News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


JohnVDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #50 on: September 06, 2021, 11:02:33 AM »
I still find it funny that people watching on TV are saying "it definitely wasn't going to go in", I mean c'mon talk about your Couch QB'ing.

I watched the replays too and the point is, it was unclear if it had a chance, and when the Euro player ran over to pick it up, she forever altered the outcome.  Its the basketball equivalent of defensive goal-tending, the ball is bouncing on the rim, maybe it goes in, maybe not.. but when you grab it off the rim, then it for sure ain't going in.

And the pace of play argument?  Give me a break...spending a few extra seconds to see if the ball is gonna drop is not the reason the official told 'em to pick up the pace.


The Rule is not written to take into account “could it have gone in”. So anyone arguing that is wrong right off the bat.  If a vertical extension of the circle of the hole intersects any portion of the ball is all that matters.  The player whose ball it is has the right to make the determination if it could go in or not and for his or her opponent to take away that right is the cause of the violation.


The “penalty” for doing this is merely that the ball is holed.  It isn’t like a penalty shot is added to the opponent’s score, which is the case in many other situations where an opponent lifts a player’s ball.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #51 on: September 06, 2021, 11:10:11 AM »
I still find it funny that people watching on TV are saying "it definitely wasn't going to go in", I mean c'mon talk about your Couch QB'ing.

I watched the replays too and the point is, it was unclear if it had a chance, and when the Euro player ran over to pick it up, she forever altered the outcome.  Its the basketball equivalent of defensive goal-tending, the ball is bouncing on the rim, maybe it goes in, maybe not.. but when you grab it off the rim, then it for sure ain't going in.

And the pace of play argument?  Give me a break...spending a few extra seconds to see if the ball is gonna drop is not the reason the official told 'em to pick up the pace.

The Rule is not written to take into account “could it have gone in”. So anyone arguing that is wrong right off the bat.  If a vertical extension of the circle of the hole intersects any portion of the ball is all that matters.  The player whose ball it is has the right to make the determination if it could go in or not and for his or her opponent to take away that right is the cause of the violation.

The “penalty” for doing this is merely that the ball is holed.  It isn’t like a penalty shot is added to the opponent’s score, which is the case in many other situations where an opponent lifts a player’s ball.


We're in full agreement here John even if you're not a fan of the "could have gone in" statement.

The reality is we don't know what the status was because her opponent rushed over to pick it up before it could be determined if it was on the lip aka touching the vertical cylinder extending upward from the cup.

P.S.  We know players at this level are ultra-competitive and look hard and wide to find any advantage.  Seems like picking up an opponent's ball that sits on the lip before it has a chance to drop in would be one of them...

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #52 on: September 06, 2021, 11:13:30 AM »
AG, I'm not certain that your final point is necessarily true. There've been numerous instances over the years where a tennis player has defaulted away a game when a referee's or linesman's error has affected the course of a match. . . The fact remains that the ball wasn't going in, and the hole should have been halved. The windfall from the clearly inadvertent breach of the rules could have been corrected by conceding the Euros' tee shot on the next tee, and they walk to the next hole having corrected the error.
Mark,

I played college tennis; I'm well aware of that being done by pro tennis players when a linesman missed a call.  No matter how you feel about the ruling, the key difference here is that the official did NOT miss the call; the rule was applied 100% correctly.  That is completely different and unrelated to the tennis example.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2021, 11:15:09 AM by A.G._Crockett »
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #53 on: September 06, 2021, 11:15:57 AM »
John,


Isn’t the Solheim Cup being played under special circumstances where the rules officials have more authority and the players less? I don’t believe whatever Korda determined mattered.

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #54 on: September 06, 2021, 11:25:05 AM »

Wouldn't it be much simpler - and we'd no doubt avoid all these disputes and misunderstandings - if players just holed out? It's not as if conceding putts is speeding up the game. They were taking 3 hours to play 9 holes :o


The sight of a professional golfer looking for a nod or listening out for an "it's ok / that's good" when faced with a 6-15 inch putt is just silly. If you're clearly hoping your opponent gives you a putt, isn't that a very good reason for your opponent not to concede the putt?


