UltiTalk.Com
Welcome to the ULTIMATE Ultimate Frisbee forum. October 18, 2019, 10:37:48 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

The ultimate forum for talking about Ultimate Frisbee. Aimed at bringing new life to the world of Ultimate Frisbee discussions, UltiTalk.Com (UT) combines both regional and international topics in one friendly place. So say hello to UT: The International Ultimate Frisbee forum.

Register your FREE UltiTalk.Com account to reveal the members-only Shout Box, Chatroom, and more!
Tweak it out. Customize the look and feel of UltiTalk by changing your Theme Settings.
 
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Members Links Gallery Login Register  
Visit UltiTalk.Com on TwitterVisit UltiTalk.Com on Facebook

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   Go Down
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot Google Bookmarks Ma.gnolia MSN Live Squidoo Yahoo My Web     Bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: Rules questions  (Read 64536 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ivar
Newbie
*

Karma: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 6



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2008, 11:02:01 PM »

So far I have written
- 17 questions
- all multiple choice
- all with references back to the rules, and occasional comments
- all roughly labelled by difficulty/obscurity

I have put them all online at http://www.afda.com/wiki/rules_quiz
This is just a holding place before putting them into a database somewhere.  Grin

Hey, you are more than welcome to use the Ultipedia infrastructure to host your rules quiz.. in fact I would appreciate it very much and do my best to help you out ! ( I run Ultipedia and wrote the current UPA rules quiz there...) Many of the technical details and wishes mentioned in this thread are already taken care of... If you have any concerns or questions, please don't hesitate to ask me. Also note that we can give full accreditation (props) to AFDA for the creation of the WFDF quiz.. With worlds coming this August to my hometown (Vancouver) it'd be great to have more WFDF representation.

Logged
tom_brennan
Newbie
*

Karma: +7/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 30



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2008, 08:44:48 AM »

Also, I've noticed an error in the Wiki:

Quote
(2) The pull is thrown, hits the ground and rolls towards the back of the endzone. An offensive player tries to stop it, and while they get a foot to it, it still rolls out the back of the endzone. They pick the disc up. Where do they put the disc into play?
- on the middle of the goal line of the endzone they are defending
- at the point on the goal line of the endzone they are defending that is nearest to where they caught the disc
- at the point on the back line of the endzone they are defending that is nearest to where they caught the disc
8.11. If the disc becomes out of bounds after touching an Offensive player, or an offensive player catches the pull out-of-bounds, the disc is put into play at the point on the Field of Play closest to where the disc became out of bounds.
Field of Play: The entire area of the field that is in-bounds, including the area of the End zones

None of these are the right answer, though I think the author was trying to go for B.  It's got nothing to do with where they caught/picked up the disc, it's got to do with where it rolled out, which could be different things.

If we find errors like this, do you want us to just edit them with a note, or what?
Yeah, just go ahead and edit them with a note. That's part of the idea of a wiki.

The 'caught the disc' was copied from a previous similar question, which I then neglected to reword appropriately. It should be better now.
Logged
thebozzman
Full Member
***

Karma: +11/-7
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 187



View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2008, 04:50:11 AM »

A rules question from games on the weekend...

Player A (defensive player) is on the mark and Player B (offensive player) calls disc space. Player A points out there is about an inch between the disc and Player B's chest. Player B says "if you contest, it goes back to stall count of 0." Stall count was at 5.

If an incorrect disc space call is made, does it go back to 0 or continue from when the call was made?
Logged
rachelg
Full Member
***

Karma: +14/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 120



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2008, 05:33:57 AM »

16.2.6. If any marking violations are contested, the stall count restarts at maximum six
(6).
Logged
Tassie Joe
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-1
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 60



View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2008, 06:53:57 PM »

Oooh, I love playing in a big tourney over the weekend and you come back with lots of questions about rules because of some contentious decisions.  I'm such a rule bitch, I need to ask you guys for validation.

Can someone confirm these for me please.

1) Two players attempting to catch a skied disc.  Offensive player gets fouled, calls 'foul', but manages to catch the disc anyway.  Calls "play-on" as per the continuation rule, and throws to an open receiver.  Defensive player (who commited the foul) calls for the disc back claiming that the continuation rule only applies when there is a foul on the thrower, not on the receiver, and that it cannot be applied in this situation.  Can you call play on if you were fouled while receiving, but still caught the disc?



