I was watching the first round, front 9 of the "winter warm up" by GK productions yesterday and watched this scenario unfold:
There is an area of out of bounds past the basket, but this area is downhill from the tee and and basket, thus the players cannot see shortly distant to the basket. The oob area is about 10 feet of cement (drainage area) and then transitions back to grass and inbounds.
The drive goes past the basket, down hill, makes contact with the out of bounds, skips in bounds on the back side of the out of bounds area, and then slides back down into our of bounds.
Per my understanding of the rules, with perfect information the disc is taken to the last place it was inbounds, and thus in the above scenario would be on the backside of the outofbounds (so thus the next throw would have to go over oob to get to the basket). However, since I'm guessing the card thought it was more likely that the disc instead went directly oob and never made it to the other side of the oob territory (again, they could not possibly see it), the next throw was taken on the front side of oob, much closer to the basket and able to make a putt.
The card, with the information they knew, most certainly made the correct call. However, if perfect information is known, it was the incorrect call. That information was seen, since it was captured on video.
The rules q&a clearly states video and pictures cannot be used for ruling. However, there is no distinction made about, for example, spectators, other cards, etc citing a rule violation or in the above scenario, correcting the card's decision since they saw the entirety of the play.
Thus the questions: 1) who can cite rules infarctions and/or corrections, and 2) who should do so?
IMHO, since perfect information is variable based on card status, spectators, etc, only the card should be able to comment. However an argument can be made to have a spectator or the videographer point out what indeed happened and allow the card to come to a consensus thereafter.
There is an area of out of bounds past the basket, but this area is downhill from the tee and and basket, thus the players cannot see shortly distant to the basket. The oob area is about 10 feet of cement (drainage area) and then transitions back to grass and inbounds.
The drive goes past the basket, down hill, makes contact with the out of bounds, skips in bounds on the back side of the out of bounds area, and then slides back down into our of bounds.
Per my understanding of the rules, with perfect information the disc is taken to the last place it was inbounds, and thus in the above scenario would be on the backside of the outofbounds (so thus the next throw would have to go over oob to get to the basket). However, since I'm guessing the card thought it was more likely that the disc instead went directly oob and never made it to the other side of the oob territory (again, they could not possibly see it), the next throw was taken on the front side of oob, much closer to the basket and able to make a putt.
The card, with the information they knew, most certainly made the correct call. However, if perfect information is known, it was the incorrect call. That information was seen, since it was captured on video.
The rules q&a clearly states video and pictures cannot be used for ruling. However, there is no distinction made about, for example, spectators, other cards, etc citing a rule violation or in the above scenario, correcting the card's decision since they saw the entirety of the play.
Thus the questions: 1) who can cite rules infarctions and/or corrections, and 2) who should do so?
IMHO, since perfect information is variable based on card status, spectators, etc, only the card should be able to comment. However an argument can be made to have a spectator or the videographer point out what indeed happened and allow the card to come to a consensus thereafter.
