2 Qs: Pick timing & bobbling a disc

7 posts / 0 new
Last post

1) If a pick doesn't get acknowledged by the thrower until several stall counts after the pick occurs, at what stall count does the mark come back in at?

2) If the thrower has the disc in his hands, the stall count is well on, and the disc pops out of his hands and he catches it again, is that a turnover? In this situation, he was not actually trying to throw it, but it just slipped out while trying to fake.

(I tried to look these up in the rules, but couldn't find them.)

1) After a pick, the count is always resumed at a value of "count +1" or "6" (if the count exceeded 5). The value of the count is the last number reached before the call. See rule XIV.A.5 for exact wording. There is an exception, though, in that the thrower can still be stalled down (see the Continuation Rule: XVI.C), regardless.

2) As I understand it, as long as the bobble is not construed as a "throwing motion," the thrower is entitled to accidentally bobble and regain control of the disc without penalty. See XII.B for exact wording. A "fake" is considered a throwing motion (II.T), but a "pivot" or a "wind-up" is not (II.T.3).*

*However, my interpretation is based on my understanding of the specific wording, that an "accidental drop" is different from an "accidental throw." If the semantic emphasis is actually intended on the word "accidental" (regardless of whether it was a "drop" or "throw") then I would be wrong.

Hey Moses...

That second one (thrower accidentally drops the disc and catches it) is in XII.B., copied below in its entirety:

"B. If the thrower accidentally drops a live disc or a disc in play without defensive interference and it contacts the ground before the thrower regains possession, it is considered an incomplete pass. If the thrower regains possession of an accidentally dropped disc before it contacts the ground without another player touching the disc, that possession is considered continuous. If the thrower regains possession of an accidentally dropped disc before it contacts the ground and after another player touches it, it is considered a new possession."

... the second sentence is most closely related to your question.

Play on...

Hey Mark,

If the thrower loses contact with the disc on a fake, then it's considered a throw (II,T). Does that change the matter, or does XII.B still allow the thrower to catch his own accidental throw?

That's a close one to articulate...

Of course, you're talking about II.T.3:
"The act of throwing is the motion that transfers momentum from the thrower to the disc in the direction of flight and results in a throw. Pivots and wind-ups are not part of the act of throwing."

Note that within this first sentence is that the direction of the motion is the same as the direction of flight.

And so if the accidental release (let me use "release" instead of "drop") is in the direction of the fake, then by this definition, it's considered a throw and not an accidentally 'dropped' disc. If, however, the fake is in a horizontal motion, and the "drop" is straight down, by this definition it's NOT a throw (motion is not the same direction as the 'flight') and so CAN be considered an accidentally dropped disc.

If the first example is caught by the thrower, it's a turnover because they caught their own throw (unless the disc touched the marker in between) and if the second example is caught by the thrower, it's okay.

Since directionality is a consideration, I would interpret the following as a "drop", but am I stretching that a bit?

Occasionally I'll initiate a throw and at the last instant realize that a defender was hidden behind the mark, making my throw a very bad idea. I try to stop the throw but there's already too much momentum and it dribbles out of my hand, usually at some goofy angle perpendicular to the field. Not that it's ever been such that I have a hope of catching it, but this is all about hypotheticals, right?

The reason I'm uncertain about this is that the loss of contact/control definitely came as the result of a throwing motion, but the flight definitely isn't in the direction of the motion.

Cool guys - thanks for the answers.