The second has photographic evidence (with a discussion already).
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=43499&id=508102308#/photo.php?pid=1019456&id=508102308

Ash Martens was running flat out with the flight of the disc and not looking at where she was going.  Huddy saw the disc coming, and saw ash coming, but all he could do was stop and try to back peddle.  He didn't even try to make a bid on the disc..  Ash caught the disc a split second before she collided with huddy.  They both went down, he called foul.  She contested, disc went back.

I can see both people's positions here.  The run, leap and grab by Ash was spectacular.  Absolutely amazing.  And it seems unfortunate that the fact she committed a foul AFTER that grab (by colliding with huddy) would cause a turnover and give huddy the disc.  She also claims it was dangerous play by Huddy in that he saw her coming but didn't get out of the way.    What do you think should have been the end result of this?
Logged
Tenk283
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +11/-147
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 473



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2008, 08:28:12 PM »

Quote
1) Two players attempting to catch a skied disc.  Offensive player gets fouled, calls 'foul', but manages to catch the disc anyway.  Calls "play-on" as per the continuation rule, and throws to an open receiver.  Defensive player (who commited the foul) calls for the disc back claiming that the continuation rule only applies when there is a foul on the thrower, not on the receiver, and that it cannot be applied in this situation.  Can you call play on if you were fouled while receiving, but still caught the disc?

This actually happened to me at AUGs.

I got it hucked to me whilst playing against a zone. I went up for it, got hit, called foul but caught it anyway. I then called play on and threw it to a wide open reciever to score.

There was a little bit of a discussion afterwards, the bloke who made contact with me said it definately was a foul by him and the decision was made by both sides that the score would count.

Not sure if that is exactly the rule. But that is what we came up with. Good spirit made the decision come quicker though.

In the second example, it would depend on if "huddy" was occupying the area that "ash" was going to land in. I believe the rules say something along the lines of "players may jump for the disc, so long as they don't cause contact and there is nothing occupying their area of landing". The onus is on all players to avoid contact. They also say something along the lines of you should never bid for a disc if there is a chance of contact (personally, I think that part sucks Cheesy).

Not sure who is at fault though Grin. Seems a bit muddy to me Cheesy .
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 08:32:50 PM by Tenk283 » Logged
Brettski
Full Member
***

Karma: +3/-15
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 117



View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2008, 08:51:18 PM »


Quote
1) Two players attempting to catch a skied disc.  Offensive player gets fouled, calls 'foul', but manages to catch the disc anyway.  Calls "play-on" as per the continuation rule, and throws to an open receiver.  Defensive player (who commited the foul) calls for the disc back claiming that the continuation rule only applies when there is a foul on the thrower, not on the receiver, and that it cannot be applied in this situation.  Can you call play on if you were fouled while receiving, but still caught the disc?

The main thing that could be an issue here was whether the person who fouled actually stopped playing, and if the rest of the field also stopped. A foul is a stoppage of play, however the continuation rule can still apply. So if you call the foul and 'play on' straight away, there is no problem.

If you call 'foul' and your mark stops, perhaps signals to the rest of his team that there was a call etc, and you do a schneaky 'play on' a few seconds later and throw to score, it should come back.

17.1. Whenever a call is made other than the first call of a marking violation, play stops
immediately unless 17.2 or 17.3 applies. Once play has stopped, no turn over is possible.
Logged

rjhberg
Full Member
***

Karma: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 147



View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2008, 10:21:13 PM »

1)

Quote
17.3. If a foul or violation is called
17.3.3. when the disc is in the air,
then play continues until possession has been established.

17.4. If the team that called the foul or violation gains or retains possession as a result of the pass, play shall continue unhalted. Players recognizing this should call “Play on” immediately to indicate that this rule has been invoked.

The "Play On" call is just an advisory call. There is no stoppage.

So you can definetely call a foul in attempting to catch the disc, catch it , and then play on immediatly.

Moral: O should never be disadvantaged because the other team stuffed up

Logged

Brettski
Full Member
***

Karma: +3/-15
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 117



View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2008, 10:32:38 PM »

The "Play On" call is just an advisory call. There is no stoppage.

