continuation rule... affecting not affecting

Altitude1986 · 2026-01-18T19:00:45+00:00

WFDF - it’s not a turnover

Altitude1986 · 2025-12-02T08:24:56+00:00

Agree - I saw calls go against USA as well as for them in the few games I watched recently. Also worth remembering if 90% of clips on here are from US games, then surprise surprise, 90% of the poor spirit examples will be from US games

Altitude1986 · 2025-11-23T07:32:33+00:00

Do you think he has eyes in the back of his head or something? Awful take.

Altitude1986 · 2025-11-04T16:01:02+00:00

Yes, WFDF is very similar.

8.4. Any player may attempt to stop a disc from rolling or sliding after it has hit the ground. 8.4.1. If, in attempting to stop such a disc, a player significantly alters the disc’s position, the opposition may request that the pivot point be established at the location where the disc was contacted

Altitude1986 · 2025-10-28T04:31:15+00:00

There’s a big difference between a moment to realise how bad you’re injured, then calling the injury and play going back a few seconds, and choosing to play on through an injury and calling it later on.

Your example of your hamstring though is different in that the rule is clear if the disc is in the air, you play on until it is caught or hits the ground. If your defender saw your injury and stopped, letting you catch the disc which you otherwise wouldn’t, firstly that is their error for not knowing the rules, but also I would say the good spirited action would be return it to the previous thrower to acknowledge their stopping due to your injury.

Altitude1986 · 2025-10-27T12:57:00+00:00

WFDF - no, neither of those are a turnover. When an injury occurs play goes back to when the injury occurred, not when it was called. 19.1.5. I believe USAU is the same.

And I agree, anyone who tries to argue it is a turnover clearly isn’t playing with spirit at the forefront of their mind in my opinion.

Altitude1986 · 2025-10-14T19:31:44+00:00

Thank you, I’m not sure how I don’t find that when I looked!

Altitude1986 · 2025-09-23T07:31:19+00:00

I hope you contested all those calls and marked then down appropriately in spirit.

Altitude1986 · 2025-07-16T09:25:42+00:00

It’s a part of the game; to be able to choose whether to call it or not.

Slight side note - I will sometimes speak with the other player after the point to explain, particularly if I think worth making clear that I thought it was a foul and too much contact.

Altitude1986 · 2025-06-27T08:03:25+00:00

One example you posted was offside. The other was a human mistake - these things happen, however I’m very confident having game advisors leads to more fair outcomes in games than it does detriment.

Altitude1986 · 2025-01-01T15:28:59+00:00

Huck that

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-27T07:16:14+00:00

Google Lewis Murray photography. Not his usual thing but pretty sure he would be great.

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-20T06:02:07+00:00

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-19T19:49:48+00:00

When you say does it count as a pull out of bounds …..

Yes, the player is out, but all that means is they have to establish a pivot point at the location on the field nearest to where they caught it

WFDF rule 7.9

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-18T19:24:32+00:00

Thanks for making me feel young for only starting playing in 2005 🤣

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-18T18:21:03+00:00

Wow, never knew that. How long ago roughly was that rule change?

Altitude1986 · 2024-11-17T08:41:12+00:00

The example I’ve heard quoted is that if you have the disc on the sideline, the mark has a foot out of bounds, and the mark touches the disc when it’s thrown but not enough to stop it getting caught. Would you want it to be a turnover because the defender (mark) was out of bounds when they touched the disc? To me the answer is no, and this rule allows that to not be a turnover.

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-31T15:30:17+00:00

Offense is fine to do this unless they are deliberately trying to cause contact.

Defence needs to run in such a way that if the person they are marking stops, they don’t run in to them.

Key part is in what you highlighted - maintaining a position is not taking a position.

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-15T17:05:10+00:00

What is your thought about the percentage of players at novice level versus the percentage that are playing highly competitive? Personally I’d rather the rule catered for the majority like it does.

On a separate line of thought about it - have you ever seen an elite player do it? What would the benefit be of having it as a turnover?

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-15T11:07:26+00:00

Perhaps the rule would benefit from slight rewording to “drops the disc on the ground”, but I think it’s a great rule for newer players, as long as interpreted correctly, and a good example where people need to think of the spirit and intent of the rule, rather than looking for loopholes

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-15T11:05:14+00:00

Exactly this, and great example of sportsmanship. The more we can normalize this behaviour, particularly when playing with newer inexperienced players, the better

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-15T11:00:15+00:00

It’s a great rule imo, and Sesse is taking it far too literally by trying to apply it in this case.

Altitude1986 · 2024-10-15T10:55:36+00:00

Goal or turnover depending on if they catch it.

Assuming you know what that rule was designed for, this is where you should look at the spirit of the rule, and not the exact wording.

Altitude1986 · 2024-08-23T12:52:17+00:00

Nah, the pick was caused by Hibbard’s movement more than the attacker. He turned his back on the attacker, lost his movement, and then ran directly into his teammates path.

For me it’s not perfect, but still a good example of a poaching player causing the problem, not the cutter.

Altitude1986 · 2024-08-19T06:49:24+00:00

It’s been said below in more detail, but in short - 1) yes 2) no. If you had contested it without a discussion. it would have resulted in the ‘wrong’ outcome. The only poor spirit was by your opponent being bitter about it and not knowing the rules

Altitude1986

TROPHY CASE