Foot Faults at World by Stokely

[Mulligan]

I agree with the sentiment that all sports suffer from the perils of self officiating along the way to the pro level.

However, how can't the PDGA be a part of the issue if, as a nonprofit org their goal is to advance the sport of disc golf, without providing training for officiating at the highest level? They can't find a couple dozen folks to train and officiate even regionally for NTs? At this point all that is really needed is coverage on the top 3-4 cards, at least.

They also are inherently changing the game itself by allowing course designs at NTs that far exceed the normal lengths of courses across the country.
In effect, they are creating a game that has more risks and rewards, but no boundaries when the players themselves are the referees of their own competition.

So, if they can't gather enough officials to make the game fair for all at the highest level, then the rules should be changed so that the players who are making calls against their opponents don't have to do so within the margin of error of a millimeter from 30 ft away.

 

[solidhummer]

Amen amen amen

 

[solidhummer]

Two of three on a four person card is 66.667%. That's not simply a majority; that's an overwhelming consensus. Given the demonstrable extreme reluctance of disc golfers to call even the most rules violations, if two competitors on your card call you for a foot fault, maybe … just maybe … you need to set aside your paranoia for a moment and at least consider the possibility that you actually did commit a foot fault.

Your missing my point though. My issue isn't with if I foot faulted or not it is with who calls it.

 

[slowplastic]

Your missing my point though. My issue isn't with if I foot faulted or not it is with who calls it.

^What if the victim's family was allowed to be the judge and jury during a trial? That's basically what he's saying...

Sure they were peers, but not anymore since there's some investment in the situation.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

Whether one "stands and delivers" or executes a run-up to the marker should be left up to the player. If they elect a run-up, the possibility of a foot fault is a part of the risk/reward equation.

All we need is an objective way to measure a foot fault or a legal plant and we're set.

 

[Mixed Bag Madness]

This isn't even a forum anymore. Any disagreements even if they are civil and non-threatening will be deleted or locked by the almighty power hungry moderators. It's pointless to even post anything anymore and it's sickening. BTW I will only use this site as a reference for courses I've played etc. and I will not dare converse on any topics or discuss anything anymore even though that's the whole point of a FORUM for fear of being censored or banned. This post will be deleted anyway because I actually enjoy conversing and having an opinion which is the point of a FORUM so it's a moot point. Please don't ban the guy who actually thought that he could converse with people in a respectable manner. I promise not to show any individuality or opinions that clash with the ruling elite anymore.

 

[Pbmercil]

This isn't even a forum anymore. Any disagreements even if they are civil and non-threatening will be deleted or locked by the almighty power hungry moderators. It's pointless to even post anything anymore and it's sickening. BTW I will only use this site as a reference for courses I've played etc. and I will not dare converse on any topics or discuss anything anymore even though that's the whole point of a FORUM for fear of being censored or banned. This post will be deleted anyway because I actually enjoy conversing and having an opinion which is the point of a FORUM so it's a moot point. Please don't ban the guy who actually thought that he could converse with people in a respectable manner. I promise not to show any individuality or opinions that clash with the ruling elite anymore.

The butthurt is strong with this one!

 

[araytx]

I agree with the sentiment that all sports suffer from the perils of self officiating along the way to the pro level.

However, how can't the PDGA be a part of the issue if, as a nonprofit org their goal is to advance the sport of disc golf, without providing training for officiating at the highest level? They can't find a couple dozen folks to train and officiate even regionally for NTs? At this point all that is really needed is coverage on the top 3-4 cards, at least.

They also are inherently changing the game itself by allowing course designs at NTs that far exceed the normal lengths of courses across the country.
In effect, they are creating a game that has more risks and rewards, but no boundaries when the players themselves are the referees of their own competition.

So, if they can't gather enough officials to make the game fair for all at the highest level, then the rules should be changed so that the players who are making calls against their opponents don't have to do so within the margin of error of a millimeter from 30 ft away.

Ok, I may or may not agree with the substance of the first three paragraphs. Consider this -- your question: "Why can't the PDGA find a couple dozen folks to train and officiate even regionally for NTs?" Who says they can't! Maybe they can. People often throw crit at the PDGA, when they forget that the PDGA is a self-governing member-driven organization, by and through our representatives. If the majority of membership wanted those officials at Worlds and NTs, I believe it would happen. But even so, with paid, trained, and standardized to the best of our abilities officials (circa other professional sports), you still have logistics issues. How many cards get an official and for how many rounds? All? Top 9? top 3 or 4? Open only? MPO & FPO? MPO FPO MPM ? What about FPM? MPG? Other divisions? For every round or only the 2nd half of the tournament? What scenario of depth of officials ensures that both Stokely's and Reading's semifinal card (lead and chase for MPM) have an official? And are we comfortable with the sport having a championship event officiated differently at the beginning and at the end? And on, and on, and on with logistics that WE (the membership) would leave the people at the office to figure out EVEN IF we had some kind of vote to get the PDGA to do it. So, I don't "blame" the executives at the PDGA office. If there is a blame (I say there is not any, but IF there is), it belongs to the membership.