I always thought that you needed to call 'play on' to invoke the continuation rule! Wow, glad I found that out now. Thanks!
Logged

Tenk283
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +11/-147
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 473



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2008, 10:39:31 PM »

Cool Grin . So what happened was what was supposed to happen  Grin . Thats sweet.
Logged
AlecD
Newbie
*

Karma: +3/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 35



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2008, 11:05:30 PM »

1) Yes, I particularly agree with Rueben.

2) is trickier in my view, I’ve come across it a bit (and been involved in a couple of similar incidents) and discussion with different people usually end in different interpretations.

I think Joe’s comments on the facebook group for the second photo were about right. By the rules, the offensive players generally have more right to not be interfered with when contesting a disc and attempting a catch. However, there are also ‘safety clauses’ that help protect the rights of defensive players in established positions making a play on the disc (just cos Huddle didn’t jump into Ash to try and contest the catch doesn’t mean he wasn’t making a play for the disc), and ensuring the safety of all involved.

I think Huddle’s actions in avoiding a worse collision were in the Spirit of the rules, and his call was fair. But I also think there was not much particularly wrong with Ash’s actions, as an offensive player it’s very hard to not focus 100% on catching the disc. Sometimes this is to the exclusion of not being aware of surroundings, but in my view it is borderline as to whether it is “reckless disregard”, particularly if you don’t know the player was there. She retained possession of the disc for her team, however it was at the expense of the defender being able to provide a ‘safe contest’ from a legally established position. Hence I think it’s fair that this contest be allowed to “happen again” on safer terms. I think a contested foul, where Ash’s team retains possession of the disc, but not to the detriment of Huddle’s actions in the contest, is a fair outcome, and in general is a fair outcome for these situations.


In future versions of the rules, I think it would be nice to have them changed/rewritten to enable players (particularly defenders) to put more emphasis on protecting the ‘safety of the contest’ from a fairly established position, and enable the contest to be reset, rather than say potentially penalising an offensive player for giving their all in retaining possession of the disc for their team (i.e. a turnover if a “reckless disregard” foul is uncontested). I think if extremely dangerous contact is about to ensue, players (defensive or offensive) should have more clearly stated right to withdraw from a contest, where they are in a well established position that is about to be encroached upon dangerously by another player, with something like a “safety” reset call. In my mind, “reckless disregard” is highly subjective, and a foul call in this respect will almost always be contested (particularly if it is made by a defender and the catch is completed by the offence), whereas a “safety” call and reset would usually be readily accepted by both teams. Calling “safety” in the moments before a contest may also make the offending player aware of the imminent collision, pull themselves out of the contest, and help to decrease the chances of serious injury. Many players DON'T stop if a “foul” call is made, as they know that the disc is potentially still up for grabs when it is airborne.

It’s also a little off-putting being accused of displaying “reckless disregard” when you are blind-sided or otherwise not aware of surroundings.
Logged
tom_brennan
Newbie
*

Karma: +7/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 30



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2008, 02:32:08 AM »

I can see both people's positions here.  The run, leap and grab by Ash was spectacular.  Absolutely amazing.  And it seems unfortunate that the fact she committed a foul AFTER that grab (by colliding with huddy) would cause a turnover and give huddy the disc.  She also claims it was dangerous play by Huddy in that he saw her coming but didn't get out of the way.    What do you think should have been the end result of this?

Foul. Obviously I'm just going on your narrative. But if you can't get the disc without causing (significant) contact, then that's your bad luck. The way you reported it, Huddy was in a legal position and did his best to get out of the way of contact, to the point of giving up an opportunity to contest the disc. Just because he saw Ash, and she didn't see him doesn't make her position any stronger.

I'm surprised no-one has quoted the rules yet, since they're pretty important in working out what's right ...
12.6. A player in an established position, who has not moved to that position to intentionally
block another player while not making a play on the disc, is entitled to remain in that
position and should not be contacted by an opposing player.
12.7. Every player is entitled to occupy any position on the field not occupied by any opposing
player, provided that they do not cause contact in taking such a position.
12.8. When the disc is in the air, all players must attempt to avoid contact with other players,
and there is no situation where a player may justify initiating contact. “Making a play for
the disc” is not a valid excuse for initiating contact with other players.
12.9. Some incidental contact, not affecting the outcome of the play or safety of players, may
occur as two or more players move towards a single point simultaneously. Incidental
contact should be minimized but is not considered a foul.
12.10. The Principle of Verticality:
12.10.1. All players have the right to the space immediately above them. An opponent
may not obstruct a player from occupying this space.
12.10.2. A player who jumped is entitled to land without hindrance by opponents,
assuming that no opposing player occupied any space between and including the
point of take off and the receiver's eventual landing spot at the initiation of the
jump.

