Marking Controversy in Irish Open

[Kalen Braley]

Explains it all here.  At issue was, did he improve his lie??


http://golfweek.com/2017/07/20/british-open-jon-rahm-ruling-no-penalty/

[Michael Tamburrini]

Surely the issue isn't "did he improve his lie" though??  That's a total cop out - an easy excuse not to give him a penalty because golf's authorities are terrified of bad headlines.  There's a lot more to golf than just how a ball is lying.


i know that when I move a bit of grass it rarely improves the lie.  Basically, if the grass is close enough to the ball to make a difference I wouldn't risk moving it.  But it does make a difference psychologically - I know that little bit of grass won't distract me if I move it away. 


This should've been a penalty (again).  Also, on seven, he came very close to testing the sand in the bunker when he raked with his foot after leaving the ball in it. 


I don't particularly blame Rahm.  If asked he was probably right to say that moving the grass didn't make a difference to the lie.  But there's more to hitting a golf shot than how the ball is sitting.


As an aside I saw a player (Matsuyama I think) hit a shot from a poor lie in a bunker with a ball two feet behind the flag as a blatant backstop.  It was much more obvious cheating than anything Rahm did and passed without any comment.

[Mike_Clayton]

Michael


I too saw that Matsuyama bunker shot and the same thing goes on all the time. It's as though they don't even know there responsibility is to protect the field - not look after their mates.
Maybe, technically it's ok because there is no agreed collusion but it doesn't make it any less of a joke.
I don't remember the players but it was one of the last two groups on Sunday at Erin Hills and one player pitched back from over the 2nd green with the other players ball a couple of feet from the hole - when it clearly could have been marked.


Here in contrast is how Bob Shearer handled the same situation as Rahm.
15th hole, 1st round of the 1982 Australian Open. Bob is playing with Jack Nicklaus when he hits a poor bunker shot. It gets out of the bunker onto the edge of the green. Angry, he takes a swipe at the sand. The ball then turns and rolls back into the bunker.
He calls the penalty.
The AGU review the TV evidence after the round and rules there is no penalty.
Jack Nicklaus agrees and assures Bob it is no penalty.
Bob insists on taking the 2 shots saying, 'I'm never having anyone question my integrity'


He beat Nicklaus and Payne Stewart by two shots three days later.
That's how Rahm should have handled both situations -but maybe his way is an indication of the way the game has gone since 1982?

[Thomas Dai]

"Integrity". Very important.
atb

[archie_struthers]

 




One last try . Next time you play ......put mark in front of ball. It's a Eureka moment.

[Michael Tamburrini]

It's not entirely the fault of the players.  Over the last 20 years influences from other sports have creeped into aspects of the game (witness the celebrations at a Ryder Cup now - where a green can't pass without a fist pump - and compare it to the fierce Ryder Cups of the 80s).  The default setting of many players now is that they weren't at fault and they start from a defensive position.


See McIlroy at the Masters a few years back.  He took a kick at the sand and would've missed the cut had it been penalised.  Instead it got explained away as a swoosh rather than the obvious bout of temper it was.


Or Tiger and his being adamant that the ball only oscillated.


Even Dustin Johnson at the US Open last year - his starting position was that it wasn't his fault.  In the past, I'd imagine players would have been more willing to begin from the position of "if I don't know why it moved, I'll take the penalty."


It's built in to the ethos of sportsmen that they are innocent now and it's not a surprise that golf is no different.  The problem is that, in golf, the referees seem to be becoming more willing to accept the word of the player rather than court the controversy of an unpopular decision.


I don't understand why the Tours and R&A/USGA aren't clamping down on the backstop thing.  It's such a blatant disregard for the rules (and the rest of the field) I have no idea why it's barely even mentioned.  I suspect that it'll eventually generate the usual response: nothing.  Or it'll be made officially legal, just to avoid the problem.

[Rob Marshall]

Michael


I too saw that Matsuyama bunker shot and the same thing goes on all the time. It's as though they don't even know there responsibility is to protect the field - not look after their mates.
Maybe, technically it's ok because there is no agreed collusion but it doesn't make it any less of a joke.
I don't remember the players but it was one of the last two groups on Sunday at Erin Hills and one player pitched back from over the 2nd green with the other players ball a couple of feet from the hole - when it clearly could have been marked.


Here in contrast is how Bob Shearer handled the same situation as Rahm.
15th hole, 1st round of the 1982 Australian Open. Bob is playing with Jack Nicklaus when he hits a poor bunker shot. It gets out of the bunker onto the edge of the green. Angry, he takes a swipe at the sand. The ball then turns and rolls back into the bunker.
He calls the penalty.
The AGU review the TV evidence after the round and rules there is no penalty.
Jack Nicklaus agrees and assures Bob it is no penalty.
Bob insists on taking the 2 shots saying, 'I'm never having anyone question my integrity'


He beat Nicklaus and Payne Stewart by two shots three days later.
That's how Rahm should have handled both situations -but maybe his way is an indication of the way the game has gone since 1982?

