Contested calls

[BBG]

Okay, here was the situation in a game this evening; disc was caught right at the sideline. The defender called the receiver out, saying that she landed straddling the line (both feet hit the ground at the same time). The receiver said she got her in-bounds foot down first. So, disputed, back to thrower, right?

Of course, it's not so simple. Two other players (one from each team) agreed with the receiver. The one who threw the pass claimed to have best perspective. The defender who made the out call claimed she had best perspective. So, of course there was a discussion. After 20-30 seconds I said "Look, she's not changing her mind, it goes back to thrower". The handler, kept saying, "But I had best perspective!", which was debatable. Anyway, the argument went on for another 30 seconds before it went back to the thrower.

So, my question: is there such a things as over-ruling a call (without observers)? I've always assumed no. If the person making the call won't change their mind in a contested situation, it goes back to thrower, no matter what. Is this correct? And if so, is there really any point arguing for more than 10 seconds?

[tugbo]

Short answer: Back to thrower due to XVI.D .

XVI.D. If a dispute arises concerning an infraction or the outcome of a play (e.g., a catch where no one had a good perspective), and the teams cannot come to a satisfactory resolution, play stops, and the disc is returned to the thrower and put into play with a check (VIII.D), with the count reached plus one or at six if over five.

As for "is there such a thing as over-ruling a call (without observers)?" Short answer: No.

Your only hope is for them to agree that somebody else had a better view of the play. (I have found "you were looking at the disc to make the catch, I was looking at your feet" to very occassionally be useful). On the other hand I have often heard a receiver claim "it is the receiver's call" which is totally false.

Relevant rule: II.A. Best perspective: The most complete view available by a player that includes the relative positions of the disc, ground, players, and line markers involved in a play. On an unlined field, this may require sighting from one field marker to another.

As for "Is there really any point arguing for more than 10 seconds?"

Well, there is XIX.E

XIX.E If a novice player commits an infraction out of sincere ignorance of the rules, it should be common practice to stop play and explain the infraction.

So if it is the rules and not the events that are in dispute then it can make sense to discuss.

... but I think 10 seconds is a reasonable guideline for when "a dispute arises concerning ... the outcome of the play ... and the teams cannot come to a satisfactory resolution."