Collusion - Yes, I'm a Broken Record

[Jim_Coleman]

   I know I'm an obsessive bore, but how about Sergio's chip from behind 15 with a ball 3 feet from the cup to help protect against going in the water?  Couldn't be more obvious.

[David_Tepper]

Jim -

Please refresh my memory about the rules. If the ball of Player A is on the green and Player B is playing a shot on to the green (from any distance off the green) is Player A obliged under the rules to mark his ball?

DT 

[Jim_Coleman]

    No.  But they cannot agree to leave it there.

[David_Tepper]

Jim -

If Player A asks Player B is he would like him (Player A) to mark his ball and Player B says "no," are you saying that this constitutes collusion? 

DT

[Jim_Coleman]

   I believe it does.

[Keith Grande]

"Professional courtesy"

[Jim_Coleman]

    I agree it's "professional courtesy."  It just happens to be against the rules, requiring dual disqualification.

[JESII]

Saw it as well Jim, and in general I agree with your position on collusion...but...on this hole it's possible the other player had hit a wedge from short of the lake and it would in fact have delayed play for Sergio to wait for him. Possible?

[Brent Hutto]

So a guy has been on Tour for 15 years and from Day One has noticed that everyone, always, leaves their ball where it is unless asked specifically to move it. Naturally, he has always done exactly as he observed from his first Tour event.

Do you consider that "collusion"?

Doesn't there have to be some verbal or written or at least pantomimed communication between the specific players involved?

I think you guys and every other armchair Rules noodge ought to let the players and tournament officials worry about the meaning of "collusion" and apply it to their tournaments. Just looks like business as usual in big-time golf to me. It is certainly no more egregious than some of the Rulings that are given to these players concerning free relief and it's far less out of character with the game than the Lift, Clean and Place nonsense that is so widespread.

[JESII]

True on the last part Brent, for sure. That said, on this topic specifically, do you think these guys would behave differently in a playoff than they do in the early rounds of a tournament?

I do and think that answers Jim's question.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Player "B" has an obligation to protect the field

[Brent Hutto]

Sure, I reckon they might hustle up there and mark a ball that would potentially be helpful to their opponent.

But what enforceable standard do you guys want to see implemented? For every clear-cut situation where a ball is 3 feet directly behind the hole and the ball's owner is stand 20 feet from it there's a borderline situation where it might or might not be inconvenient to wait for him to mark a ball that might or might not actually offer an advantage.

That's the problem as I see it with trying to armchair quarterback this. And as far as "protecting the field" if 99.999% of the time in a stroke play tournament, players leave their ball in place and unmarked then who can possibly gain an advantage? It's a nigh universal practice, no different for one player than another. No advantage can exist if it's something that can be expected to always happen.

Finally, in the end it makes much less difference to the outcome of a tournament than any number of other special treatments that Tour players receive (gallery members moving boulders to name one risible example). Of course to repeat myself in a world where Lilft, Clean and Place is routinely implemented it's hard to work up much indignation at all for lesser Tour-wide practices one feels might not be totally 100% within the spirit of the Rules.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Brent,

It sounds like you agree the practice is against the rules (although you are not willing to concede the players are colluding), yet your argument is there are far worse violations of the RoG that go in abeyance (lift, clean, and place) so why sweat the small stuff. Also that the rule is difficult to enforce.

If I have characterized your position correctly my response to that position is the RoG should not be a "cafeteria" where golfers pick and choose which rules to obey. If it's a dumb rule write a new one, sure. (In this case personally I don't believe "the law is a ass.")

As for your second point regarding enforceability, well, why don't we see them enforce it before writing it off as unenforceable? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

It relates to proximity and circumstance.

If player "A" hits it a foot behind the hole from 240 and player "B" is 230 from the hole, player "A" has NO obligation to Mark his ball before player "B" hits his ball.

If player "A"'s ball is a foot behind the hole and player "B" is 4' or 40' over the green and chipping/pitching/putting, then, player "A" is obligated to mark his ball or explain why he didn't.

[Jeff Taylor]

Which rule are you citing?

[Brent Hutto]

Mark,

My point is, there are other things done on the PGA Tour that the Tour considers to be playing by the Rules and you do not. Like the dreaded Lift, Clean and Place.

This practice of leaving balls unmarked is considered by Tour players to be within the Rules of Golf and you do not agree.

If one were going to start a crusade to get PGA Tour players to abide by your personal interpretation of the Rules (as shared by Pat and Jim and many others here) then I'm suggesting maybe start that crusade over something that obviously matters a great deal to the outcome. Lift, Clean and Place would be as good a start as any.

When tilting at windmills, why not start with the big windmills first?

At any rate, the Rules do nor forbid leaving balls unmarked on the green. They only forbid collusion. I submit that some act must take place to constitute that collusion. Something other than passively acceding to a practice that has been observed on Tour for ages.

[Steve Salmen]

 On 15 Sergio played a chip with a ball near the hole.  I don't know whose ball it was or the circumstances under which it was marked.  Pace of play may be a fair enough reason for not marking.  Anyway, Sergio missed a short putt.

