Disc lands on tee pad of another card/hole?

[Pwingles]

In this case it would be the thrown disc. You are not moving the lie the player is throwing from - as in what happens in with "intentional" interference. You are only replacing it. I do not take the "other than" as the only acceptable reasons to touch a disc and is simply a few examples of non-malice intention, and the QA is example of Establishing Position which is not listed either. The lie is never technically moved only touched.

OMG dude, its simple, there is no reason for you to move it (other than to identify the thrower), and then put it back. It gives you the scenario in which you can move it, the scenarios where you cant are literally anything else.

 

[RomServo]

I might be relatively new to the sport, but if someones disc lands anywhere near me at all, you couldnt even pay me to touch it. Conversely, i would hope they would do the same for me.

 

[sidewinder22]

OMG dude, its simple, there is no reason for you to move it (other than to identify the thrower), and then put it back. It gives you the scenario in which you can move it, the scenarios where you cant are literally anything else.

3.2 Pace of Play
All competitors shall play without undue delay and will make every effort to keep up with the group in front of them. Players are required to quickly move from the completion of one hole to the tee area of the next hole. Also, while advancing down the fairway, the player shall not unduly delay play by his or her actions.

801.01 Application of the Rules
These rules have been designed to promote fair play for all disc golfers. In using these rules, players shall apply the rule that most directly addresses the situation at hand. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness.

If you replaced the disc part C. should be the most applicable rule. I interpret the intentional interference as meaning you only get the penalty if you intentionally don't put it back/replace it.

 

[JC17393]

In this case it would be the thrown disc. You are not moving the lie the player is throwing from - as in what happens in with "intentional" interference. You are only replacing it. I do not take the "other than" as the only acceptable reasons to touch a disc and is simply a few examples of non-malice intention, and the QA is example of Establishing Position which is not listed either. The lie is never technically moved only touched.

No, you only get the penalty if you intentionally don't put it back/replace it.

The rule has nothing to do with the lie. Take "lie" right out of the equation. This only has to do with moving the disc itself.

You can't replace the disc until it is moved first. You can't intentionally move the disc without penalty unless you do so in an effort to identify it. It doesn't matter if you intend to replace the disc or not. The act of moving the disc at all is what incurs the penalty.

At this point either you are being intentionally obtuse or you are really thick to not understand what multiple people are trying to explain.

 

[Pwingles]

If you replaced the disc part C. should be the most applicable rule. I interpret the intentional interference as meaning you only get the penalty if you intentionally don't put it back/replace it.

right, this is the crux of the issue... you are interpreting something wrongly

 

[sidewinder22]

The rule has nothing to do with the lie. Take "lie" right out of the equation. This only has to do with moving the disc itself.

Mini markers are included in the wording which would infer this rule is about the lie rather than the disc.

Marker (or Marker Disc)
The mini marker disc or the thrown disc at rest, either of which may be used to indicate the lie from which the next throw is to be made.

You can't replace the disc until it is moved first. You can't intentionally move the disc without penalty unless you do so in an effort to identify it. It doesn't matter if you intend to replace the disc or not. The act of moving the disc at all is what incurs the penalty.

Part C deals with a moved disc, simple interference. Part D.2 deals with an intentionally interfered or moved lie.

At this point either you are being intentionally obtuse or you are really thick to not understand what multiple people are trying to explain.

I understand fully what you are arguing, I just don't agree with the application as the way the rule is worded or intended. Your argument loses substance when you start attacking someone personally rather than their argument.

 

[sidewinder22]

right, this is the crux of the issue... you are interpreting something wrongly

2. Moving a thrown disc or mini marker disc (other than in the process of identification, retrieval, or marking);

The temporary moving/replacing could be considered as an extension of the "other than" process of marking(the lie).

 

[sidewinder22]

See:

802.03 Marking The Lie

F. A marker disc that is moved prior to the ensuing throw shall be replaced to its original position to mark the approximate lie.

 

[sidewinder22]

Marking it would be the prerogative of the thrower, not you or any other player.

Not true. Read more closely.

D. A player who intentionally interferes with another player's disc in any of the following ways shall receive two penalty throws:

2. Moving a thrown disc or mini marker disc (other than in the process of identification, retrieval, or marking)

 

[araytx]

The lie is not intentionally moved. It is simply replaced as per part C.

In this case it would be the thrown disc. You are not moving the lie the player is throwing from - as in what happens in with "intentional" interference. You are only replacing it. I do not take the "other than" as the only acceptable reasons to touch a disc and is simply a few examples of non-malice intention, and the QA is example of Establishing Position which is not listed either. The lie is never technically moved only touched.

