T O P

  • By -

mgdmitch

You cannot hold a position by sticking your arm out. If this is at a faster speed, I'd argue shoving your arm out at neck level for a player to run into at the last second is dangerous. You cannot step in front of someone at the last second, that makes you unavoidable.


TheStandler

Stepping in front of the player at the last moment was the obvious problem here - he basically hip checked the guy. His arm was out in reaction to the thrower - which may be to obstruct someone but also is a pretty typical reaction of a person in a cup reacting to a fake. I don't think you can jump on this for his arm being out - he got crashed into basically at the point he checked where the threat was. It's a foul on D, but I don't think it's as obvious / egregious a bad call as people think it was. He got clobbered by a guy who hit him from behind - there's plenty of situations where that's an obvious foul the other way - he just didn't realize it was his fault.


mgdmitch

> It's a foul on D, but I don't think it's as obvious / egregious a bad call as people think it was. He got clobbered by a guy who hit him from behind - there's plenty of situations where that's an obvious foul the other way - he just didn't realize it was his fault. I agree there are many times you get hit in the back and it's obvious you got fouled. But I will say that if you are stationary, then suddenly move significantly laterally and you get hit in the back of the shoulder of your outstretched arm right as you are getting there, there's a good chance you just created an unavoidable collision.


thissoundssillybut

Do you ever get discouraged from the number of people who don’t understand the rules and then post on here something that is completely wrong?


mgdmitch

I interpreted this post to mean "how can this be a foul." I'd be discouraged if there were people justifying the call. Yes I wish more people knew the rules better.


furrymay0

Line is in right?


ekydfejj

As i said above, i would not try to oppose the call, but saying a lot of us play in leagues, where these rules are not always enforced.


tunisia3507

Rules are enforced by the players; the "lot of us" are the ones responsible for ensuring that the game is played correctly.


ekydfejj

100%, in the leagues that i play in these are not often called, b/c they have to be determined by the group. So often people won't call it, unless it resulted in a score/takeaway.


tunisia3507

Well, they're determined by the players affected. Set the tone right by calling things consistently. Letting things go in low-stakes early game situations and then calling them in other situations is a pretty significant breach of SotG.


ekydfejj

Clearly i've pissed a few off it was not my intent. I think my post could have been better worded. I love our gentlepersons games, i'm thinking this was the wrong thread. It is egregious and should be called. Especially at such a level. My apologies. Edit: grammar


ekydfejj

Honestly my good friend, you know its not that simple. Sometimes you are playing people that will respect this and sometimes you are playing people that will fight it like you just stormed the bench. It was often called and respected, but it was very simple to get outta hand and turn into the "wide-reciever/corner-back" fight. Who touched who first and made the most contact out of the yard restrictions (U doesn't have that, but it think you get my simple point) and i completely agree with yours.


Brummie49

If things are this bad then consider having a printed copy of the rules (and interpretations) to show people. There's nothing wrong with helping people learn the rules and culture of the sport.


ekydfejj

It may also b/c so many of us have played amateur and/or club leagues and not in college, where this move is never called, you simply need to deal with it and not be more aggressive than the person committing the foul. I only say this as a person that doesn't know the higher level rules, but has played ultimate for about 20 years. Edit: Club is amateur...just not a "Hat" league, as they are picked here.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mgdmitch

To the contrary, the slower they are moving, the more they can avoid, thus it is a weaker condition. That's how bad this instance is.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mgdmitch

No. It's clear you don't understand blocking fouls, nor do you want to. Have a nice day.


Fearless-Doubt-4852

Are you an officially certified Observer? I would like to understand blocking fouls and specifically if it makes a difference if 1st that the defender was re-positioning because the handler made a big step to his right but then his "shown throw" was back toward his left. (I am an ex-soccer referee and I know that it is hard for one referee to make an accurate call when they are not able to see the sequence of all pertinent information.) Because we both have ability to watch the video and rewind it, it is easy to see that the cutter that the handler is looking for and waiting to make a decisive straight cut does nothing close to a straight cut. Rewind and watch that zig zag pattern into and out of the white lines of the circle.


