Rule 204.07(A) currently reads:

A. General Procedure: In order to make a call of an infraction (traveling, line
fault, or stalling), the call must be made during or immediately after the
occurrence. The angle infraction call must be made prior to the disc hitting
the ground. If the team on which the call is made accepts the call as valid,
play stops immediately with any throws made after the occurrence being of no
consequence. The team making the call then may either:
	1.dismiss the infraction with any points that have been scored
	  in the exchange being awarded without consideration of an 
	  infraction; or,
	2.charge their opponents with an infraction and replay the exchange. 
	  On the third and subsequent instances of a team being charged with
	  any combination of infractions in a game, the team not committing
	  the infraction is also awarded one point if they choose the replay 
	  option.

I propose that it be amended to read:

A. General Procedure: In order to make a call of an infraction (traveling, line
fault, or stalling), the call must be made during or immediately after the
occurrence. The angle infraction call must be made prior to the disc hitting
the ground. If the team on which the call is made accepts the call as valid,
play stops immediately with any throws made after the occurrence being of no
consequence. The team making the call then may either:
	1.dismiss the infraction with any points that have been scored
	  in the exchange being awarded without consideration of an 
	  infraction; or,
>	2.remove the infraction throw from consideration and award any points
>	  scored in the exchange; or,
	3.charge their opponents with an infraction and replay the exchange. 
	  On the third and subsequent instances of a team being charged with
	  any combination of infractions in a game, the team not committing
	  the infraction is also awarded one point if they choose the replay 
	  option.

The specific motivation behind this suggestion is the situation in which one 
throw lands in with angle and the other throw goes out. With the current rule, 
the team calling the infraction must choose between charging an infraction or 
taking a break. Given that it's extremely rare for an infraction to be worth a 
point, the team which threw two bad throws - one out and one with angle - has 
not lost anything. That doesn't seem right. The proposed change gives the team 
calling the infraction the option of taking a point for the out disc.

Option #1 handles the situation where an infraction is called on a throw that 
goes out, so that the calling team can take the point on that throw. The new 
option #2 handles the situation where the other disc goes out, so that the 
calling team can take that point. 

It corrects a flaw in the current procedure which allows an infraction throw 
to save an out throw. Theoretically, this weakness could be taken advantage of.
Suppose my partner has thrown a lead that is drifting out. If I can get an 
infraction throw to land in, I will have effectively saved that out throw. For 
example, I could throw a high vertical backspinning shot that will land with 
about 90 degrees of angle. Or, if I'm in the back of the court, I could run 
up to the front (travel) and throw a burn. If my shot lands in, the other team 
must choose break or infraction and I have effectively saved a lost point.

Of course, the other team could just catch my throw and earn a point. But they 
shouldn't have to - my throw was made with an unfair advantage. The vertical 
angle shot is not easy to catch, and traveling greatly improved my odds of 
burning successfully.

I've come up with a chart that addresses the various scenarios that include 
angle throws (since angle is easily the most frequently called infraction).
It is from the point of view of the defending team taking the expected option.

	I	O	AI	AO	H
-------------------------------------------	I = in
I	-2	Break	Inf	Inf	-1	O = out
O		+2	+1*	+2	+1	AI = angle, in
AI			2 Inf?	+1*	Inf	AO = angle, out
AO				+2	+1	H = held
H					Dbl

* Inf with the current rule
? It's not clear in the rules what to do about two angle throws that stay in

The only change in practice, then, is when one throw goes out (released before
an infraction occurs), and an infraction throw stays in. The defending team 
can take a point for the out throw instead of charging an infraction.

The following objections have been raised:

1. The team calling the infraction will have too big an advantage.
2. Angle is an accident, and should not be punished too severely.
3. Angle is a subjective call. No one can tell the difference between 29 and 
   30 degrees.
4. There will be more angle calls.

Responses:

1. They are awarded a point in a situation where they should get one.
2. Not necessarily. Steep shots have their advantages. Intent is moot in the 
   making of a good rule.
3. True, that's why it tends to get called at 40 and above.
4. Players will call angle when they see it (and occasionally to try to get 
   out of a tight spot), just as they do now.