Misinterpretation of 2006 rule change - 2006/01/10 23:59
There seems to have been a misinterpretation of the changes to the out of bounds rule 803.08. It was stated at the players meeting of the monthly that if a disc is partially out of bounds then it is considered out of bounds. That is not what the rule states:
803.09 Out-of-Bounds A. A disc shall be considered out-ofbounds only when it comes to rest and it is clearly and completely surrounded by the out-of-bounds area. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be at rest once it is fl oating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the water. See section 803.03 F. The out-of-bounds line itself is considered out-of-bounds. In order to consider the disc as out-of-bounds, there must be reasonable evidence that the disc came to rest within the out-of-bounds area. In the absence of such evidence, the disc will be considered lost and the player will proceed according to rule 803.11B.
The only change to the rule is that the out-of-bounds line itself is now considered as out-of-bounds. The only place that I can think of that this comes into play at dela is on the parking lot where we say the cement blocks (or is it the logs? Or do we say the front of the cement blocks?) are the out-of-bounds line.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Ed Buskirk
Legend
Re:Misinterpretation of 2006 rule change - 2006/01/11 03:41
Nice work Stan. Thanks for clearing that up.
I think you are correct and the kind of situation the rul change was intended for was !OB lines like those in the Dela parking lot.
Thanks
Ed
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Steve Lonhart
Legend
Re:Misinterpretation of 2006 rule change - 2006/01/12 01:40
Hey Stan,
I read some of the thread on this at the PDGA site last week. Since we don't have fences, this should not be a big deal. There were cases at other courses with fences (e.g., chain-link) that marked OB. Some argued that a disc leaning against the fence, but on the OB side, was actually IB because the line itself was not OB (and hence, to some, had to be I. So a disc on the wrong side of the fence could be IB--which I suspect most reasonable golfers agree is likely NOT the intent of the original rule.
I have not yet waded through all the rules, but there are some other interesting changes from what I hear. I hope I receive my rule book soon... I think there will be LOTS of misconceptions flying around most of the year.
Cheers, Steve
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Stan Pratt
Admin
Re:Misinterpretation of 2006 rule change - 2006/01/12 16:16
Steve, the PDF (link) on the PDGA website is updated to the new rules set, but the online/intereactive version is still the old one. I haven't taken the time to read through the whole thing yet, but there is a summary of the changes on page 14 of the PDF (it's also on the first page of that rules post onthe PDGA forum).
Forum 
. So a disc on the wrong side of the fence could be IB--which I suspect most reasonable golfers agree is likely NOT the intent of the original rule.