New Rule/Re-Tee (for free)?

Recently, a couple of locals have been saying that a player may take a re-tee of the box if they don't like the drive (usually right after they shank a drive badly). On occasion it has been alleged that it does not even cost the player a stroke! What's up with that? Now I admit that my Rule book is a year or two old, but I could not find any info on the PDGA website confirming this alleged rule change. Anybody got any information regarding this subject, or are these guys talking out of their butts?

[Nick]

If players are exploiting the rule, why not change the rule so that there is no free warning?  1-shot penalty the first time it happens.

[Chuck Kennedy]

It's been discussed for the next rules update. Another option is to just not allow a thrower to call a foot fault but they can second the call.

[Nick]

Yeah, that makes more sense than allowing them to call it on themselves for an errant shot.

[BogieWon]

Seems to me that this rule is confusing and ripe for abuse. From the comments given here, I don't think that I am the only person still a bit confused - as there seems to be room for open interpretation. If it only regards to foot faults, then why doesn't it specify that in the rules - ie foot faults? I've seen players take a second shot simply because they didn't like their drive, then argue no penalty is applied (and quoting the rule)!

So what's the deal, Chuck? Can you give me a definitive answer that I can take back to the local Club and report as gospel (and I will be quoting you sir - LOL)?

[Chuck Kennedy]

A legitimate foot fault call by the thrower or another player that is seconded gets a warning and a free rethrow. That's in the rule 803.04F. It can only be abused if the thrower calls a foot fault within 3 seconds when they know they've yanked a shot AND another player in the group agrees it was a foot fault. If a thrower watches their shot go off into the wilderness and then claims the foot fault rule more than 3 seconds later, it's too late. They could even be called for trying to cheat.

[BogieWon]

I get the foot fault concept, but I am asking about rule 803.06 which would literally seem to imply players get to take alternate shots.

Rule 803.06-

"At any time, a player may elect to rethrow from the previous lie ... The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player's score."

That's what people are arguing about on my local course. I'm glad that I got you here, because I really need the clarification. What has been observed locally is folks taking a second shot, simply because the throw was errant (no foot fault call, not even OB), then quoting this rule as saying it is completely ok! How can this be? Help me Chuck, help me!

 

[Jamie 'gr8rocshot' Ruane]

So what seems to be confusing...is the players Bogiewon is referring to are quoting the wrong rule...as regards to stance violation (foot faults) verses Optional Re-Throw

[Chuck Kennedy]

The Optional Rethrow 803.06 is always an option but it costs a 1-shot penalty. If a player takes an Optional Rethrow from the tee, that next shot will be their third. The OP was talking about how you could get a rethrow without penalty and that's the foot fault warning.

[Jamie 'gr8rocshot' Ruane]

OP is so impersonal Chuck....he's BogieWon ; )~

[BogieWon]

OK Chuck, your explanation stands. Rule 803.06-

"At any time, a player may elect to rethrow from the previous lie ... The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player's score."

I shall quote you on this, but IMO I think the rule is silly, open for abuse and stinks philosophically (and I'm not trying to be a curmudgeon here). I just cannot fathom the purpose of letting people taking optional throws (in this case because the didn't like the results of the original). I guess that I'm so old school that I in  a person only taking one shot at a time (outside of OBs and foot faults).

 

Thanks for helping out, Chuck, I appreciate the clarification.

[Jamie 'gr8rocshot' Ruane]

Your absolutely correct in your assumption BogieWon....that something is rotten in Denmark regarding how these players are interpreting the Optional Re-Throw rule. A players opts for the Re-Throw, it does include a 1 stroke penalty.

 

What's great about these discussions is now we get to debate two whacked out rules for the price of one. Both can easily be abused in an attempt to circumvent one of the fundamental concepts of the game....Play it where it lies.

 

Optional Re-Throw.....you pointed out almost the exact scenario I used the last time this was discussed.

 

Stance Violations...calling it on yourself  because you just doinked a 15 foot putt...and your buddy ole pal seconds it because he's your buddy ole pal. 

[BogieWon]

I agree with your assessment Jamie. Some of these rules need to be looked at very carefully at the next Rules Committee meeting.

 

I brought this subject up because my home course (Black Butte Lake in Orland CA) is extremely prone to bad rolls because of its topography (which makes it quite challenging). If I can simply re-throw every time I get a bad roll, it takes away the "risk & reward" factor that I find so endearing in this sport (ie I don't like my throw, I'll just do it again - possibly ad infinitum). The opportunity for abuse is just too high for my liking!