Obstacles and Relief Rule

[keith]

During our Safari round yesterday at Sanders Ferry, my group encountered a rules issue that came into play. I made a throw over water that ended up landing behind a wheel of a truck that was parked (legally) in the parking area (this is hole #14). My next throw was to the basket at 15 (Safari golf remember). Since the truck was hindering both my stance and run-up, I implemented rule 803.05 (B). Since I could not move the truck, I relocated my marker to the nearest lie, which was not any closer to the hole, and was in the line of play. Since I have difficulty with the metric system, I stated that I could move my marker back up to 15 meters. Now, the rule only allows for 5 meters. But in my simple mind.... I was getting meters and feet confused (which happens often). 5 meters is 16 feet 5 inches. I was way within that distance when I remarked my lie. But... I confess that I should had stated 5 meters instead of 15 meters. I apologize for my senior moment.

This is actually a very interesting rule and one that could be used more often that you realize. The list of objects that are deemed as "Casual Obstacles to a stance" are as follows: casual water, loose leaves or debris, broken branches no longer connected to a tree, motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals,player's equipment, people, or any item designated by the director before the round. The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle. If it is impractical to move the object, then the player can move back up to 5 meters (16' 5").

Curious to hear what you all think.

[Ron Pittman]

I think you are right. The rules seem to require you to move the branches that bother you.

I think that the 2011 rules revision that added the the phrase "broken branches no longer connected to a tree" has opened up a can of worms.

I think that this rule does not specify how big is too big (and thereby part of the course).

I think since this rule does not specify as to;
1. branches that seem to interfere with your stance
2. branches that seem to interfere with your runup
3. branches that seem to interfere with your follow thru
So, it seems that you can move whatever "bothers" you.

I think that the basic premise of playing your disc from where it lies (good or bad) can easily be violated by a loose interpretation of this rule.

I think that the rules have now linked "broken branches no longer connected to a tree" to the words --- "The player must first attempt to move the obstacle". We all have seen players (sometimes with help from other players) move some very large "limbs", brush piles, fallen trunks, etc.

I think that the wording and the application of this rule is in conflict with:
A. The description of the game in the Rules Introduction.
"Disc golf courses are normally laid out among wooded areas with diverse terrain to provide natural obstacles to the flight of the disc. These natural obstacles are very much part of the game and must not be altered in any way to decrease the difficultly of the hole."
B.803.5 A
" A player must choose the stance which results in the least movement of any obstacle."
C. 803.5 F
"A player who purposely damages anything on the course shall receive two penalty throws without warning, if observed by two or more players ..."
D. the basic notion that if you don't like where your disc landed --don't throw it there next time.

I think that most any fallen trunk or limb of any size can be now be lumped into the category of "broken branches no longer connected to a tree" and we have blurred the lines of relief and "play it where it lies".

I think that being able to gain 5 meters of relief for "branches" that are too big to remove is seemingly allowed in the rules and beyond my comprehension why such is now so.

I think you should be wary of sentences that begin with "I think".
Ron

[keith]

Here's another case concerning this rule. Currently, hole #13 at Seven Oaks has numerous trees laying around that have been chained sawed. These enormous logs are "No Longer" attached to the tree. Are they movable? .. Yes. Is it impractical for an individual to move them? At least from my weak little self it is.

And what about "Casual Water"?? How much water and how large an area constitutes "Casual Water". Yet again, you can move back up to 5 meters (16' 5"). This could be quite handy if I need more space in order to avoid a possible set of trees or something.

Blessings,

Keith

[Ron Pittman]

Dec 12, 2011 10:02:05 GMT -5 keith said:

Here's another case concerning this rule. Currently, hole #13 at Seven Oaks has numerous trees laying around that have been chained sawed. These enormous logs are "No Longer" attached to the tree. Are they movable? .. Yes. Is it impractical for an individual to move them? At least from my weak little self it is.

I believe that the wording of the rule allows a player to at least make an argument for move these "branches". I would strongly argue against such a thing. According to 803.05D "In situations where it is unclear if an object may be moved or other relief obtained, it shall be determined by a majority of the group or an official".

It seems that the rule has created a perfect place for drama and disagreement on whether to move or not to move. IIMO, It also seems that the TD could pre-determine what can be moved or not since the TD is an official and I suggest the TD could make a blanket rule about not moving stuff like that .

And what about "Casual Water"?? How much water and how large an area constitutes "Casual Water". Yet again, you can move back up to 5 meters (16' 5"). This could be quite handy if I need more space in order to avoid a possible set of trees or something.

Great question. Casual water is any standing water not declared OB by the TD. (or not in casual play --- any water not indicated OB on the tee sign or in accepted local rules)

Size does not matter. (insert joke as needed). If by moving back up to 5 meters you can avoid wading in the water, then do so. But, the 5 meters is measured from your lie, not the back edge of the water, so if the water is more than 5 meters wide on your line of play --- you have to either wade on in or take an optional rethrow penalty and throw again from your last lie.
Ron


Blessings,

Keith

[Ron Pittman]

Just a another quick thought on why I believe the wording on this rule can easily create an argument.

803.05B is entitled "Casual Obstacles to a stance".
It seems way to easy to read that as "Casual Obstacles to my preferred, un-inhibited stance"

I confess to being a purist. Kick the debris out of the way, get behind your marker, and throw the dang thang. Once again, if you don't like your lie---- blame yourself --- you threw it there!
Ron

[johnwood]

Hmmmm..... this is the 3rd. example of rules I find vague, subjective, argument/hard feeling starters.


IMO the Great Ruling Council of Disc Golf should hire an outside scientific type firm, or just an interested technical proof reader E. Hemmingway type to cut out half the language & make the rules K-I-S-S.


I guess that's why I prefer to play for FUN (tags included). ;D

[Ron Pittman]

Ha. Being a Disc Golf Rules Zealot is FUN!!

[bryan]

Dec 12, 2011 17:18:29 GMT -5 johnwood said:

IMO the Great Ruling Council of Disc Golf should hire an outside scientific type firm, or just an interested technical proof reader E. Hemmingway type to cut out half the language & make the rules K-I-S-S.

I don't imagine that it is possible to write rules for any game in a way that will be 100% clear in all circumstances, especially a game that takes place on a non-standardized playing surface (compare the uniqueness of a disc-golf course to the regular dimensions and layout of a football or soccer field).

Be sensible and make a ruling as a group. No drama required. The affected player, if he or she disagrees, appeals to the TD. There are very few circumstances that should generate an argument. After all, it takes two to tango, and players that disagree with the majority ruling can finish the hole provisionally using their own interpretation. The rules allow us to agree to disagree and then appeal to a higher authority.

Regarding Keith and the vehicle -- clearly he was correct to move back. As we were playing the hole (safari-style) it was a parked car in the middle of the fairway. Back up, create some space, and make your throw. Take the car out of play.

With regard to the seven oaks question, I would be surprised to find myself playing with someone who thought that a downed tree 3' or more in diameter could be considered a "branch", but I suppose it could happen.