On your last paragraph, where is the logical nexus? It does not logically follow, even accepting your premise that "OK the PDGA somehow assertively decided not to hire train prep and assign officials for Worlds or other NTs," that because of that reason rules should be changed specifically the "foot fault" rule which is different depending upon your card. The argument that changing the foot fault rule will lead to a better consistency is faulty in and of itself -- so the only way to make it consistent is to eliminate the rule all together. I think that's worse. But any new definition of the foot fault rule, still self-officiating, will have a similar level of inconsistency, protest, and divisiveness.

 

[rhatton1]

Out of curiosities sake does anyone know why the foot fault rule became one warning with a rethrow and then all subsequent infractions in the same round a penalty stroke and a rethrow? What was the logic behind this? Is it an attempt for speed of play by harshly "educating" the player? My biggest issue with the rule and the one I have had long before this debate was the openness of the rule to some pretty dubious abuse.

What would be wrong with just a rethrow? Why the need for penalty? Even just a rethrow could be abused but not as badly as 2 card mates potentially throwing out penalty strokes on their competitors (not saying this is what happened in this instance)

The rule just seems as it stands overly punitive for no real gain?

And please don't answer with "well the player just shouldn't footfault if they don't want the penalty" It's not a question I am asking.

 

[rhatton1]

On a side note

One could argue that the 30cm rule provides an advantage to those with smaller feet. The bigger your foot the harder (or less room for error) it is to hit the mark. Anybody out there with size 14s know what I'm getting at?

For example... A guy with large feet plants/releases and as his plant foot turns he bumps his mini just after release with his toe. IMO it would (without video evidence being legal) be tough to call a foot fault. Benefit of doubt goes to the player. Right?
But how many times would people call him on a foot fault anyways?

Sure you could say the guy with big feet should plant farther behind his mini, but if you where size 14s and you only have 30cms to work with...well...do the math

This is a good point and something that irks me with these shots - if he had pivoted as normal and as he probably expected to he would be well within the mark, both times though he seems to get stuck in the turf - this is somewhat to do with throwing the anny - his weight seems to get to the outstep more than it should - but also the ground. I would warrant that Scott felt he had planted in the exact right spot and in the same place he has for years and years but the lack of a pivot let him down. When you have been throwing that long you don't need to think about your foot placement on an xstep to the mini, it happens naturally, you are so intune with your stride length and body.

We are talking a call close to 30 cms, whether you believe it is in or out it is definitely close, had his size 14's pivoted as he would expect instead of getting stuck he could have planted 2' behind the lie and still been legal as the disc released (disc on a good drive pretty much moves with the pivot of the foot so releases when the foot is almost pointing down the line.)

This isn't saying it wasn't a footfault (although for me it does look to close to call, maybe Ken and Patrick Brown did have a better angle than the camera to see it) - it just feels overly punitive to get both a stroke and a rethrow for your foot getting stuck.

 

[coupe]

^What if the victim's family was allowed to be the judge and jury during a trial? That's basically what he's saying...

Sure they were peers, but not anymore since there's some investment in the situation.

Bull feathers.

EVERY player in a competition has an investment in the outcome, simply by virtue of the fact that they're competing in it, AND THE OBLIGATION to ensure that ALL competitors play by the rules.

To suggest that one's competitors can't be trusted to act with integrity when it comes to rule enforcement is to project one's underdeveloped sense of fair play, sportsmanship, and competitive integrity onto others.

#matt7.3-5 #thegoldenrule

 

[coupe]

Out of curiosities sake does anyone know why the foot fault rule became one warning with a rethrow and then all subsequent infractions in the same round a penalty stroke and a rethrow? What was the logic behind this?

Warning for the first violation (which did not require a second) in a round and penalty and rethrow for subsequent violations have been the rule since 1982, although a rethrow was not required except on successful fallen putts: see PDGA 1982 Rule Book

Requiring a second for the first violation, and rethrow on ALL stance violations except unsuccessful falling putts was added in 1990: see 803.03 Stance, D and E.

So the 2013 revision eliminating of the requirement for a second for the first stance violation call in a round is effectively a reversion to the 1990 rule.

While the PDGA and Rules Committee have not offered an official explanation for reverting to the 1990 rule in 2013, unofficially, it was noised that the change was made to address the widespread perception that players weren't bothering to watch for, much less call foot fault, "because no one was going to second it," even if one did call it.