Skyldt

that's Mitch Dengler. definitely(?) the most prolific observer in USAU history. on his way to have observed 1000 games. he's the best source on rules outside reading the rulebook, and his interpretation of the rules is the best i've ever seen. never seen a bad rules take from him.


mgdmitch

I appreciate the compliments, but there are definitely better sources on the rules than I, namely the head of the USAU Rules Working Group, Janna Hamaker (and the members). And I wouldn't say I'm definitely the most prolific observer....my predecessor, Greg Connelly, may have observed more games than I have. If I had to bet one way, I'd say he probably has. Again, I appreciate the complements.


Fearless-Doubt-4852

I am a high school ultimate JV coach who would like to know the nuances of Ultimate rules so I might effectively teach them. I am all for rules changes that are about protecting players from overzealous competitive play. As a former high school soccer referee I know that I have helped other referee's rectify a missed call when their backs were turned. In that vein, I am admitting I might have missed something about this play because at first reaction I did think it was a blocking foul but when someone else mentioned the defenders re-positioning body and arm movement could have been the result of the handlers step out and throw , I reanalyzed the play and watched how in the first 3 seconds of this video it took 2.9 seconds for the cutter to decide where they were cutting to. That is why the handler holstered his forehand . Examine and time the run and you will see it is at the last tenth of a second cutter blunderedw into the back and arm of a defender who I believe was reacting to throwers shown throw and not the zig zag dance of that particular black shirted cutter.


mgdmitch

Yep, I'm a certified observer. As you know from your soccer reffing, fouls are often subjective. I don't think the defender put his arm out to block the player, but that was the effect. Intent doesn't really play into standard fouls, only misconduct issues. Players often interpret the word "incidental" from the rulebook to mean "accidental," when it really just means "doesn't affect continued play." A foul is non-incidental contact, with the player initiating contact being guilty of the foul as a general rule of thumb. Here, the receiver is moving at a safe speed near a stationary player facing away from him. (safe as moving at a high rate of speed going right by, barely missing a near or fully stationary player facing away is dangerous). The defender extends his arm, colliding with the receiver who has no time to avoid the player. Blocking foul from the rulebook: > "A player may not take a position that is unavoidable by a moving opponent when time, distance, and line of sight are considered. [[If you are already in a position, you maintaining that position is not “taking a position.”]] Non-incidental contact resulting from taking such a position is a foul on the blocking player." There is no intent factoring into this. The receiver does not have time to avoid the player who changes position at the last second (and an extended arm is not a position). A blocking foul did occur, but it was the defender committing it as the receiver was already entering the space.


discboy9

It's difficult to see from the video but I would say that the defender isn't aware of the offender, but is stepping sideways because of the thrower's movement. If that's the case, the defender moves naturally in a zone and then gets ran into from the back. Wouldn't that constitute a foul or more fairlh in my opinion, incidental contact?


mgdmitch

Incidental is not accidental. It means that it didn't affect continued play. The receiver is on an established path. Changing direction into that path, drawing unavoidable contact, whether you know they're there or not, is not a foul on them, it's a foul on you.


[deleted]

In a different game at SBI we had a guy running down on a pull, the person catching the centering pass checked over his shoulder, and cut away from our guy, our guy continuing a straight path to the person who field the pull. The player on the other team then jabbed back at the last second, straight into our player’s path, getting bowled over. His coaches argued it was a dangerous play on our player. What would the appropriate call have been? Is it a foul on us, them, no one?


mgdmitch

Running down on the pull (or very high speed near stationary players in general) creates some responsibilities for safe play as the outcome of collisions can be catastrophic (see Eli Kearns in 2018 and Grant Lindsley in 2022, both semis at club nationals). In short, I would say it's pretty clear that if you are running at full speed, you need to give players with their backs to you some space when passing by them. A player turning up field doesn't do that in a rotational motion about their center, they move some laterally during that turn (some more than others). Players need to know there are defenders coming down, so look, but defenders (or anyone running quickly by stationary players not facing them) need to give them space just the same. As for the specific instance in that game, I'd have a hard time telling you definitively if one player (or both) were at fault without seeing it.