Has there been a situation where a played picked up a ball after hearing "it's ok" and it turned out that it was someone in the crowd that said it, rather than the opponent? If it hasn't happened yet, it's bound to happen at some stage. (EDIT: I just read this may have actually happended in the Pettersen/Lee incident)


These situations are just open to too many misunderstandings. The Suzann Pettersen incident was another example where not conceding a putt (which was her right) got her in hot water.

There are good reasons unrelated to pace of play for conceding putts in match play, where, unlike stroke play, you are "protecting the field". 


Suppose in a four ball that Player A is away, and A's partner is only a foot or two from the hole but would be standing in an opponent's line.  A is putting for birdie; the partner is putting for par, and the sensible team strategy would be to have A's partner putt first to make par and allow a free run for A's birdie putt.  Both players on Team B have birdie putts; how they putt them will depend on whether or not A makes his/her putt.  In this case, conceding A's partner's putt is good strategy to keep footprints out of their line.

Another example that happens commonly is when a player who is out of the hole has a putt along a similar line as their partner's putt, which DOES matter.  Their opponents don't want the player who is out of the hole to show their partner the line, so they concede the meaningless putt, which means that player is NOT allowed to putt the ball.  That concession really, really matters, especially at the professional level where players learn a ton about line and speed from watching a similar putt.

Those two situations come up all the time in match play; I'm sure there are others, but you get the idea.  And when to concede and when not to concede putts are things that make match play hugely entertaining to play and watch.
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

Peter Flory

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #55 on: September 06, 2021, 12:35:58 PM »
I have a hyper technical question out of curiosity. 

What if:
- Korda's putt was clearly hanging over the edge of the cup
- Sagstrom said "that's good" within a few seconds of the ball stopping
- Korda walks up to it and picks it up. 

In that scenario, would Sagstrom's concession be null since it would have been given before it was allowed to be given?  And would Korda forfeit her score on the hole by picking up without a valid concession given?

No:

See:

b. What to Do If Ball Overhanging Hole Is Lifted or Moved Before Waiting Time Has Ended
If a ball overhanging the hole is lifted or moved before the waiting time under Rule 13.3a has ended, the ball is treated as having come to rest:
   •   The ball must be replaced on the lip of the hole (see Rule 14.2), and
   •   The waiting time under Rule 13.3a no longer applies to the ball. (See Rule 9.3 for what to do if the replaced ball is then moved by natural forces.)

In stroke play, you don’t have to wait the 10 seconds, you tap it in without waiting.

In match play you can concede the next stroke while the is still in motion so there is no need to replace it as the next stroke was conceded:

Rule 3.2b(1) says:
»   A concession made while the opponent’s ball is still in motion after the previous stroke applies to the opponent’s next stroke, unless the ball is holed (in which case the concession does not matter).

I'm not sure that I'm following this completely.  Are you saying that in this scenario, the ball would still be considered to be in motion from Sagstrom's perspective and that the concession would apply into the future?  But from Korda's perspective, the ball would be considered to be stationary- so she'd be allowed to pick it up? 

As an alternative, what if Korda got to the hole, waited out the 10 seconds, and then tapped it in, well after the premature concession (say Korda's partner was still in play)?  Would that be a penalty for putting after the putt had been conceded?

I'm realizing that every Ryder Cup, President's Cup, and Solheim Cup team should probably have a 30 minute seminar in their team room focusing on the traps related to conceded putts. 

Brian_Ewen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #56 on: September 06, 2021, 01:00:19 PM »
.

Brian_Ewen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #57 on: September 06, 2021, 01:02:30 PM »
Those two situations come up all the time in match play; I'm sure there are others, but you get the idea.  And when to concede and when not to concede putts are things that make match play hugely entertaining to play and watch.


