Kalen: I understand, I really do. It's a topic that I have debated with others many times. Of course rules change. But if you look closely over the last 75 years not much has changed, really- more interpretation that hard rules. Stymies may be the exception, but the overriding theory on that is that the player is entitled to the condition he created, not what was created by someone else. Anyway, as for divots and spike marks and footprints in bunkers, the obvious question is how far do we go away from "play the course as you find it and the ball as it lies." (SOft spikes have essentuilly eliimated the spike mark problem, at leat in the US, where they are ubiquitous. About the only place traditional spikes are seen anymore in on the Tour.) Where do you stop, where Kalen wants? Where Jim, or Phil, or Sean want? Or do we operate based on the question, "what is in the beest interest of the game?"
Sean: The committee always has the option, and many exercise it, to decalre a bunker that is "swamped" as you call it "ground under repair." Then the player may take relief outside the bunker without penalty. It's n ot likely to happen in the US Open because hte binker would be pumped out, but I've sen it a lot over the years. Otherwise, the extra penalty shot is assesed only upon the player choosing to take relief outside the bunker.
Here's something I can blame ont he course: on the third hole of a course I frequent, tres on the left side of the tee have grown out and taken away the preferred line for the tee shot, aiming players toward trouble on the right adn redering the left side of the teeing area useless.