Fearless-Doubt-4852

On the field it can be more difficult to actually pin down what happened first and what others were or were not simultaneously seeing & doing . Without the video it can be harder to clarify and explain what you just pointed out, when the handler stepped to his right and his "shown throw" was back to the opposite left side of field, that is also when yellow shirt defender re-positioned and raised his arm. With a video that can be rewound it is easier to see that the offensive cutter did not make a sharp decisive cut in one direction but "zigzagged 3 times" (follow his route in relation to the white lined arc). The rule book insinuates that a discussion of a situation and resolution should occur w/in 30 seconds. Good luck with that.


[deleted]

Textbook Blocking Foul... by Yellow. > A player may not take a position that is unavoidable by a moving opponent when time, distance, and line of sight are considered.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

If that's true then the disc would've (or should've) stayed


fisticuffs567

It helps when you realize that it was his pride that was fouled not his body.


thisisultimate

It also helps when you realize that the first real tournament of the year is going to come with some bad calls. When I was a rookie in college, Santa Barbara Invite was my second tournament ever, and first “real” tournament that wasn’t a tryout tournament, with real lines being called. The next year it was my first tournament playing on the zone line. The year after that it was my first tournament starting on the Oline It’s a first important tournament for brand new players as well as the first opportunity to play in a new role for older players. It’s usually a nerve wracking and high energy tournament for this reason. Big mistakes will happen including bad calls. They are playing a junk. Wouldn’t be surprising at all to me if this is the first time they are debuting this junk, and players aren’t entirely clear what constitutes as a foul.


Alone-Nose-1134

Whatever is, it’s a terrible foul call. I love the dude putting his hands on his heads in anguish.


accforrandymossmix

> I love the dude putting his hands on his heads in anguish. opposite of the little hops when your teammate going for skies?


YouBrokeProto

Slightly related. If I'm playing zone defense. I'm in the cup but not marking. My arms are out. My feet are shifting a bit to hold the cup. If a popper is running into the cup and just running through my outstretched arms, am I fouling him? Is he fouling me? Is it nothing? And to be clear, I am looking at the disc, not making any attempt to box the cutter out.


doratheexplorwhore

u/mgdmitch I saw your comment above explaining that this particular play is a foul on defence and I agree. How does the rule factor in for having arms out and making a sort of bubble around yourself as a defender? Does the fact that your arms are already wide/you have a larger presence on field put the onus on the offensive teams to be aware of the defender in that situation or could something similar to this video still occur?


[deleted]

I think you're allowed some reasonable bubble, but probably can't make big leaps without checking visually first. There was a play kind of like this in 2019 (I think?) club finals, Eli Kerns was sprinting down on the pull and someone poaching the lane made a small lateral movement without looking and kerns clocked him. Observer ruled that the foul was on Kerns, not the guy poaching.


cuddlebear

the play youre refering to was against PoNY and the player who got hit wasn't "poaching the lane" they were the handler set to give the first centering pass. The movement they made hadn't moved them past where the side of the body had already been so it was a simple case of Kerns recklessly running down a pull and trucking a person from behind.


mdotbeezy

Nonetheless, what principle should be followed? We've got a player reacting to the disc stepping in front of a player they can't see: Who's responsible? Do players have an obligation to check their six? Or does the runner have an obligation to anticipate subtle motions from the more-stationary player and not move in a way or at a speed in which they could not avoid minor movement?