Mini markers are included in the wording which would infer this rule is about the lie rather than the disc.




Part C deals with a moved disc, simple interference. Part D.2 deals with an intentionally interfered or moved lie.


I understand fully what you are arguing, I just don't agree with the application as the way the rule is worded or intended. Your argument loses substance when you start attacking someone personally rather than their argument.

The Lie is not in the rule. Sidewinder, please get that. Lie, thrown disc, and marker disc are three different things.

Not true. Read more closely.

D. A player who intentionally interferes with another player's disc in any of the following ways shall receive two penalty throws:

2. Moving a thrown disc or mini marker disc (other than in the process of identification, retrieval, or marking)

Again, you read things into the interpretation to suit your position that are not really there. This rule is not in reference to and does not mean he gets an exception "if he marks another player's disc" (like you're trying to stretch this to mean). It means he gets an exception if he moves the thrown disc or mini marker disc in the process of marking HIS OWN disc, e.g., the old "making minis" joke. That's the only one he has privilege to mark without permission.

 

[sidewinder22]

The Lie is not in the rule. Sidewinder, please get that. Lie, thrown disc, and marker disc are three different things.

A "thrown disc or mini marker" as stated in verbatim in the rule - are "markers" what actually "mark the lie" as per the definition of terms.

Again, you read things into the interpretation to suit your position that are not really there. This rule is not in reference to and does not mean he gets an exception "if he marks another player's disc" (like you're trying to stretch this to mean). It means he gets an exception if he moves the thrown disc or mini marker disc in the process of marking HIS OWN disc, e.g., the old "making minis" joke. That's the only one he has privilege to mark without permission.

By your interpretation I suppose another player is not allowed to ID or retrieve another person's disc either then even though they are listed as "other than" exceptions.

You can request another player to mark their lie, if it is not reasonable to ask permission as given in this situation, then using common sense, the fairness rule 801.01A is applied and by logical extension of the closest rule, the teeing group can "mark" the disc's location in some way from the sides of the tee, then after teeing replace the disc/lie. So there is no interference - no penalty as it's in the "process of marking".

 

[krupicka]

Let's throw out another scenario to see how to proceed. Two fairways running parallel North South. Thrown discs from both directions land partially top of each other (North bound disc is slightly more north than the southbound disc). Marking one or both discs results in the marker or mini of the other in the lie. What do you do?

 

[sidewinder22]

Let's throw out another scenario to see how to proceed. Two fairways running parallel North South. Thrown discs from both directions land partially top of each other (North bound disc is slightly more north than the southbound disc). Marking one or both discs results in the marker or mini of the other in the lie. What do you do?

Assuming for some that you wanted to mark the lie which is not necessary, the higher hole should play first(assuming they are both already there or could defer to the other player for speed of play) and either player could request the other player to remove their disc, otherwise I think the same outcome from my previous disc on tee pad situation would be applicable if the other player is not present.

 

[Steve West]

What about another player's disc that lands in the wrong basket for them, which is the basket you want to putt into?

 

[sidewinder22]

What about another player's disc that lands in the wrong basket for them, which is the basket you want to putt into?

If you want to hole out, you would putt on your basket.

 

[araytx]

A "thrown disc or mini marker" as stated in verbatim in the rule - are "markers" what actually "mark the lie" as per the definition of terms.

True. But that doesn't change anything I stated. "The lie," "the thrown disc," and the "mini marker disc" remain three different things.

By your interpretation I suppose another player is not allowed to ID or retrieve another person's disc either then even though they are listed as "other than" exceptions.

You can request another player to mark their lie, if it is not reasonable to ask permission as given in this situation, then using common sense, the fairness rule 801.01A is applied and by logical extension of the closest rule, the teeing group can "mark" the disc's location in some way from the sides of the tee, then after teeing replace the disc/lie. So there is no interference - no penalty as it's in the "process of marking".

"By my interpretation"-- Ha! Not a chance. Right now you are becoming the king of extrapolation. No reason to continue the unnecessary extrapolations, including to the Rule of Fairness, when the rule exists to cover this situation. I'm going to try again:

Your quote of the rule 804.03D

Not true. Read more closely.

D. A player who intentionally interferes with another player's disc in any of the following ways shall receive two penalty throws:

2. Moving a thrown disc or mini marker disc (other than in the process of identification, retrieval, or marking)

Your context:

Per post #69, you were asserting that the exception in 804.03D (in the "other than" clause) gives a player the right to mark and move another player's disc without penalty.

