Barsby's putt--falling or no?

[keys]

Originally Posted by ChUcK

Not bad, but not perfect, either. If someone can windmill their arms in order to stay behind the marker until their putt is at rest in the basket, and then they fall over, it's not a very impressive putting display.

Yeah, good call, I didn't think about that one. I have definitely done some wind milling long after the putt had come to rest in the basket.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The main reason for the rule wording as it is currently is to prevent jump putts inside 10m, not necessarily to prevent awkward unbalanced flailing. Considering that a player has 3 seconds in which to call a foot fault, I'm wondering if simply requiring that the person putting not place any supporting point in front of their lie for at least 3 (4?) seconds after release would be a sufficient rule tweak? No mention of balance required then.

In the Barsby example, that would likely be a foot fault under this proposed 3 second rule. After releasing the putt, the person could have their non-stance foot poised in the air for 3 seconds, even beyond the lie like the Karate Kid crane move, and then place it down. It might look theatrical but it still takes some control of balance to pull that off (even if the person subsequently falls on the ground).

[E-ROC]

Who Effen cares, get over it already. Do you think he is losing sleep over this? Hell no, that tournament was over two weeks ago and he has probably made 1000 putts since then.

Personally, you should be talking about how nice it is to have a local disc golfer showcasing the NW on YouTube and how good a job he has done producing these videos for your viewing pleasure. Instead you want to ridicule one ridiculous putt and pull the rule book out and make this forum incredibly dull.

[TYVEK]

Originally Posted by E-ROC

Who Effen cares, get over it already. Do you think he is losing sleep over this? Hell no, that tournament was over two weeks ago and he has probably made 1000 putts since then.

Personally, you should be talking about how nice it is to have a local disc golfer showcasing the NW on YouTube and how good a job he has done producing these videos for your viewing pleasure. Instead you want to ridicule one ridiculous putt and pull the rule book out and make this forum incredibly dull.

Dude, this moved past barsby's putt a long time ago and now is taken on a legitimate concern of how the rule is stated in the rules book and how it is enforced. making sure everybody is following the rules of the game is not incredibly dull, it needs to be done.

[E-ROC]

Rule sticklers=still boring. Done.

[Matt B.]

Originally Posted by E-ROC

Who Effen cares, get over it already. Do you think he is losing sleep over this? Hell no, that tournament was over two weeks ago and he has probably made 1000 putts since then.

Personally, you should be talking about how nice it is to have a local disc golfer showcasing the NW on YouTube and how good a job he has done producing these videos for your viewing pleasure. Instead you want to ridicule one ridiculous putt and pull the rule book out and make this forum incredibly dull.

Whenever I am talking, I am doing so "personally". I've tried speaking through others, but it was not for me. Thanks for letting us know what we "should" be talking about though, I'm always looking for pointers.

On that note, the videos are indeed awesome. Nice job, Mat!

On the other note, I can't decide if that's a falling putt or not, but I do think rules discussions are interesting and useful.

[Sam]

No, Matt... you're just boring. Like me. Sheesh!

[ChUcK]

*sigh*

On Tennessee's Flippin' Ze Disc pt deux, Matty-O sinks the exact same putt as Barsby did, but without the crowd wave. (4:50 or thereabouts) It looks a little less awkward, but very similar. Is this just a convention amongst good putters and/or the pro circuit?

Chuck Kennedy is right, we're getting all caught up on balance issues when really it's just all about not jump-putting. It is certainly true that while these putts aren't following the technicalities of balance per se, they definitely are not gaining any sort of competitive advantage the way a 15-foot jumper would.

I mean, the amount of weight-mis-distribution that would cause these falling putts is like 1/2 centimeter over their internal fulcrum. Matty-O has that advantage over Barsby all the time simply due to height differences. I still maintain that by the current wording of the rules, though, they are falling putts.

[all2common]

I did not see "flailing of the arms." I think that balance was established. Putt is good. No foot fault.

[PDXDuck]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

The main reason for the rule wording as it is currently is to prevent jump putts inside 10m, not necessarily to prevent awkward unbalanced flailing. Considering that a player has 3 seconds in which to call a foot fault, I'm wondering if simply requiring that the person putting not place any supporting point in front of their lie for at least 3 (4?) seconds after release would be a sufficient rule tweak? No mention of balance required then.

The wording and interpretation of the rule has certainly gone way beyond it's intended purpose. The 3 or 4 seconds after release idea or no point of contact beyond the marker until the disc is at rest (still with one supporting point in constant contact behind marker) would take the air out of this balloon.