Speith did the same thing yesterday on a bunker shot on one of last holes. I don't see it as a big deal. I agree the ball should be marked but I also can't remember ever seeing someone on tour helped by it.

[Thomas Dai]

This business about the 'backstop' ball.


Try a different perspective. Encourage pace of play by allowing the backstop ball...if a player can hit their next shot before the 'backstop' ball is marked and picked up then good luck to the player for playing their shot quickly,


Retiring to hide behind the settee now!


Atb

[Mike_Clayton]

Thomas,


Marking the occasional backstop ball has zero influence on the overall pace of play. Slow play is caused by players generally just pissing about.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm curious how often this actually occurs?


Given that someone has to chip/hit before you AND that ball has to end up pretty close to directly behind the hole on your line AND its such a hard target to hit given its only a fraction of the size of the cup... I can't recall when this has happened on TV or otherwise.  Seems such a remote use case to even worry about.

[Mike_Clayton]

Kalen


Here is but one example at a pretty important time.
Last group of the US Open, Final day 2nd hole.


It's about 3 minutes in -  with an entirely appropriate comment from Paul Azinger.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZJzK10Ndcc

[Thomas Dai]

Thomas,
Marking the occasional backstop ball has zero influence on the overall pace of play. Slow play is caused by players generally just pissing about.

Agree about slow play and players pissing about but, playing Devils Advocate here, wouldn't the potential saving of a shot encourage speed of play...play quick while the backstop ball is there....even more so if the 'backstop' ball couldn't, yes couldn't, be replaced in it's original position?
Indeed not being able to replace a potential backstop ball in the original spot, and a backstop ball possibly being moved further away, might encourage slow-coaches to 'piss-around' less and mark their balls quicker.
Not sure about the video phrase 'protecting the field' either....although I can't write about the Pro game plenty of 'funnies' exist in the amateur game when mates play with mates in competitions for prizes.
atb

[Mike_Clayton]

Thomas - that would stop it but it wouldn't work because where to you draw the line? You always have to replace the stationary ball.
It was something that never/hardly ever happened all the time I played in the 80s and 90s.

[Thomas Dai]

It was something that never/hardly ever happened all the time I played in the 80s and 90s.

Fair point Mike and your sentence above says a lot about the way golf, especially TV golf (and other sports/professions as well?) seems to have morphed over the decades.
Atb

[Mike_Clayton]

Thomas, I'm just watching Alfie Plant in The Open with a massive Nike swoosh on his hat and shirt.
Either : He's getting paid.
He's not and he's getting ripped off.
Or, he's no a big promise the day he turns pro.


When we played the reps would sneak you a dozen balls in the car park.It was against the rules but everyone broke them except, according to Jack Nicklaus, Bill Campbell.


It's changed in lots of ways.

[Thomas Dai]

Mike,
I know where your coming from. I recall 'boot money' in rugby union in the decades prior to the game going professional and David Campese's comment towards the end of the amateur era that he was the first amateur to make a £1m from rugby union! I think when Rod Laver won Wimbledon back in the amateur days his first prize was a £25 voucher for a local sports shop!
The world hadn't half changed, it always has but the pace of change these days, jeez, there's us communicating on GCA via the web....Dan Dare stuff when I were a lad!
Atb

[Padraig Dooley]

With regards to the backstop ball there is a decision on it.

     22/7 Ball Assisting Fellow-Competitor on Putting Green; Procedure for Referee If Competitor Does Not Lift Ball          Q.  In stroke play, a competitor’s ball is in a position to assist the play of a fellow-competitor and the competitor is in a position to lift the ball under Rule 22-1 without delaying the fellow-competitor’s play. However, the  competitor does not take any action to invoke the Rule. Would a referee be justified in intervening and requesting the competitor to invoke the Rule to protect himself and the rest of the field?
  A.  Yes. If the competitor were to object, there would be strong evidence of an agreement not to lift the ball for the purpose of assisting the fellow-competitor in breach of Rule 22-1. The referee would be justified in so advising the competitors involved and warning that failure to lift the ball would result in disqualification under Rule 22-1.





     

[Michael Tamburrini]

I wonder why no referee has stepped in - it's a pretty blatant rule violation (although - as Mike noted - amateurs who are walking, talking adverts for NIKE are pretty suspicious too and that's also ignored).


