Pet Peeve: foot fault run ups

[Cgkdisc]

Ricky or any player can call a suspect throw they just made a Practice Throw and throw again. Of course, they would have to count the practice throw. That's why it may not have been wise to have official warnings in our rules for stance violations before a penalty is invoked on the second occurrence. Perhaps for a stance violation called by the thrower, it should be a re-throw and count the bad throw. If others in the group call it, either another player has to second it, or for that matter, the thrower could agree.

 

[JC17393]

One advantage golf has in this aspect is there's no run up and unless there's a lost ball, they're always playing the same ball exactly from the spot it came to rest.. so there's essentially no judgement or anything to measure.

Given that most existing courses weren't designed with S&D in mind, I don't think I'd be a fan of that rules change.

Bottom line: if we don't police our selves, we sacrifice the integrity of our sport.

S&D wouldn't solve the issue presented by this incident with Wysocki at Worlds. It was on a putt. It was a falling putt within the 10-meter circle. No run-up involved at all. It wasn't a nit-picky, only really perceptible on video violation. It was a blatant (albeit unintentional) falling putt that the player himself acknowledged but was powerless to do anything about even if he wants to.

This isn't a rules issue, it's an enforcement issue, and it's always been an enforcement issue. Too many gutless and/or lazy players who don't want to be "that" guy and call a violation when it happens. It's one thing when it's a local C-tier on the bottom card of MA2 or something, and people can shrug it off as "no big deal". It's quite another when you're talking about the lead card at one of, if not the most prestigious tournament in the world. There really is no room for "if this were a 'serious' tournament, I'd call it" kinds of arguments.

 

[BrotherDave]

A rule that can't be enforced reliably isn't a good rule. It's like a mando put up for safety purposes.

 

[JC17393]

A rule that can't be enforced reliably isn't a good rule. It's like a mando put up for safety purposes.

I disagree.

While there can certainly be poorly written rules, it doesn't matter how they're written if no one is willing to enforce them in the first place. In the case that started this thread, the rule is perfectly fine. It is the players that are the problem.

 

[Steve West]

I disagree.

While there can certainly be poorly written rules, it doesn't matter how they're written if no one is willing to enforce them in the first place. In the case that started this thread, the rule is perfectly fine. It is the players that are the problem.

I think rules can be written in ways that make them more or less likely to be enforced. A rule where there is no real penalty, the player can't call it, and calling it makes a player re-throw is probably the least likely.

Would anyone have called it if it didn't require a re-throw? Seems more likely.

Would anyone have called it (or didn't dare not call it on camera) if it cost Ricky a penalty? Seems more likely.

Would Ricky have called it if he could? Seems more likely.

 

[Ye Olde Am]

I disagree.

While there can certainly be poorly written rules, it doesn't matter how they're written if no one is willing to enforce them in the first place. In the case that started this thread, the rule is perfectly fine. It is the players that are the problem.

I'm not sure there's clearly a problem with the players, at least with the specific situation under discussion.

Why don't players don't make a call when there's an obvious violation? My guess is that they don't think the call would be fair to the offending player. It's similar to "Jury Nullification."

Jury nullification occurs when jurors choose not to convict a defendant they believe to be guilty of the offense charged, usually because they conclude that the law in question is unjust or the punishment is excessive.

Or, you could ascribe to the conspiracy theory that all four players share the same sponsor.

Or, you could say the other players didn't see the offence (it seems to be proper etiquette for players look in another direction when someone is putting), and, because the rules don't permit a player to call a stance violation on their own throw, there was no call to be made.

The big question is whether the players who did not make the call should be punished. And if so, then what their punishment should be (i.e. what existing rule should/could be applied).

 

[JC17393]

Or, you could say the other players didn't see the offence (it seems to be proper etiquette for players look in another direction when someone is putting), and, because the rules don't permit a player to call a stance violation on their own throw, there was no call to be made.

Actually, it's the total opposite. Looking away during putts is poor etiquette since the rules compel players to watch each other's throws.

801.04 Courtesy
B. Players should watch the other members of their group throw in order to aid in locating errant throws and to ensure compliance with the rules.​

The whole "turn your back on the putter" thing is primarily a result of players retrieving their own made putts, walking away from the target to clear the area then pausing in mid-stride so as to not be moving when the player throws. It has nothing to do with etiquette (other than the attempt to not create a distraction for the thrower).

This points out the other reason I find there is less fault with the rules as written and more fault with the players themselves...many players don't know the rules, or at least the correct rules. Can the rules be blamed for poor enforcement if the players don't know the rules in the first place?

After 20 years of playing, I can say that 99% of the lack of enforcement I've encountered comes down to two things: lack of knowledge and lack of integrity/guts/interest in making calls. Either they don't know the rule to enforce it or they don't want to be the jerk/dick/nazi who makes the call.

 

[DG_player]

I think rules can be written in ways that make them more or less likely to be enforced. A rule where there is no real penalty, the player can't call it, and calling it makes a player re-throw is probably the least likely.

Would anyone have called it if it didn't require a re-throw? Seems more likely.

Would anyone have called it (or didn't dare not call it on camera) if it cost Ricky a penalty? Seems more likely.

