Broken Disc in Basket

[Steve West]

I've had several occasions where I couldn't tell if a disc was IB or OB. Is that moist soil or surrounded by water? Is that disc buried by a layer of thatch past that cable that is 3' above it? Given my level of visual acuity and ability to interpret those data I must be 100% certain of the discs status before I would make the call. If I'm not 100% certain, I can't make the call. If you issued me a courtesy warning I would accept it with a smile and think, "Wow, you are fun to play with."

Saying that you don't think the disc is "clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area" - and therefore is not OB - is making a call. You would not be subject to a courtesy violation for weighing in with that opinion.

 

[_MTL_]

I've had several occasions where I couldn't tell if a disc was IB or OB. Is that moist soil or surrounded by water? Is that disc buried by a layer of thatch past that cable that is 3' above it? Given my level of visual acuity and ability to interpret those data I must be 100% certain of the discs status before I would make the call. If I'm not 100% certain, I can't make the call. If you issued me a courtesy warning I would accept it with a smile and think, "Wow, you are fun to play with."

A couple things to clarify / point out.

1. I am mostly always speaking about rules from the perspective as a PDGA Marshal, not as a player. If I was marshaling you and you refused to make a call, I would absolutely issue you a courtesy warning. As a player, I would be much more lenient and explain we have to make a call and not being 100% sure is ok.

2. This is why you ALWAYS mark water and don't leave it up to the group.

3. You always have to make a call. There is nothing in the rules that suggests otherwise.

 

[roblee]

Saying that you don't think the disc is "clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area" - and therefore is not OB - is making a call. You would not be subject to a courtesy violation for weighing in with that opinion.

Whew!

 

[roblee]

A couple things to clarify / point out.

1. I am mostly always speaking about rules from the perspective as a PDGA Marshal, not as a player. If I was marshaling you and you refused to make a call, I would absolutely issue you a courtesy warning. As a player, I would be much more lenient and explain we have to make a call and not being 100% sure is ok.

Interesting. I didn't think about a marshaling scenario.

2. This is why you ALWAYS mark water and don't leave it up to the group.

Agree, that is desirable but I know that how its marked can still require a group call.

3. You always have to make a call. There is nothing in the rules that suggests otherwise.

In the dozen or so times this this happened there was never a formal vote. Rather a consensus,"benefit to the player". :thmbup: I think the letter and the intent of the rule was correctly applied. I would never be a contrarian regarding an OB call. If pressed for a call I couldn't be sure of I would simply call it IB (=benefit to the player).

 

[_MTL_]

In the dozen or so times this this happened there was never a formal vote. Rather a consensus,"benefit to the player". :thmbup: I think the letter and the intent of the rule was correctly applied. I would never be a contrarian regarding an OB call. If pressed for a call I couldn't be sure of I would simply call it IB (=benefit to the player).

The Q and A completely proves this to be incorrect and clearly states that this is a tiebreaker.

https://www.pdga.com/faq/rules/qa-a...b-i-think-its-unclear-doesnt-benefit-doubt-go

Logically, I completely agree with what you are saying. However, as the Q and A points, out, it simply is not correct.

But if you internally thought "well, I'm not sure, so yeah, in" thats fine. But don't ever vocalize that lol.

 

[BillFleming]

We need to stop using the phrase "benefit of the doubt to the player" in reference to the PDGA rules. I have said for years that this "expression" is the most mis-applied and mis-understood (NON-)rule we have.

See the link in the post below, the Q&A (part of PDGA rules) for OB specifically uses the wording "Benefit of the doubt".

The Q and A completely proves this to be incorrect and clearly states that this is a tiebreaker.

https://www.pdga.com/faq/rules/qa-a...b-i-think-its-unclear-doesnt-benefit-doubt-go

Logically, I completely agree with what you are saying. However, as the Q and A points, out, it simply is not correct.

But if you internally thought "well, I'm not sure, so yeah, in" thats fine. But don't ever vocalize that lol.

 

[_MTL_]

I Agree that it is bad wording but it is the actual language used so we have to use it.

 

[Steve West]

I Agree that it is bad wording but it is the actual language used so we have to use it.

The Q and As are the last vestige of the early "Hey, I just thought of something, let's slap it up on the website somewhere" developmental stage of rules making. We would be better off without them.

But, they ARE official rules.

 

[kenjiac]

Disc not disk.

 

[araytx]

See the link in the post below, the Q&A (part of PDGA rules) for OB specifically uses the wording "Benefit of the doubt".

I get that "technically" the Rules Q&A are part of the rules, but the reality is that the Q&A are interpretations of the specific rule(s) referenced. In this example that you are quoting, QA-APP-4, it is referencing the rule on "Appeals", 801.03. That's what APP stands for. In RULE 801.03, the word "doubt" isn't found. However, I can give you the Q&A, since that is what many players still call it; the Q&A is phrased like a player might state/ask it. It just isn't the rule, nor is the rule about doubt, specifically, the rule is not about the definition of doubt which means "in case you have doubt because you're not sure." That is not the interpretation here. Agreed?

If not then I would've contended we need to put in a definition of "doubt" since that is the first place it's found in the book -- & I didn't make that contention.

The Q and As are the last vestige of the early "Hey, I just thought of something, let's slap it up on the website somewhere" developmental stage of rules making. We would be better off without them.

But, they ARE official rules.

Agreed. But they might better be touted as interpretations of rules, RI's instead of QA's. But I see that they are phrased as QA's or FAQs.

 

[jenb]

Q: My disc skipped off an in bounds rock, struck the basket and chained out, then rolled out of bounds. With the aid of an electron microscope and advanced forensic techniques I prove that microscopic disc particle from that disc are in the basket, on the IB rock, and on my fingers. Have I thrown yet? Is it IB? Did I hole out?

 

[zontar]

Q: My disc skipped off an in bounds rock, struck the basket and chained out, then rolled out of bounds. With the aid of an electron microscope and advanced forensic techniques I prove that microscopic disc particle from that disc are in the basket, on the IB rock, and on my fingers. Have I thrown yet? Is it IB? Did I hole out?

No. yes. no. if you'd read the rule book we wouldn't be having this discussion, Jen.

 

[jenb]

No. yes. no. if you'd read the rule book we wouldn't be having this discussion, Jen.

So the microscopic disc particles that struck the IB rock make it IB even though it rolled OB?

 

[zontar]

absolutely. PDGA rules are always clear enough.