My interpretation:
Contrary to what you stated:
1) a player may retrieve another player's disc for him (assuming approval, e.g., "Can you grab my disc out of that tree while you're up there?")

2) a player may look at a disc to ID whose disc it is, particularly applicable when players have thrown the same or similar discs (e.g., "...we both threw yellow Champ Destroyers with a blue stamp, I need to check to see if this is mine.")

3) 804.03D itself, however, DOES NOT, authorize, as you implied, marking another player's disc as an exception to the penalty in that section. The relevant exception (not all exceptions, just the one we're talking about here) in that section is that a player IS penalized EXCEPT WHEN he moves another player's disc in order to mark his own disc. For example our two thrown disc discs landed on top of one another (doesn't matter if we're on the same hole or not), in a fashion such that it is physically impossible to mark my disc with a mini marker and remove it without disturbing the other player's disc. THEN I get an exception to the automatic penalty for interference. That's all I am saying ... not that other stuff you added in.

 

[JeremyKShort]

I just ran out of will to argue this one. I can only yell at a wall for so long.

Wgile I think the letter of the law says you can't move it, I'd be ok with someone moving one off of a tee because it's the tee. Is it something that needs to be addressed in the rules? It's an oddball enough thing that I don't think it happens enough to be an issue.

 

[sidewinder22]

True. But that doesn't change anything I stated. "The lie," "the thrown disc," and the "mini marker disc" remain three different things.

If there was a comma between "a thrown disc, or (a) mini marker disc" like you wrote out, I might agree with you, however that is not how the rule is written. "A thrown disc or mini marker disc" as written in the rule and definition are the same exact thing which = indicate the lie as markers....

Marker (or Marker Disc)
The mini marker disc or the thrown disc at rest, either of which may be used to indicate the lie from which the next throw is to be made.

"By my interpretation"-- Ha! Not a chance. Right now you are becoming the king of extrapolation. No reason to continue the unnecessary extrapolations, including to the Rule of Fairness, when the rule exists to cover this situation. I'm going to try again:

Per post #69, you were asserting that the exception in 804.03D (in the "other than" clause) gives a player the right to mark and move another player's disc without penalty.

My interpretation:
Contrary to what you stated:
1) a player may retrieve another player's disc for him (assuming approval, e.g., "Can you grab my disc out of that tree while you're up there?")

So if you find someone's lost or OB disc, then you are not allowed to retrieve it without their approval and should receive a 2 stroke penalty?

2) a player may look at a disc to ID whose disc it is, particularly applicable when players have thrown the same or similar discs (e.g., "...we both threw yellow Champ Destroyers with a blue stamp, I need to check to see if this is mine.")

Yes it is particularly applicable in that situation, and there are other situations as well.

3) 804.03D itself, however, DOES NOT, authorize, as you implied, marking another player's disc as an exception to the penalty in that section. The relevant exception (not all exceptions, just the one we're talking about here) in that section is that a player IS penalized EXCEPT WHEN he moves another player's disc in order to mark his own disc. That's all I am saying ... not that other stuff you added in.

Now you are adding words to the rule that are simply not there. And what if it was her own disc? Sorry ladies you all get 2 stroke penalty for not marking his own disc, unless you are a tranny maybe. Nowhere in the rule book does it state that only you can mark your own lie. There are situations like the one in the OP that would authorize you(group) to mark another player's disc.

 

[sidewinder22]

For example our two thrown disc discs landed on top of one another (doesn't matter if we're on the same hole or not), in a fashion such that it is physically impossible to mark my disc with a mini marker and remove it without disturbing the other player's disc. THEN I get an exception to the automatic penalty for interference. That's all I am saying ... not that other stuff you added in.

You can not intentionally move/interfere with another players disc to mark yours. If you accidentally moved their disc in the process of marking your lie, then that is entirely different than intentional interference. Accidental is not intentional or conscious.

If you intentionally interfere with another player's disc, then you should get a 2 stroke penalty whether you are marking your disc or not, and you should not be exempt from it! :wall:

 

[sidewinder22]

Marking any lie is not interference or intentional interference, whether it is your own lie or another player's lie. It can not be "interference" if the disc intentionally ends up in the right lie, it never technically moved. You might call a courtesy violation if someone marks your lie without your permission.

Moving any lie intentionally is intentional interference whether you are ID'ing, retrieving, or marking. ie you ID someone's disc and then move it intentionally to another lie - you would not be exempt from a 2 stroke penalty because you were ID'ing the disc. Or you are marking your disc that is under another player's disc, and you moved their disc without marking it, or you moved their lie intentionally - you would not be exempt from a 2 stroke penalty because you were marking your own lie.