FF to 17. Sergio again has played a chip with a ball about 2-3ft right of the hole.  Normally not a big deal but at Augusta, inches off line seem to turn into yards away from the hole (as stated by a commentator).  Again, I don't know whose ball it was but Luke Donald was just standing around.  If it was his ball, he did an awful job of protecting the field, if that is his obligation.  Sergio chipped to six ft or so and missed.

I've never been a fan of Sergio but this recent resurgence has kind of made me pull for the guy because he has so much talent.  After seeing these two episodes, he's probably the last guy in the field I'd like to see win.

[Brent Hutto]

But let's say every other player on Tour is leaving their ball there unmarked in those circumstances and then Luke Donald takes it on himself to say, "Wait a minute" and hustle over there to mark it before Sergio hits.

Is the "field" being "protected" or is it just bad luck to get drawn with Luke Donald who happens to interpret that particular Rule like the most hard-ass of Rules Noodges.

Here's the problem with being Holier than Thou. There's always someone more Holier-than-Thou than Thou.

Where exactly to draw the line on acceptable situations for delaying play to get a ball marked before someone chips is a judgment call. It would appear to me that the Tour players by and large choose to interpret that judgment call by erring on the side of leaving the ball unmarked. Rather than have a situation where every player reacts slightly differently to various scenarios, they all pretty much react the same.

The alternative would be a race to the Holier than Tour-est. Who's to say someone wouldn't take Pat Mucci's eminently reasonable interpretation of this Rule and decide he's being way too lenient. Maybe one day Mark B. gets his senior Tour card and decides every ball on the green must be marked even if the player is 100 yards back down the fairway and the ball is 40 feet offline from the chip.

Yes, the shared interpretation (which is not collusion, per se) on the PGA Tour appears to be the most lenient possible interpretation. Why would we expect it to be any different. These guys spend whole careers being given lenient interpretations. By their fellow players, by the Tour officials, by everyone except the couch potatoes sitting at home in front of the TV.

But as I say, a widely shared personal judgment which obeys broadly understood social norms is NOT an agreement to waive a Rule.

[Bruce Katona]

Someone was ceratinly paying attention to the Rules yesterday as I just read that Luke Donald was assessed a two stroke penalty on #9 for touching the sand.....I didn't see this happen but he eventually carded the dreaded "snowman."

Anyone see it or was this called in by an armchair rules maven?

[Brent Hutto]

Bruce,

It seemed to happen pretty quickly (or maybe that's an artifact of my DVR habits!) so I assumed it was assessed immediately after the infraction. But maybe that was a wrong assumption.

[Michael Whitaker]

Rule 22 - Ball Assisting Or Interfering With Play
 
22-1. Ball Assisting Play
Except when a ball is in motion, if a player considers that a ball might assist any other player, he may:

a. Lift the ball if it is his ball; or

b. Have any other ball lifted.

A ball lifted under this Rule must be replaced (see Rule 20-3). The ball must not be cleaned, unless it lies on the putting green (see Rule 21).

In stroke play, a player required to lift his ball may play first rather than lift the ball.

In stroke play, if the Committee determines that competitors have agreed not to lift a ball that might assist any competitor, they are disqualified.

Note: When another ball is in motion, a ball that might influence the movement of the ball in motion must not be lifted.

22-2. Ball Interfering With Play
Except when a ball is in motion, if a player considers that another ball might interfere with his play, he may have it lifted.

A ball lifted under this Rule must be replaced (see Rule 20-3). The ball must not be cleaned, unless it lies on the putting green (see Rule 21).

In stroke play, a player required to lift his ball may play first rather than lift the ball.

Note 1: Except on the putting green, a player may not lift his ball solely because he considers that it might interfere with the play of another player. If a player lifts his ball without being asked to do so, he incurs a penalty of one stroke for a breach of Rule 18-2a, but there is no additional penalty under Rule 22.

Note 2: When another ball is in motion, a ball that might influence the movement of the ball in motion must not be lifted.

PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE:

Match play – Loss of hole; Stroke play – Two strokes.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brent,

The PGA Tour and PGA rules have no standing at The Masters

In addition, protecting the field becomes an inherent quality amongst competitors at the higher levels.

[Keith Grande]

Someone was ceratinly paying attention to the Rules yesterday as I just read that Luke Donald was assessed a two stroke penalty on #9 for touching the sand.....I didn't see this happen but he eventually carded the dreaded "snowman."

Anyone see it or was this called in by an armchair rules maven?

I heard he "touched the sand' - assuming with his club? when his ball remained in the bunker, sometime before he hit his second shot out of the bunker.  It was not called immediately, he was addressed by the rules committee prior to signing his card after the round.

[Thomas Dai]

If, to avoid arguments/penalties over the collusion issue, players/caddies always walked up to mark their ball just imagine how slow our already sooo slow game would be.

atb

[Sean_A]

If, to avoid arguments/penalties over the collusion issue, players/caddies always walked up to mark their ball just imagine how slow our already sooo slow game would be.

atb

ATB

I agree.  Sometimes, expediency trumps mind numbing rules.  Nearly all tv golf is horrible to watch (I really don't know it attracts an audience), lets make it even worse.  At some point the rules have to be trimmed or our game is going to sink into the mire of rules bureaucracy - if it already hasn't.

Ciao