You make the call

[can't putt]

Is the disc in bounds or out?

- The creek is declared out of bounds.
- The creek has overflowed its channel slightly
- In the area of overflow, tufts of grass are sticking up through the ice
- A disc comes to rest in the area of overflow.  The disc is clearly completely surrounded by ice from the creek, however the disc is among some of the tufts of grass poking through the ice.  There is grass poking through both under the disc and around its edges.

[Sr.]

I would say it is ob because it is surrounded by water. If part of the disc is resting on the shore line it should be considered in bounds.

[Jon Brakel]

According to accepted PDGA rules interpretations, it would be out of bounds.

[damonshort]

here's another one, although this will screw up the scientific results of the poll.... 

An ob creek is fortified on the bank by some wooden planks on the basket side. Disc hits the planks, *below the playing surface*, goes in the water. Where is it marked?

[stpitner]

wait, it was completely surrounded by the ice?  I thought I was told it was on the edge.  Argh.  I should have had you guys show me where it was.  I also asked if you were able to take a legal stance behind the disc that was not OB and was told that you could.  If the disc was completely surrounded by the ice of the creek - which was OB - then you could not take a legal stance for your next shot, ruling the disc OB.  I was told that a legal stance could be made, was under the impression that the disc was on the bank side touching grass, and that's why it was ruled in bounds.

[can't putt]

Clearly a misunderstanding.

I also asked if you were able to take a legal stance behind the disc that was not OB and was told that you could.  If the disc was completely surrounded by the ice of the creek - which was OB - then you could not take a legal stance for your next shot, ruling the disc OB.

In fact, the player could not take a legal stance behind the disc and so, in accordance with the rules, marked his lie 1 meter in bounds perpendicular to the creek.  This, however, has no bearing on if the disc was in or out of bounds.  If the disc was in contact with the ground past the edge of the ice the player still could not take a legal stance behind the disc, but the disc would have been in bounds.

If the disc was laying on the ice O.B. but within 30 centimeters of the bank on the far side of the creek from the basket the disc would be O.B. but a legal stance could be taken (except that the disc was O.B., of course).

The question of "legal stance" in determining the "boundedness" of the disc is irrelevant.

[can't putt]

An ob creek is fortified on the bank by some wooden planks on the basket side. Disc hits the planks, *below the playing surface*, goes in the water. Where is it marked?

"Playing Surface" is not defined in the rules, so that phrase is irrelevant.  The rules state that the O.B. line itself is out of bounds.  Just as a fence is the line defining the boundary of a ball field, the planks define the boundary of the creek.  Disc should be spotted at the last in bounds which is not where it hit the planks.

[stpitner]

yes, it should have been called OB, I thought that it was on the edge and there was some grass just on the edge that it was touching.  That's why I sounded confused when you asked me if 1 blade of grass stuck up from under the ice and touched the disc.  I don't think I can retroactively go back and change the score  - especially when I had already made my call yesterday.  I apologize, and after reviewing the final scores - it would not have affected positions in any fashion.

[Jon Brakel]

wait, it was completely surrounded by the ice?  I thought I was told it was on the edge.  Argh.  I should have had you guys show me where it was.  I also asked if you were able to take a legal stance behind the disc that was not OB and was told that you could.  If the disc was completely surrounded by the ice of the creek - which was OB - then you could not take a legal stance for your next shot, ruling the disc OB.  I was told that a legal stance could be made, was under the impression that the disc was on the bank side touching grass, and that's why it was ruled in bounds.

I'm not even sure why you would ask if a legal stance could be made behind the disc. Take a look, make a ruling, move on.

[Jon Brakel]

An ob creek is fortified on the bank by some wooden planks on the basket side. Disc hits the planks, *below the playing surface*, goes in the water. Where is it marked?

"Playing Surface" is not defined in the rules, so that phrase is irrelevant.  The rules state that the O.B. line itself is out of bounds.  Just as a fence is the line defining the boundary of a ball field, the planks define the boundary of the creek.  Disc should be spotted at the last in bounds which is not where it hit the planks.

That depends on if the planks were the boundary line. If so, then you are correct. If the TD did not define the planks as the boundary line then it should probably be marked at the planks.

[stpitner]

wait, it was completely surrounded by the ice?  I thought I was told it was on the edge.  Argh.  I should have had you guys show me where it was.  I also asked if you were able to take a legal stance behind the disc that was not OB and was told that you could.  If the disc was completely surrounded by the ice of the creek - which was OB - then you could not take a legal stance for your next shot, ruling the disc OB.  I was told that a legal stance could be made, was under the impression that the disc was on the bank side touching grass, and that's why it was ruled in bounds.

I'm not even sure why you would ask if a legal stance could be made behind the disc. Take a look, make a ruling, move on.

I was approached after the round about it - there was a provisional taken and the question brought back to me later.  If I saw the lie I would have been able to call it no problem.

[can't putt]

I don't think I can retroactively go back and change the score  - especially when I had already made my call yesterday.  I apologize, and after reviewing the final scores - it would not have affected positions in any fashion.

No one's asking for an adjustment in scores, but thanks for the apology.  As I said -- clearly a misunderstanding.

This situation comes up, however whenever someone says "completely surrounded by water".  While that phrase is useful in defining O.B. at the edge of a creek or lake it leads to confusion in shallow creeks with rocks and mud above the surface.  In my opinion the spirit of "the creek is O.B." is that anything between the banks of the creek is O.B. regardless of whether the disc is partly resting on that rock, that stick, or that water bug.