Another thing that struck me - watching the coverage - was the commentators discussing how players coped in bad weather.  The consensus being that players should slow down and play as slow as possible to let the weather pass.  I remember this from St George's a few years ago - every time a band of rain came in the players would take forever getting on rain gear and, by the time they were ready to hit, the storm had moved on and they could take them off again.  I don't really have a point here other than bloody hell, professional golf is slow and I don't get why golfs authorities are all okay with it.


I was watching the 1966 US Open on youtube (https://youtu.be/xrxcRtvVA58).  Arnold Palmer has a three foot putt at the 18th - probably the most nerve shredding one in his career.  He's just blown a seven shot lead and this downhiller is to get into a playoff the next day.  It's notable that he didn't mark the ball, he just looked at it and putted.  From the ball coming to rest until he hit his putt was under a minute.  Given all the problems we seem to have with marking the ball these days why not have a rule on it?


Something like: You get to mark the ball when you first get on the green but - after you hit a putt - you have to putt continuously until you have completed the hole.  It'd shave about 20 minutes off a round at the top level.  I think they used similar (you only mark your ball once per green) in the 1967 US Open to avoid rounds taking more than 4 hours *bursts into manic laughter*

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks Padraig and Micheal.


With regard to the rule/decision, there's surely a fine line between "without unduly delaying the fellow-competitors play" and the competitor "pissing about" as Mike C calls it and suggests above.


Also, the authorities are currently promoting 'play when ready' golf. Now if I'm ready to play and do so while a backup ball is near the pin should I be in the wrong by being ready to play promptly while my playing partner is pissing about not getting to his ball to mark it quick enough? Reward the speedsters, penalise the slowcoaches?


As to the Arnold Palmer story and the like, I would like to think this area in under review for as Micheal says, pace of play is suffering.


Atb

[Mike_Clayton]

They used to have a continuous putting rule - and I'm not sure it wasn't in play in the '66 Open.It'd kill off the line on the ball thing but it doesn't work if the greens are wet and/or the ball is picking up sand.

[Mike_Clayton]

Kalen,


If you are watching The Open you just saw Sergio leave a ball he could very easily have marked for Ricky while he played from the bunker. It goes on all the time.

[Niall C]

With regards to the marking or not marking discussion I recall in one comp Monty playing  a bunker shot that hit his playing partners ball before that player had had a chance to mark it. I can't recall whether the other competitor was Thomas Bjorn or Darren Clarke but I recall them being very unhappy and Monty making profuse apologies to try and placate them. Of course, neither of them reputedly had much regard for Monty and might not have been inclined to do him any favours anyway.

It seems to me to be a simple rule to make that the player must mark and the other player must allow him to mark before they play there shot. Pace of play doesn't come into it. As Mike says, slow play is down to, well, slow play !

Niall

[Thomas Dai]

Devils Advocate again -


How far off the green does a players ball have to be for him to have to wait while his playing partner walks up and marks a ball that has been hit near the pin? 5 ft? 20 ft? 50 yds? One club length? 2 club lengths?


And for that matter, how near to the pin does the ball have to be before you wait for it to be marked? 1ft? 2th? 5ft? Putter length ('standard' length putter)?


Atb

[Niall C]

Dai

Good question ? Personally I'd make it a judgement call but on the basis of probability or likelihood. If it does happen how likely was it to happen ? If a player is lying 5 to 10 feet pin high as his playing partner looks at it and that playing partner is say 50/60 yards from the hole then I think there might be an expectation he'd get within that and therefore if he did hit the other ball that would not have been foreseen. If on the other hand, the ball lies adjacent to the pin or behind or in front of it then I think it reasonable for the ball to be marked.

Would that slow down play ? The pace that these jokers play at the guy could have walked up and marked his ball, strolled of to the green, had a comfort break and still got back in time to see the next guy play his shot, so probably not.

I'm obviously speaking of the professional game and the amateur game is a totally different matter. Quite a lot of amateurs would be thankful of just hitting the green from 50/60 yards off and therefore the likelihood of hitting the ball on the green would be small, while most of them also mark their ball as a matter of course when someone is chipping from just off the green or out of a bunker so again the issue wouldn't arise.

Niall

[Thomas Dai]

Good points Niall but what is part of the pro-game one day has a habit of morphing into the amateur game the next....e.g. impressionable youngsters waiting 50 yds out while their mate or playing partner walks up to mark etc. And the more the TV commentators (and I guess folks like us!!!) highlight it the quicker the morphing is likely to take place. If there has to be a 'blackball' rule I'd go for 2 clublengths off the green and with 1 (standard) putter length of the hole.


As an aside on 'morphing' the TV talking heads are more and more mentioning the 'walk through' line of putting. Guess what? I'm hearing amateurs mention it now and some even getting narky with playing partners for ignoring the possibility. More slow play....and this at a time when more and more folks wear bubble-sole shoes where the likelihood of a 'spike mark' should be non-existent?


Atb