"Manufacturers would have little choice......I am not saying manufacturers would like it, but surely they don't have the clout with the USGA that a lobbyist would with a Congressman."
Sean Arble:
Oh really? Maybe you haven't noticed what's effectively been going on between the golf equipment manufacturers and the two regulatory bodies in the last 10-20 years. Effectively, the manufacturers have scared the shit out of those two bodies (or at least scared the nerve out of their lawyers who've scared the shit out of those bodies boards of directors!).
For about that time span the manufacturers have basically held a Damocles sword over the equipment regulators (USGA & R&A) called "restraint of trade" lawsuits.
Perhaps, if the boards of the regulatory bodies were democratically elected by the golfing public the atmosphere would be like lobbyists and Congressmen but if one really thought about that it would probably make matters even worse!
In my opinion, the best way for the regulatory bodies to go about ball and equipment rules and regulations and the manufacturers and their ratcheted up adverserialness in the last 10-20 years and obviously in the future is to just basically say; "Dese are de rules and regs, period" and tell the manufacturers if they want to come after them to come on and give it their best shot because basically they'll never win!
The reason I say that is the regulatory bodies (two "not for profit" organizations) have the best defense in the world against "restraint of trade" lawsuits from manufacturers. (the regulatory bodies will always pretty much be on the defendant side and never on the plaintiff side on I&B lawsuits).
They can simply say in their defense they're completely based on VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE by the manufacturers and by golfers and there's not one damn thing they (USGA & R&A) can do about it if the manufacturers and golfers want to violate their equipment and ball rules and regulations. The USGA and R&A are not the "Law" on I&B rules and regs as so many seem to think they are. Golfers and manufacturers have always followed their I&B rules and regs only because they've chosen to not because they actually have to (except in the USGA's own 13 tournaments (R&A's own too)!
Of course it might be a real possiblity if the regulatory bodies used that ideal defense (basically which should never lose against manufacturers' "restraint of trade" lawsuits, in my opinion) and continued to win with it that the manufacturers would say, "OK, then if it's voluntary compliance we then choose not to comply with your I&B rules and regs and if we sell non-conforming balls and equipment to the golfing public and they buy it en masse, guess what, you guys (the regulatory bodies) will effectively be irrelevant in I&B rules and regs."
It seems the regulatory bodies may be very aware of that possibiliy!