I really hate to bring this up yet again...

[The Hammer]

I'm sure if you practice it enough you can get it to work...

Why would he practice something that he know is illegal? That seems like a massive waste of time.

 

[heartman]

grass != ground

 

[tbird888]

If a blade of grass can spell the difference between safe and out of bounds, how is it not part of the ground?

 

[burdphil]

Why would he practice something that he know is illegal? That seems like a massive waste of time.

You can see his front foot sinks down considerably from the first frame to the second. Therefore, unless it is quicksand or soft mud, his foot isn't contacting the ground in the first frame.

As long as my foot is still "sinking down", it can't be called, right? To your point, no one is going to be able to definitively determine that in the matter of half a second. At 6'8" and with very long legs, I figure I can get at least a good 5' closer on every putt outside the circle. I am absolutely going to start practicing this...

 

[JC17393]

If a blade of grass can spell the difference between safe and out of bounds, how is it not part of the ground?

A blade of grass shouldn't ever be the difference between safe and OB. But that's a different discussion.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It doesn't matter what it is in reality, it's what it looks like in real time to the other players. If another player wishes to call the fault, regardless of the reality or video proof, Paul does not have any recourse. There is no benefit of the doubt to the player on this call. Benefit of the doubt comes into play when the group is split on a call say 2-2. But a foot fault call specifically is the call/vote of one other player in the group with no benefit option.

 

[MacDaddy]

...but someone should probably start calling this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnCpv-ty1ZI&feature=player_detailpage#t=360

I understand the concept of the step putt, but it looks like his front foot is clearly on the ground before he releases the disc.

I'd call that on him.

 

[Mocheez]

This reminds me of travelling in the NBA... Refs became lackadaisical in calling travelling violations. After awhile, players were taking three or four steps and blatantly carrying the ball.

http://www.newsweek.com/nbas-extra-step-what-happened-traveling-254154

 

[The Hammer]

If a blade of grass can spell the difference between safe and out of bounds, how is it not part of the ground?

I guess a tree would be part of the ground too. No more 2 meter penalties!!

 

[brutalbrutus]

A blade of grass shouldn't ever be the difference between safe and OB. But that's a different discussion.

Last year at a tourney they had spray painted OB lines. On one particular shot a guy on my card landed right up against one of these lines. There was one blade of grass with paint on it hanging out over the disc but the disc was beyond the line.....

 

[The Hammer]

As long as my foot is still "sinking down", it can't be called, right? To your point, no one is going to be able to definitively determine that in the matter of half a second. At 6'8" and with very long legs, I figure I can get at least a good 5' closer on every putt outside the circle. I am absolutely going to start practicing this...

Let me know how it goes. Especially in regards to the results you get when your foot contacts the ground prior to release vs. when it doesn't. You'll see what I'm talking about when you try it.

 

[orion487]

So, you think Uli is spending hours practicing something he knows is illegal, banking on the fact that his card won't likely call something that's close? And if that's your motivation for throwing a similar step-putt, that's on you, not Uli.

Besides, you're glossing over the argument that hitting the ground would lose all power. Until you can disprove that (and I encourage you to set up your own camera and try), you really have no argument. I'll take physics over circumstantial evidence any day.

 

[JC17393]

Last year at a tourney they had spray painted OB lines. On one particular shot a guy on my card landed right up against one of these lines. There was one blade of grass with paint on it hanging out over the disc but the disc was beyond the line.....

If the disc was beyond the line, what difference did the blade of grass make? The line is the line.

You don't make it clear, but was the disc beyond the line to the in-bounds side or the out-of-bounds side? If it's beyond the line to the OB side, it's OB. A blade of grass isn't going to save it.

 

[brutalbrutus]

It was OB side, and during the player meeting the TD said to give the benefit to the player, so we ruled it in bounds. The grass had paint on it, and the OB was defined by the painted line, so technically wouldn't the one blade of grass still be part of the line? I was just trying to say that one blade of grass can define OB. Whether the TD and us in the group were wrong is a different matter.....

 

[JC17393]

It was OB side, and during the player meeting the TD said to give the benefit to the player, so we ruled it in bounds. The grass had paint on it, and the OB was defined by the painted line, so technically the one blade of grass is still part of the line. I was just trying to say that one blade of grass can define OB. Whether the TD and us in the group were wrong is a different matter.....

The OB line itself is OB, so if you called the disc in-bounds because the blade of grass, as part of the line, was touching the disc, it's still OB.

Even if the blade of grass was growing from the in-bounds side of the line, it still wouldn't matter because the line is the line and it doesn't bend or disappear for a blade of grass.

 

[Mocheez]

So, you think Uli is spending hours practicing something he knows is illegal, banking on the fact that his card won't likely call something that's close? And if that's your motivation for throwing a similar step-putt, that's on you, not Uli.

Besides, you're glossing over the argument that hitting the ground would lose all power. Until you can disprove that (and I encourage you to set up your own camera and try), you really have no argument. I'll take physics over circumstantial evidence any day.

He may not be shifting his weight onto the front foot, but it looks pretty obvious that his foot is at minimum touching the grass (half his shoe is covered up in the second frame).

The amount of momentum generated by falling forward that extra tiny bit makes a huge difference. Try this at home... throw a putt with your front foot falling forward but well above the ground and then throw a second putt with the foot falling forward into the grass but not firmly planted. You will see a noticeable difference in velocity between the two.

 

[burdphil]

Besides, you're glossing over the argument that hitting the ground would lose all power. Until you can disprove that (and I encourage you to set up your own camera and try), you really have no argument. I'll take physics over circumstantial evidence any day.

I can disprove it by referring you to the video link that I posted in the OP where Paul flips his putter forward after stepping his left foot on the ground.

Ulibarri doesn't foot fault every time on his step putt... here's an example where his foot is clearly off the ground during the release...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnCpv-ty1ZI&feature=player_detailpage#t=629

That first example, however, was a fault, and I'm surprised no one else called it.

 

[bradharris]

That first example, however, was a fault,

No it wasn't. Because...

no one else called it.

 

[burdphil]

No it wasn't. Because... (no one else called it)

Well, that's exactly right, and that's why I'm going to start doing it.

 

[Streets]