Would Ricky have called it if he could? Seems more likely.

Does anyone know the reason why the PDGA decided the first fault isn't a penalty?

It seems odd to me that such a cardinal rule of the game would have a warning for the first offense. I can't think of any other sport that gives a warning for serious rule violations.

 

[DG_player]

After 20 years of playing, I can say that 99% of the lack of enforcement I've encountered comes down to two things: lack of knowledge and lack of integrity/guts/interest in making calls. Either they don't know the rule to enforce it or they don't want to be the jerk/dick/nazi who makes the call.

This would partially be solved if you could call yourself for the fault. I think most people would have the integrity to call themselves if they knew that they had committed a foot fault. If most people called themselves, than there would be a lot less instances where you're put in the awkward situation of having to be the jerk who calls it on someone else.

 

[slowplastic]

This would partially be solved if you could call yourself for the fault. I think most people would have the integrity to call themselves if they knew that they had committed a foot fault. If most people called themselves, than there would be a lot less instances where you're put in the awkward situation of having to be the jerk who calls it on someone else.

If you make a bad put and know it, you can "fall" forward. Whoops I foot faulted! Get a second chance.

Super dirty, but I'm sure there's lots of people who would be tempted.

 

[JC17393]

If you make a bad put and know it, you can "fall" forward. Whoops I foot faulted! Get a second chance.

Super dirty, but I'm sure there's lots of people who would be tempted.

Players were able to call their own violations for years and it was never really an issue. Well, people pretended it was an issue and the rule was changed to what it is now, but actual instances of players being "dirty" and abusing the rule never happened. The biggest reason was that self-calls still required a second from someone else in the group in order to stand. So those "whoops, I committed a falling putt" fake calls, if they were ever attempted, would be halted in their tracks when no one seconded them. No second, no violation, no "free" re-throw.

The simpler solution (then and now) would be to simply eliminate the warning and go right to a penalty for the first violation. Self-calls would have to be honest because who's going to fraud their way into a penalty and no one would be hesitant to call a fault on someone else because it might give them a "free mulligan".

 

[DG_player]

The simpler solution (then and now) would be to simply eliminate the warning and go right to a penalty for the first violation. Self-calls would have to be honest because who's going to fraud their way into a penalty and no one would be hesitant to call a fault on someone else because it might give them a "free mulligan".

It definitely puts you in a difficult position with the first fault being a warning. If you hesitate to immediately call it, you're left in a weird position: Either you appear to be a dick because you waited to call it after you saw they made a good shot, or you end up giving them a free re-throw for a bad shot (essentially turning a rules violation into a reward, which is really weird if you think about it).

It's no surprise that a lot of calls are not made.

 

[JoakimBL]

I've been saying this since 2013.
Without having seen the incident (the youtube link doesn't work for me?) Ricky would have been in his right to issue courtesy violations to the other players in the group.

 

[_MTL_]

Ricky or any player can call a suspect throw they just made a Practice Throw and throw again. Of course, they would have to count the practice throw.

I disagree with this 100%.

If a player makes a throw and choose to re-throw, that's optional re-throw with penalty.

I don't see any scenario where declaring a throw a practice throw would be allowed. It completely contradicts the optional re-throw rethrow and opens up pandora's box of "crap I screwed up - Practice throw!"

 

[JoakimBL]

Agree with MTL. If a throw is made from the lie, it's a throw, not a practice throw.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I disagree with this 100%.

If a player makes a throw and choose to re-throw, that's optional re-throw with penalty.

I don't see any scenario where declaring a throw a practice throw would be allowed. It completely contradicts the optional re-throw rethrow and opens up pandora's box of "crap I screwed up - Practice throw!"

Cite why a player cannot call a "practice throw" when they know they had a stance violation? They are accepting a 1-throw penalty for not throwing from their lie properly. It's not a mulligan. It's a penalty.

 

[_MTL_]

Cite why a player cannot call a "practice throw" when they know they had a stance violation? They are accepting a 1-throw penalty for not throwing from their lie properly. It's not a mulligan. It's a penalty.

BEcause the scenario is already covered in:

http://www.pdga.com/rules/official-...ie/80302-optional-relief-and-optional-rethrow

 

[Cgkdisc]

BEcause the scenario is already covered in:

http://www.pdga.com/rules/official-...ie/80302-optional-relief-and-optional-rethrow

That's a call the player can make after a properly made throw. A practice throw is called when a throw was not properly executed. Are you going to argue that a player is getting some benefit by tacking 1 throw on their score while still at the same lie?

 

[_MTL_]

That's a call the player can make after a properly made throw. A practice throw is called when a throw was not properly executed.

Cite me where the A practice throw is only for stance issues, etc and that the foot fault and other stance rules don't have how to handle them.

I've literally never heard anyone ever make this argument. Ever.

 

[krupicka]

Cite why a player cannot call a "practice throw" when they know they had a stance violation? They are accepting a 1-throw penalty for not throwing from their lie properly. It's not a mulligan. It's a penalty.

Practice Throw
A throw of more than two meters during a competitive round that
does not change the lie. Provisional throws, misplayed throws,
and stance violations are not practice throws.