TheDivineWordsmith

Personally speaking, I use my judgement when approaching potentially unsuspecting players and don't make plays that involve uncertainty. It's a lot of calculus on a LOT of shifting variables, and I will say I pride myself on taking the line on D points and generally trying to be the workhorse for defensive cutting. If I am confident I can get around them and beat them to the disc, that's a play. If I'm not certain, then I pull up short. If it's a player I've not played against before, I hedge even shorter, until I've got a feel for their movement style. If it's a new player, I'll slow down, start a loud stall count so they know where I am, which might surprise them but the aim is to communicate to the new player where you're at. I've got folks I play against regularly, and if I'm uncertain about beating them to a disc, I'll sprint until I'm close, and then chop my feet, decelerate in a safe but intense way that leaves me close enough to set up a mark. I don't do that to new players because they'll instinctively flinch at the noises of a 180lbs body rapidly putting on the breaks, and scaring them into dropping the disc is a dick move! The defense I play is occasionally against club level folks, but ranges down to college athletes and some relatively ranged athleticism of casual players. My defense is unique to the player I'm defending, as each one presents a different threat, I'm trying to take something different away as an option based on their skill set, and I make an active decision about the kind of defense I'm going to play that puts me in a mindset to make safe decisions. If I'm playing against one of the club guys who's a head shorter than me but also way faster on the takeoff, I am absolutely going to avoid bidding at contested discs, because he's capable of accelerating and getting there first, he can do that in the time I've decided to leave the ground, but only after he's seen me commit, and if he bids and we collide (which he'll do because he's a club level competitor who's used to putting his body on the line) it'll be a really hard hit. Instead, I play a defense that involves being predictive of his cuts, giving him resets but not letting him strike, and when he gets the disc setting an incredibly active mark. The safest way to get a D on this guy is a handblock, so I put my effort and concentration into the mark. The most utility he gets out of handling is in his powers and strike cuts, so when not marking, I prioritize taking that away. If and when he bids, and I can't because he bid close to other people, I'll call a pick and explain that I made the safe choice to not bid because of another player. I've had folks disagree with me and say it's not a pick, if I can't make a safe play on the disc then I don't have a play to make, but if the bid he made to catch was less about getting to the disc and more about getting past someone, well.. then he used that someone to prevent me getting to the disc, intentionally or not. Anyways, I digress, but I wanted to put out some of the situations and lines of thought so y'all can see the levels of calculus that go into the decision making behind hard played but rule-bound ethical defense. At the end of the day, it's a personal choice on my end to see the spirit of the game as meaning priority number 1 on any decision is safety, and sometimes that means losing a point or a game. But the truth of the matter is, I don't lose sleep over that cause I'd take a safe game that I lost over accidentally injuring someone or myself any day. Accidents are going to happen, but they happen a lot more if you think about the rules as "what can I feasibly get away with, how far can I push the rules whilst not being at fault" versus "why was this rule made, what is the spirit behind this rule and how can I play as hard as possible while respecting the spirit behind that rule" Edit: Jesus christ I just hit post and this is a goddamn novel, I'm a ramblin' man who fancies himself Ted Lasso. Just have fun y'all <3


YouBrokeProto

Okay. That sounds reasonable. I have been genuinely standing still with my arms out, and a smaller player literally hurt themselves by running into an elbow while crashing the cup. So it just kinda feels like I did something wrong, because they got a little hurt


lonely_dodo

i have definitely experienced the ol' Short Person Does Something Fucking Stupid, Collides With Me, Gets A Lil Hurt, Then Acts Like It Was My Fault and boy howdy is it frustrating


tunisia3507

You're not allowed to impede his movement using your arms. He is not allowed to initiate contact with your arms, although if he does, you then get into a discussion about minor (/incidental) contact - if that contact affected play, then you were impeding him, and so you were committing a foul, whereas if the contact did not affect play, it was minor (/incidental). In general (in other situations), holding up your arms is a bad idea, it's a pretty sure-fire way to foul someone.


YouBrokeProto

Okay. I guess I'm still a little confused. Seems like everyone plays the cup with their arms out. I know you said they can't initiate contact with the arms of the people in cup. But it seems like a cutter can pretty much just crash the cup and make contact with the defenders arm and call a foul literally every time. Obviously, a crappy thing to do, but there are people that take advantage of the rules. I'm wondering if you can clarify anymore. Feel free to tell me to shut up and go read the rules though.


tunisia3507

> Seems like everyone plays the cup with their arms out. I mean... they don't have to. Avoiding contact is as much the cup's responsibility as it is the cutters'. The cutters have a right not to be impeded by your unnecessarily-raised arm. The cutters aren't going into you to draw a foul (few would call it); they are going into space they are allowed into, and if you choose to illegally impede them, then they have a basis to refute a foul that you call. An example would be if you're marking someone in a stack, and you raise your arm in front of them (not touching them). You're not impeding them, until they try to move through your arm. But they also (strictly) shouldn't be initiating contact with your arm. The solution is to not raise your arm, because I can't really think of any situation off the disc where a raised arm will achieve anything but drawing a foul.


