Since no one has popped the top on this one, I'll say the "No Alchohol" rule needs to be reconsidered for courses that allow alcoholic beverages. Most city parks do not even allow you to scratch your butt anymore but there are a few courses, one course comes to mind, on Federal property, where the open container laws do not apply.
Personaly, the TD should double-check the regulation or ordinance first and if it is OK then let the TD make the call and not the PDGA. I guess it depends, if PDGA insurance specifically prohibits alcohol for a cheaper rate then it will never happen. If this is the case, then, what happens when tournaments get more funding from outside sponsors? Outside sponsors could flip the bill for the insurance for a weekend. It is the PDGA's goal to get more outside sponsor money but they might be shooting themsleves in the foot on this issue.
And, I am not a big drinker, I just need any kind of advantage over the rest of the players. lol.
Ok, CAZ...thanks for fleshing it out a bit more. Now I understand the situation much better than I did when I first responded last night.
The players that played in a two-some without permission nor an official could have been DQed, point blank. They had alternatives besides playing it out. The first of which would have been to split up...one going to the group in front, one to the group behind...once they realized their third was missing. I've done this myself a couple different times. Pretty simple procedure.
Second of which could have been to NOTIFY THE TD. Let him make the call rather than doing it yourself. If it's mid round and somebody walks off, then they're the a-hole who caused the problem and THEY should notify the TD that he/she just abandoned his group. In which case, again, the two that were left should have hung back and joined up with the group behind them (assuming it was all 3-somes, they could have just made a 5-some).
The fact remains, the players had alternatives and from what you've said, most should have known that already. So as a TD, I would have DQed the ones that knew what they were doing (especially the pros). They know better, they deserve the punishment. The AM3s, on the other hand, I may have been more lenient with given their skill level and likely inexperience. But at an A-tier (I've personally never run an A, just a few Bs), everyone has to be a PDGA member therefore should have a rulebook and consequently, know the rules. So there's certainly room to be a hard-ass all the way down the line.
So I'm going to say that the rule has consequences already. And that is that players "ignoring" it should be disqualified for cheating (defined in the book as willful circumvention of the rules). No different than pencil-whipping or playing out of OBs without penalty or any other intentional ignorance of rules for personal gain/better score.
I just talked to the pdga and this situation is not a disqualification under disqual. and suspention part A section 3. Dave said it was not willful circumventing the rules.
I did notify the TD and a bunch of bystanders joined the conversation.
I also want to make a clarification that the person who wrote the rule and said he was part of the rules committee is not currently on the committee but was a past member and I am sorry for the miss information.
I also found out that I had broken a rule at dglo and didn’t know it. I played through the storm when players were called in. I didn’t realize we had to come in so I continued to play with my group. (We didn’t know what the 3 horn blasts were) earlier today I learned this was a rules violation and I will give my payout back to the TD and inform him of the violation. I will do this because I am all about playing by the rules even when it means I am the one who is wrong.
I guess I'll have to disagree with Mr. Gentry on that one...if a player KNOWS that two-somes are not allowed, yet continues play in a two-some without notifying the TD or getting someone to stand in as an official (doesn't need to be a tournament official or a certified official, just someone to mediate any disputes), that's knowingly circumventing the rules. No question at all. All might have gone swimmingly and all rules may have been followed, but who's to know? The players involved might have been perfectly trustworthy, but who's to know what went on in the group? Could have been two buddies that, without a third-party, decided to let this infraction pass or that infraction pass. Who's the second on a foot fault? Too many of the rules hinge on having a third voice to even be called...sorry, a two-some without authorization from the TD is a DQable offense in my book.