interesting to see how people react to hearing something they don't want to/don't think is right

 

[Rastnav]

in case you'd like to read a thread filled with people that think you're wrong: https://www.reddit.com/r/discgolf/comments/vhcvlv/confirmation_from_rules_committee_that_throwing_a/

Lots of people are wrong about lots of things. Finding people willing to give opinions that are objectively wrong is just about the easiest thing possible to do.

All rule sets are ambiguous in some way. Clarification of how the rules are intended to be interpreted is always necessary. The rules specify that modification of a disc via normal wear and tear is allowed, but otherwise it is not. Interpreting what that means at the edge case is going to be necessary.

That said, I personally think that the rules for what discs can be legally approved should probably be changed to exclude discs like the Blowfly. A disc should be rigid enough to support its own weight (caveat:Yes, I understand that all materials have some amount of flex when supporting any weight. I'm talking about a maximum allowed flex when supported at one point along the circumference.) But that's just me.

 

[Jimb]

Just wondering if anyone mentioned "spirit of the game'". Isn't it about throwing discs and not balls?

I really have no horse in this race but it seems obvious to me.

 

[jakebake91]

Devil's advocate.....

If the disallowement hinges on "saucer shaped"....at what point is a tacoed disc illegal? Its no longer in it's intended from-factory shape.

 

[Jimb]

Devil's advocate.....

If the disallowement hinges on "saucer shaped"....at what point is a tacoed disc illegal? Its no longer in it's intended from-factory shape.

I have always bent my tacoed discs back into shape. So, for me, its basically irrelevant. I am interested to see other's thoughts.

 

[DiscJunkie]

I think this whole rules kerfuffle is a sign that we're starting to take ourselves too seriously.

 

[The Shide]

Until the rule book explicitly prohibits "balling up" a disc, I will reserve the right to do so.

New as of 6/16/2022:
QA-EQU-6: Can I take my disc, tuck the rim into itself, and throw it like a ball?
No, this is a post-production modification which alters the original flight characteristics (813.01.C.1). The disc is no longer in a round, saucer-like configuration required by the Technical Standards. Even though the modification may be temporary, it is illegal to throw the disc while in this configuration.

Looks like I got what I asked for (careful of what you wish, am I right?)

In my defense, my stubbornness about this subject was based upon reading the entire paragraph about altering a disc; that is, the examples in the paragraph were concerning making permanent changes to a disc (i.e. etching, carving, sanding, etc). Balling up the disc is not permanent.

So I will stand (sitting, actually) corrected. My apologies to anybody whose blood pressure was raised by my obstinance.