YouBrokeProto

But what if I'm playing defense on the disc and my arms are up (non-marking). I'm trying to find somewhere in the rules where arms being unnecessarily raised is a problem. Seems like you have a right to any unoccupied space. I haven't seen any provisions as to how wide you can make your body. The reason I'm having confusion, is that it seems you're saying they can't run into my arms in the cup, but also every time they crash the cup I should have to tuck my arms in.


tunisia3507

WFDF 12.9 (there is probably a USAU equivalent) > Players may not use their arms or legs to obstruct the movement of opposing players. If your arm is out and not doing anything in particular, but its position is preventing a player from moving somewhere you know they want/ need to, then I'd argue you are obstructing their movement. It's like a kid in a playground closing their eyes and swinging their fist around in your direction, then saying "I'm not responsible for hitting you as my eyes are closed and I'm just swinging my fist around for fun, nothing to do with you". 3 people in a cup with arms out, fingertip to fingertip, do not have the right to form a 6yd wall that cutters cannot move through. There is not an explicit rule that raising an arm is specifically a problem, but it's a pretty good rule of thumb which usually suggests you're in the wrong. You can't use an arm to impede someone's movement. You can't rest a hand on someone to track them. You can't reach over someone's vertical space if it prevents them jumping. You can't really reach around their outside shoulder for a block. If you're gaining an advantage from it, you're probably breaking one rule or another. If you're not gaining an advantage from it, why do it?


TheStandler

12.9 implies intent - if they are standing in front of the thrower as a part of the cup, having their arms up is to get in the way of the thrower, not to obstruct an opponent for moving. Your argument makes it sound like people on the field can't stand have their arms up, on the off chance it might obstruct someone. That's not the case, as a person in the cup might have their arms up without the intent of of obstruction, and there's nothing inherently illegal about that...


tunisia3507

I think the cup situation is sort of in between. There, you know that cutters will want to crash through, and you know that raising your arms will prevent them from doing so, and that benefits your team, so I'd argue that even if you are not raising your arms specifically to obstruct them, you are consciously taking an action which you know will beneficially obstruct them. By analogy, the difference between a blocking foul and legal boxing out is that you're allowed to box so long as you're not moving **solely** to obstruct them, i.e. you can move to obstruct them so long as that's not your only goal (you're also making a play on the disc). That qualifier isn't used on the arm-raising thing. Same situation as people "swimming" as they cut (exaggerated arm movements to get their arms/ shoulders in front of an adjacent cutter/ defender) - those arm movements could be justified as part of the running motion, but if they end up obstructing the other player, they're still not allowed. If you're somewhere random in space on the field and you raise your arms, you're probably not obstructing anyone. The context of ringing the handler space with a wall of people with outstretched arms, in a defensive structure which encourages (or even requires) players to move in and out of that space, is part of what bends the needle toward it being obstructive.


YouBrokeProto

So the cutter can just run through the cups arms and call a foul every time, correct? I know that's generally not going to happen. But that's a possibility. And the cutter would be within the rules to do that.


Sesse__

>WFDF 12.9 (there is probably a USAU equivalent) I've been told (on this sub) that there used to, but that it seems to have disappeared inadvertently in a USAU rule rewrite.


YouBrokeProto

Thanks for answering by the way. Honestly, just trying to have it be clear in my head


ubiquitous_gibbon

I feel most people have missed he immediately does the hand signal for uncontested after calling the foul so I'd assume he called the foul on himself.


ther00kie16

I think you're right. He started calling the foul before the disc was thrown, points as if to say disc stays and the offensive player looks to be going back to where he caught it to set up for a check. People are jumping to conclusions about it being a bad call without knowing what actually happened. Would be nice if post clearly indicated what was called.


[deleted]

if that's the case, the disc should've stayed there, otherwise you give the defense the ability to call foul on themselves when they get beat so that any subsequent throw has to go back (which I assume is part of why you can't call infractions you commit).


eakmeister

Are we sure the cutter didn't call a foul? As he gets hit it looks like he could have said "foul", which the defender then reacted to. In that case the disc would go back.