A few comments
By the rules, the offensive players generally have more right to not be interfered with when contesting a disc and attempting a catch.
Really?? Which rules are you reading? The only difference between O and D players when the disc is in the air is for a simultaneous catch.
But I also think there was not much particularly wrong with Ash’s actions, as an offensive player it’s very hard to not focus 100% on catching the disc.
Well, if it's that hard, then it's something that people need to practise. Just because it's hard doesn't make it right not to do it. The rules are pretty clear that it's a no-no.
It’s also a little off-putting being accused of displaying “reckless disregard” when you are blind-sided or otherwise not aware of surroundings.
If others are aware of their surroundings and you aren't, then it should be to your disadvantage, not theirs. Part of good offensive positioning is avoiding having to move into your blind spot. If you need to do so, then you should look first. If you don't, and you collide with someone, then is it "reckless disregard"? Yes.

Read rule 12.8. It's pretty clear in this instance
Logged
AlecD
Newbie
*

Karma: +3/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 35



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2008, 04:58:14 AM »

Thanks for the comments Tom, sorry for the opinion-based post.

You've corrected my understanding on the meaning of “reckless disregard,” cos I didn’t use to apply it to people inadvertently causing contact because they were unaware of another player’s position, rather only those who enter a contest strongly and dangerously while knowing other players were in the vicinity (i.e. knowing there’s a high possibility of contact but not caring). Some definitions I’ve (only now) looked up:
reckless: careless or heedless
disregard: give little or no attention to

I’ve been trying to come up with words to explain my thoughts on receiver culpability, i.e. talking about errant throws, but then a receiver’s legs are always under control by the receiver’s brain… so I’ll just shut my trap, grow a brain and try and play more responsible Ultimate  Smiley
Logged
ash_5
Guest
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2008, 05:57:51 AM »

I've got one,
Defensive player is marking the player with the disc and steps across to make a hand block. As the offensive player throws the disc the follow through makes contact with the marker who calls foul. The throw is incomplete (i.e. the offensive team fails to make the catch).
so i.e. it's the defence calling a foul on the offensive player

Does the continuation rule apply?
Logged
Tiger
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +22/-10
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 304



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2008, 06:31:41 AM »

It's a turnover. The defence has called a foul to their own benefit, first person to recognise this calls 'play on'. Follow through is not part of the 'throwing motion', which I believe was roughly defined (maybe on RSD? maybe in my dreams I have about ultimate legislature?) as the action which imparts spin to the disc (ie the snap of the wrist).
Logged

thoughts and stuff - sifultimate.blogspot.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   Go Up
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot Google Bookmarks Ma.gnolia MSN Live Squidoo Yahoo My Web     Bookmark  |  Print  
 
Facebook Comments

Jump to:  






Advertise on UT!



Register your FREE UltiTalk.Com account to remove these ads!
Change language to English Change language to Brazilian Change language to Chinese-Simplified Change language to Danish Change language to Dutch Change language to English Change language to Finnish Change language to French Change language to German Change language to Greek Change language to Hebrew Change language to Hungarian Change language to Indonesian Change language to Italian Change language to Japanese Change language to Norwegian Change language to Polish Change language to Portuguese Change language to Romanian Change language to Russian Change language to Spanish Change language to Swedish Change language to Thai Change language to Turkish Change language to Ukranian Change language to Vietnamese

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
UltiTalk.Com is the #1 forum and bulletin board for talking about, chatting about and discussing Ultimate Frisbee.
Please help spread the word to promote an international community of Ultimate Frisbee players, coaches and teachers.


Site Design By MWM Consulting, Inc. MWM Consulting, Inc.



Google last visited this page Today at 07:22:34 AM
SimplePortal 2.1.1