 

[rhatton1]

Thanks Coupe, my question is more why penalty strokes are necessary rather than just rethrow of the shot - is this to stop players gaining an unfair advantage through intentionally foot faulting to throw a shot to gauge wind/distance (only thing i can think and it seems a bit farfetched- they may not get called)

 

[Mulligan]

Ok, I may or may not agree with the substance of the first three paragraphs. Consider this -- your question: "Why can't the PDGA find a couple dozen folks to train and officiate even regionally for NTs?" Who says they can't! Maybe they can. People often throw crit at the PDGA, when they forget that the PDGA is a self-governing member-driven organization, by and through our representatives. If the majority of membership wanted those officials at Worlds and NTs, I believe it would happen. But even so, with paid, trained, and standardized to the best of our abilities officials (circa other professional sports), you still have logistics issues. How many cards get an official and for how many rounds? All? Top 9? top 3 or 4? Open only? MPO & FPO? MPO FPO MPM ? What about FPM? MPG? Other divisions? For every round or only the 2nd half of the tournament? What scenario of depth of officials ensures that both Stokely's and Reading's semifinal card (lead and chase for MPM) have an official? And are we comfortable with the sport having a championship event officiated differently at the beginning and at the end? And on, and on, and on with logistics that WE (the membership) would leave the people at the office to figure out EVEN IF we had some kind of vote to get the PDGA to do it. So, I don't "blame" the executives at the PDGA office. If there is a blame (I say there is not any, but IF there is), it belongs to the membership.

On your last paragraph, where is the logical nexus? It does not logically follow, even accepting your premise that "OK the PDGA somehow assertively decided not to hire train prep and assign officials for Worlds or other NTs," that because of that reason rules should be changed specifically the "foot fault" rule which is different depending upon your card. The argument that changing the foot fault rule will lead to a better consistency is faulty in and of itself -- so the only way to make it consistent is to eliminate the rule all together. I think that's worse. But any new definition of the foot fault rule, still self-officiating, will have a similar level of inconsistency, protest, and divisiveness.

To your first paragraph, fair enough... but isn't the issue, that the rules aren't able to be followed consistently, the conversation we're having right now? So, just cause the discussion is happening in real time doesn't mean it isn't valid, or even that blame needs to reside with anyone specifically, but it does maybe indicate that its time for the sport to evolve. And I do think its still a big part of the role of the organization that accepts fees for managing the sport to lead the evaluation of the needs/wants of its members. If the goal is to further professionalize the sport that just can't happen without a decision for officiating. How that hasn't been a major push by the PDGA by now, in 2015, seems crazy to me. I specialize in nonprofit management myself, and in relation to the membership leading the charge, you just can't expect the tail to wag the dog and have good results.

Secondly, I'm not arguing to remove the foot fault rule altogether, but advocating for either a simplification (i.e stand and deliver or a single step after tee shot for instance) and/or actual officiating at the NT level. What capacity or how deep that officiating goes, or if there is a need for rule simplification, is up to the PDGA to figure out, with the help of their membership.

I will reiterate that I do think the PDGA has been selectively sitting on their hands on certain key issues like this, while also actively making other decisions that really change the nature of the game with course design at NTs, both of which are kind of irresponsible to the sport.

It might be cool to see super long throws for some spectators, but is that really the nature of the sport? We suspend the rules once a year and have a home run derby cause its fun to watch the best hitters crush, but we don't change the ballpark to see a bunch of extra homers in the world series. If the focus of the PDGA is on that kind of spectacle at the worlds, without first fixing the very real issue of self policing of the rules by competitors than I'd say they have their priorities out of whack.

 

[Mulligan]

Bull feathers.

EVERY player in a competition has an investment in the outcome, simply by virtue of the fact that they're competing in it, AND THE OBLIGATION to ensure that ALL competitors play by the rules.

To suggest that one's competitors can't be trusted to act with integrity when it comes to rule enforcement is to project one's underdeveloped sense of fair play, sportsmanship, and competitive integrity onto others.

#matt7.3-5 #thegoldenrule

This is a totally unrealistic PollyAnna-ish statement.
Refer to any major sports history, for reference.
The Tour de France immediately comes to mind, for one.

 

[HotPinkBeast]

30 pages?!

really?!

yep 30 pages.

now back to PP OP thread...

 

[coupe]

Thanks Coupe, my question is more why penalty strokes are necessary rather than just rethrow of the shot - is this to stop players gaining an unfair advantage through intentionally foot faulting to throw a shot to gauge wind/distance (only thing i can think and it seems a bit farfetched- they may not get called)

It's probably more a case of making the penalty for a violation severe enough that players will make a conscious effort not to foot fault.

Of course, that only works if players actually call foot faults.

 

[scarpfish]

30 pages?!

really?!

yep 30 pages.

Only for people who don't know they can change their display settings to 20, 30 or 40 posts per page. Some folks are probably still on page 8.

 

[discgman]

I was thinking about this, what if, say, a foot fault is called on a fair way run up, then make the rule that once you have been called on said foot fault you must stand and deliver. If you foot fault on the stand a deliver and still foot fault you deserve a penalty.

 

[Hampstead]

Only for people who don't know they can change their display settings to 20, 30 or 40 posts per page. Some folks are probably still on page 8.

I blocked most everybody in this discussion. So far there are only 12 posts.