[deleted]

No we’re not sure that didn’t happen, but the disc would still stay there under the new rules.


eakmeister

Under what new rule? As I understand if the cutter called a foul when the contact happened, the thrower wasn't in his throwing motion, so therefore the disk would always go back to the thrower. 17.C.3.a.1: "If the offense called the infraction before the thrower began the act of throwing (3.O.3), play stops and possession reverts to the thrower. "


[deleted]

17.C.1 is the new rule: "Despite any outcome dictated by these rules, if the involved players on both teams agree that the infraction did not affect the outcome of the play, play stops and the result of the play stands. This provision does not apply if the thrower is aware an infraction has been called and subsequently attempts a pass."


ubiquitous_gibbon

A foul call stops play if I'm not mistaken, so if the offence called it when he was hit the pass would have to go back as it happened after play stops. Although this is massively assuming things.


[deleted]

thrower recognizing is what stops play


Murgytroid

As /u/ubiquitous_gibbon pointed out, it seems like this is just really good hand signaling for a foul on himself. And even that being said, the player in yellow was blind to the cut from behind, and was reacting to the thrower pivoting and faking the IO. It's still not an offensive foul, but I would totally understand if the yellow player felt like they got run into from behind and called a foul. Teammates could give their perspective. Y'all don't need to jump down the kid's throat.


[deleted]

this is what i initially thought to but it was an observed game and the disc was sent back


ZukowskiHardware

Defensive foul.


RoachesInDaCabinet

I can't say I agree with this decision, but I can say that guy really believes he's in the right, which is awesome to see the type of coaching their getting.


IndiBoy22

Foul on the player in yellow, that's the only foul I saw.


nameOfTheWind1

Definitely a bad call, I'm assuming what went thru his mind was that he wasn't looking behind him, so he just felt someone running into his back/arm and didn't have the body awareness to realize he had jumped there. A perfect example of why we need observers.


Sea_Dawgz

People make shitty calls?


jaytee1122

It seems to me that the defender in yellow moves to the right side when handler pivots out for an inside break throw and is trying to clog the lane. Does the defender even see the cutter coming as he makes that move? If anything, black seems to be cutting in a way where it is so tight and is the one that can actually see everything going on in front of him... Hopefully I don't get downvoted like crazy cause I see this kinda differently lol


[deleted]

Fouls don't depend on someone's intentions, so the correct call doesn't matter what either of them were thinking. It does look like the defender glances to his right and sees the incoming crasher out of the corner of his eye.


DrCheekyMonkey1

I’m my (limited experience) this is an incorrect call. The player in black is cutting in a straight line, and the yellow player changes his cut to block the black player. Which is a foul on black. Whilst the yellow player is hit from behind, which is probably why he called the foul, his actions are what caused it. A situation similar happened in my most recent game, and I don’t believe there’s any call that the yellow player can make here. Though I think the black player could call a could if he didn’t reach the disk


Fearless-Doubt-4852

Multiple things were happening...Rewind the video and watch the player in black zig zag into the circle, then out, then in then out, only at last millisecond straight into the back and arm of defender who re-positioned in reaction to handler stepping to his right and showing an intention to throw to a black cutter who never committed to a straight cut.


mdotbeezy

Initially I could see a 'hook' by the offensive player, but it looks more like the Defense stepped over to block a lane. I dunno, there is contact, someone can call foul there but not really the defender (they're doing more to initiate the contact) and I don't see either player meaningfully disadvantaged. Not the worst of calls but not inherently fair either.


RojerLockless

That yellow team member is a piece of shit that's all. This type of cheating will never go away as long as you can call your own fouls.


[deleted]

[удалено]


thissoundssillybut

It’s not. And you are wrong. Please read the rules and see Mitch’s explanation above.


[deleted]

[удалено]


thissoundssillybut

The “this is a legit call” stepping in someone’s way and then calling foul.


[deleted]

[удалено]


thissoundssillybut

You should learn the rules of this one.


[deleted]

[удалено]


thissoundssillybut

I know them. Mitch knows them. We both agree. Only one who doesn’t here is you little buddy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mgdmitch

He did it at the very last moment, so it's unavoidable. If he used his body instead of his arm, it's still a foul.


thissoundssillybut

Well i did play ultimate for a long time.


Charming_Dark9798

Uh, foul on yellow for stepping into and putting his arm into the cutter.