We'll just find another balloon, though

[Flash]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

The main reason for the rule wording as it is currently is to prevent jump putts inside 10m, not necessarily to prevent awkward unbalanced flailing. Considering that a player has 3 seconds in which to call a foot fault, I'm wondering if simply requiring that the person putting not place any supporting point in front of their lie for at least 3 (4?) seconds after release would be a sufficient rule tweak? No mention of balance required then.

In the Barsby example, that would likely be a foot fault under this proposed 3 second rule. After releasing the putt, the person could have their non-stance foot poised in the air for 3 seconds, even beyond the lie like the Karate Kid crane move, and then place it down. It might look theatrical but it still takes some control of balance to pull that off (even if the person subsequently falls on the ground).

<<Smart Ass Remark Coming>>
Well lets get rid of the falling putt limitation within 10 meters and make all jump putts legal regardless of distance from the basket and we will not have these silly situations where we need to decipher if the individual maintained their balance
<<Smart Ass Remarks Curbed>>

It seems like a good addition but I personally think the entire 3 second limitation on the foot fault is a little bit ridiculous anyways. Most people do not even carry a watch to determine when three minutes are up for a lost disc let alone a stop watch to know for sure it was 3 seconds. If the foot faulter challenges the 3 second time calling and no one in the group has a stop watch showing the time of the call, doubt goes to the thrower anyways. How can you honestly say ya it was less than 3 seconds, I was totally watching his release point and it was for sure under 3 seconds when I called it. What do you think group, Player 1 well I wasn't really watching the time, Player 2 me neither, Player Called No.

Besides for a tap out putt where we have 4 individuals standing around a basket at a distance of 5 feet, just our of reach for a drop in putt we need to wait for 3 seconds before moving forward to remove our disc so the next guy can putt because he is afraid of a bounce out?

[GettinBetter]

He would have displayed full balance if after he picked up his mini he could go back up into his original putting stance, i dont think he could have.

[Chuck Kennedy]

Considering that walking is sometimes defined as moving forward taking alternate steps with your feet while repetitively losing then regaining balance, we have issues with the meaning of balance in regards to the putting stance rule.

[mine all mine]

I bet if this was a NT event and maybe it was some other high profile youngster *cough nikko cough* that put would have been called instantly!

[Flash]

Originally Posted by mine all mine

I bet if this was a NT event and maybe it was some other high profile youngster *cough nikko cough* that put would have been called instantly!

Does that surprise you, society always rewards those who fall inline and are likeable, those who go against the flow and are edgier are less likely to have people turn away at something like this. Its not right but it is what it is.

To me it doesn't matter what the infraction, if you love the game and like competing regardless of what you have on the line if someone calls you on something and it gets seconded then all right for the game either replay your shot or take the stroke. Integrity for the game is why these things should be called not to punish someone, but to ensure the game is being played the same by all. That is why I have no problem calling someone on a foot fault that threw OB and now gets to re-tee, or if someone makes a sick putt and now has to repeat it. Because to me its more about the game then it is about those who are playing it!

[chris7graham]

hmmmmmmmmmmmm??????????????????? whatever leave him alone he's a great golfer and human we all make mistakes no one called it so oh welll back to disc golf YAY

[Magilla]

Originally Posted by TYVEK

it could be called a falling putt by a really really uptight person.

OR by ANYONE on a Open lead card at an NT, or so it seems these days.

Talk about "DRAMA".........

[ChUcK]

Originally Posted by Flash

if someone calls you on something and it gets seconded then all right for the game either replay your shot or take the stroke.

I can see why you guys want to put this topic to rest. The more we talk about it, the more guys chime in, the more gaps in rules knowledge are uncovered. That must be embarrassing for all the 'professional' disc golfers out there who still don't know the rulebook. I'm not trying to pick on you specifically, Flash, you just buzzed in at the wrong time.

I asked a few pros the other day if they ever actually have cracked a rulebook and read it. Not a single affirmative response. They called me a "Rules Nazi". I called them "Apathetic Illiterates". We were both wrong, of course.

[Chuck Kennedy]

I'm going to propose that in the next rules update something along the lines of carrying a rulebook in the group be required or everyone in it might get a 2-shot penalty. It would be like the seatbelt law, someone from another group can't call the rulebook penalty on the group if asked. But if a situation arises within the group where a ruling is required and no one has one, the 2-shot penalty can be applied by the TD or official in addition to whatever the infraction was that couldn't be resolved by the group because they weren't carrying one.

[GettinBetter]

I like your idea chuck kennedy