Pick Continuation Rule - Update / Interpretations Needed

[ezstreet]

Hi everyone,
Following a number of calls made after a game this week, my team was requesting that some of you (especially you rule gurus and junkies) weigh in on an interpretation of the Pick - Continuation Rule.

As the rule is written:

"C.Any time an infraction is called, the continuation rule applies. Continuation Rule: Play stops when the thrower in possession
acknowledges that an infraction has been called. If a call is made when the disc is in the air or the thrower is in the act of throwing, or if the thrower fails to acknowledge the call and subsequently attempts a pass, play continues until the outcome of that pass is determined.

A specific situation occurred in the game on at least 3 occasions where a defensive player called a pick (which sometimes did and sometimes did not affect the play) and the thrower DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE the pick call and threw the disc to a receiver (once for a point). The concern we have here is that the pick was called about 5 seconds before the thrower released the disc.....the call was echoed 5 or 6 times, the mark was yelling to the thrower that a pick was called and while the thrower RECOGNIZED a pick was called, he FAILED TO ACKNOWLEDGE the call and eventually put up the disc to a receiver. The thrower's take on this play was that he hadn't ACKNOWLEDGED the call (even though he was aware of it), and so one more throw was legal based on the continuation rule. Our take on the play was that the thrower very clearly was aware that a pick had been called, but failed to acknowledge this in order to gain an advantage and use the continuation rule to get an extra throw off.

To put it more simply, if you hear a pick but don't say that you heard it, you're fine to take as much time as you like to make your next throw.

Now I realize that some of you will say that it's tough to judge if a person actually knew the call was made, but let's be honest.....it's easy to tell when someone DEFINITELY knew the call was made. Especially when this occurred with the same player repeatedly.

So what's the verdict? Can you blatantly disregard that you are aware a call has been made to get another throw off? I think that's a loose and poor interpretation of the rules (as did the thrower's teammates). And that's not to mention the spirit of the play......

Your thoughts are appreciated!

[GregS]

I'd agree that's poor spirit on their part. I'm not sure what the rules committee's intention was in using the word "acknowledge".

However, I don't see anything that says the marker has to stop counting stalls. Once it's acknowledged, the stall count comes back to what it was when the pick was called, but I'd say that if they're clearly not acknowledging the call and you stall them down, that's a turnover.

And if they throw it away or you get a D on it, remember that turnover stands too. And if any player feels that they would have had a play on the disc had the pick not happened (taking into account that "I stopped running because I heard a pick call" is explicitly no longer an excuse), then it has to come back to the thrower.

So, overall, it seems to me that the benefit generally goes to the defence in a situation like this, and the thrower continuing to ignore the call is more likely to hurt than help their team.

[tugbo]

I believe the relevant rule is under the Etiquette section (XIX)

XIX.F states
When a call is made, throwers must stop play by visibly or audibly communicating the stoppage as soon as they are aware of the call and all players should echo calls on the field.

So upon being "aware" a call has been made the thrower MUST "acknowledge" the call.

Ignoring the pick call (for debatable advantage) is breaking the rules.

[ezstreet]

That's exactly what I thought.

It seems to me that having an automatic EXTRA throw after a pick is called is just plain wrong. Acknowledge it and do what's right and move on!

[peterd]

It's not really an extra throw, more of an extra chance to D. As long as you guys don't stop running the advantage is yours.

[rahil_s]

No, if it doesn't affect the play, the disc stays with the person that caught it.

[Mortakai]

No, if it doesn't affect the play, the disc stays with the person that caught it.

Which is why the marker should then call a violation of XIX.F. which will bring that completed pass back. Even if the thrower contests...

So continue echoing those calls, especially the marker directly at the thrower as fast as possible. That's the best argument that validates a XIX.F call.

[theprdg]

I've heard two outcomes to the situation below from different high level players.

Handler A completes a pass to B, with defender DB being picked which affected play. B legitimately does not hear the call and passes to C who then drops it.

Outcome 1 - only outcome of pass after the pick call matters (i.e. from A to B). Anything that happens after B gets the disc doesn't count (drop or pass completion). So disc goes back to A.

Outcome 2 - outcome of subsequent passes after matters. If C catches, goes back to A. If C drops, turnover. This one doesn't make sense.

Thanks,

S.

[larrypmac]

I've heard two outcomes to the situation below from different high level players.

Handler A completes a pass to B, with defender DB being picked which affected play. B legitimately does not hear the call and passes to C who then drops it.

Outcome 1 - only outcome of pass after the pick call matters (i.e. from A to B). Anything that happens after B gets the disc doesn't count (drop or pass completion). So disc goes back to A.

Outcome 2 - outcome of subsequent passes after matters. If C catches, goes back to A. If C drops, turnover. This one doesn't make sense.

Thanks,

S.

The continuation rule says that the pass to B is affected. If it's caught, back to thrower. If not, it's a turnover. End of play. People affected by the pick get to catch up. The pass to C officially did not happen. So it's Outcome 1.

[GregS]

People affected by the pick get to catch up.

They don't get to "catch up". They get to "move to recover the relative position lost because of the pick". If they were 6 feet behind when the pick happened, they get to move back to 6 feet behind.

[DjDATZ]

People affected by the pick get to catch up.

They don't get to "catch up". They get to "move to recover the relative position lost because of the pick". If they were 6 feet behind when the pick happened, they get to move back to 6 feet behind.

You also can't re-gain a defensive advantage if you were disadvantaged. If you were on the wrong side of the player according to the force your team is putting on, you cannot set yourself up on the force side.