[can't putt]

That depends on if the planks were the boundary line. If so, then you are correct. If the TD did not define the planks as the boundary line then it should probably be marked at the planks.

You know, I originally posted exactly that.  But then I reviewed the Q and A where it implies the ball field was O.B., not specifically the fence that defined it.  It still rules the disc that hit the fence from the ball field side O.B.

[stpitner]

the reason I brought up the stance was because I was trying to figure out more about where the disc was positioned.  I'm not going to bother trying to explain my logic because I don't remember enough of what was said yesterday.  It was poorly asked on my part, and considering this happened on hole 1 (I think, right?), we should have just walked over there and had you show me.

What I really learned from all of this was that I need more help in running these things.

I don't think I can retroactively go back and change the score  - especially when I had already made my call yesterday.  I apologize, and after reviewing the final scores - it would not have affected positions in any fashion.

No one's asking for an adjustment in scores, but thanks for the apology.  As I said -- clearly a misunderstanding.

This situation comes up, however whenever someone says "completely surrounded by water".  While that phrase is useful in defining O.B. at the edge of a creek or lake it leads to confusion in shallow creeks with rocks and mud above the surface.  In my opinion the spirit of "the creek is O.B." is that anything between the banks of the creek is O.B. regardless of whether the disc is partly resting on that rock, that stick, or that water bug.

Chalk this one up as a learning experience.  Unlike umpires and referees, I'm willing to admit when I screwed something up lol.

The other ruling that I had to make that day that really messed me up was due to the first round scorecard never being turned in.  There was no ruling that I could find that discussed "what if the scorecard isn't just late, but never turned in?"  The scorecard was eventually found and turned in just before the second round, but the ruling up to that point was getting the entire card of players together and determining what their final scores were.  They all received an additional 2 strokes for a late card penalty.  When the card was finally turned in, all of the scores they reported matched what was on the scorecard except one - and the scorecard accurately reported his score as 1 better than what said.  If that scored card never showed I know that potentially the ruling should have been DQ for all 5 players, but I'm glad that the card did come in - and the problem was resolved.

[pickax]

When OB is defined by a fence, then yes when it hits the fence it is still OB and cannot be used to determine last place IB. When OB is described as being completely surrounded by Water, then I would take a wall on the edge of the creek to be IB unless the railroad ties themselves were declared OB. Look at it a different way, if a disc was in the creek and leaning against the wall, I would say it is touching in bounds and therefore IB. That's how I ruled at least two times yesterday on hole 2, the effective difference being which side of the creek the next shot should be taken from.

[can't putt]

In reviewing the player's handbook from yesterday I see O.B. defined as "completely surrounded by water in creek" so I can see the justification for your call.  To me, this points out a problem in the O.B. definition.  Scott will have to answer this, but I suspect he included the surrounded phrase to answer the question "how much of the disc needs to be in the water to be O.B."  I suspect his intended O.B. was the creek, period.  No where in the rules does it state that if a body of water is O.B. that the disc must be completely surrounded by water to be considered O.B.  The rules do state that the disc must be completely surrounded by the out of bounds area.

Given the handbook definition of O.B. I also see the player making the case that his disc was not, in fact, O.B.  It was not completely surrounded by water, it was partially resting on grass poking through the ice, and it was in its entirety above the surface of the water, since the water was, in fact, frozen.

So what does common sense dictate the spirit of the rule to be?  And should that be considered?

[pickax]

Generally ice is not considered water unless otherwise indicated. From the Q&A on casual water:

Does the rule granting relief from casual water apply to ice and snow? 
* 803.04 (Obstacles and Relief)
Discussion:
No. The "casual water" listed in the rule is water as it's commonly understood, i.e. in a liquid form. The rules do not grant relief from snow, ice, or even steam should you encounter it.
However, the TD may grant relief from "any item or area" before the round.
If, for example, there is a patch of ice on the course known to be dangerous, the TD could declare it a casual obstacle and grant the players relief from it.

Hole 1 had a very poorly defined edge to the creek on the near side IIRC. There was some discussion on at least one disc on our card on that side. btw grass poking through the water or ice does not IB make.

[can't putt]

Generally ice is not considered water unless otherwise indicated.

Exactly!  Therefore, since the creek was completely frozen on hole 1, and the player's handbook defined OB as "completely surrounded by water in creek", and there was no indication otherwise, there was effectively no OB on hole 1.  Right?

Or... was the intent of the TD to have the entire area between the edges of the water/ice that belonged to the creek OB?  I think the latter, and I think any disc surrounded by that area -- regardless of whether that disc was or was not completely surrounded by water -- was properly OB.

[Jon Brakel]

On the potential for a non-existent score card, I have ruled in the past that the group MUST turn in a score card. So, if it is truly lost they must fill out a new one with scores on each hole that the entire group can agree to. I would then accept those scores with the two throw penalty per player for a late card. I would NOT accept the group giving me just total scores for each player.

In my opinion ice is water and water is ice. They are both H2O and they can both be used to define a creek edge. H2O might not be the best definition of OB but it is used quite often. A paint line or string line is much better but we play on courses that are not maintained for competitive play so we have to do the best that we can.

[stpitner]

My best answer: don't run tournaments in friggin' winter.  lol.  I promised Sara yesterday that I will no longer run a tournament in cold winter months.  You guys were probably a lot warmer from walking around and throwing, but the TD's were frozen!