But this is not about conceding, its about picking up an opponents ball.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #58 on: September 06, 2021, 01:07:35 PM »
Those two situations come up all the time in match play; I'm sure there are others, but you get the idea.  And when to concede and when not to concede putts are things that make match play hugely entertaining to play and watch.


But this is not about conceding, its about picking up an opponents ball.


Which is usually the same thing...99.9% of the time.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #59 on: September 06, 2021, 01:13:15 PM »
The most concerning issue is why the professional women are not trusted at the EXACT same level as the men to make their own calls.

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #60 on: September 06, 2021, 01:20:18 PM »
AG, I'm not certain that your final point is necessarily true. There've been numerous instances over the years where a tennis player has defaulted away a game when a referee's or linesman's error has affected the course of a match. . . The fact remains that the ball wasn't going in, and the hole should have been halved. The windfall from the clearly inadvertent breach of the rules could have been corrected by conceding the Euros' tee shot on the next tee, and they walk to the next hole having corrected the error.
That makes no sense to me. The Euros breached a Rule. Why should the Americans "give" them anything back?

Wouldn't it be much simpler - and we'd no doubt avoid all these disputes and misunderstandings - if players just holed out? It's not as if conceding putts is speeding up the game. They were taking 3 hours to play 9 holes :o
It'd be even slower, because they can't really play out of turn. So they'd have to mark that 6" putt, as you say. Plus what AG added.

I'm not sure that I'm following this completely.  Are you saying that in this scenario, the ball would still be considered to be in motion from Sagstrom's perspective and that the concession would apply into the future?  But from Korda's perspective, the ball would be considered to be stationary- so she'd be allowed to pick it up?

If a ball overhanging the lip is conceded, until the player arrives at the ball in a reasonable time and waits ten seconds, it's not considered to be at rest per se. If Nelly picks up the ball she's accepted that it was at rest and takes the concession (the same as if a player taps in a putt overhanging the hole). If she waits the ten seconds and it falls in before that elapses, it was holed with the previous stroke.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #61 on: September 06, 2021, 01:33:17 PM »
Those two situations come up all the time in match play; I'm sure there are others, but you get the idea.  And when to concede and when not to concede putts are things that make match play hugely entertaining to play and watch.


But this is not about conceding, its about picking up an opponents ball.


Sagstrom did both; she conceded a birdie putt, then picked up the overhanging eagle putt.  But I’m not sure I can think of a situation where picking up a ball or a marker wouldn’t be a concession.




But in any case, I was responding to Donal’s idea that perhaps it would be better if there were NO concessions at all in match play.
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

Rob Marshall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #62 on: September 06, 2021, 03:19:54 PM »
Nellie had plenty of time to tell her not to pick it up. The Euro did not IMO rush to pick it up and contrary to what Nellie said she watched the Euro pick it up. After it was picked up she said nothing.
If life gives you limes, make margaritas.” Jimmy Buffett

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #63 on: September 06, 2021, 03:32:03 PM »
Those two situations come up all the time in match play; I'm sure there are others, but you get the idea.  And when to concede and when not to concede putts are things that make match play hugely entertaining to play and watch.


But this is not about conceding, its about picking up an opponents ball.


Sagstrom did both; she conceded a birdie putt, then picked up the overhanging eagle putt.  But I’m not sure I can think of a situation where picking up a ball or a marker wouldn’t be a concession.




But in any case, I was responding to Donal’s idea that perhaps it would be better if there were NO concessions at all in match play.


A.G.-A concession can add a strategic element to match play. I hope it remains intact.

Brian_Ewen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #64 on: September 06, 2021, 04:53:55 PM »
I just can't get over that some of you's still believe that ball had any chance of suddenly just dropping in  ::)

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #65 on: September 06, 2021, 05:02:02 PM »
I just can't get over that some of you's still believe that ball had any chance of suddenly just dropping in  ::)


Which doesn’t matter anyway, as we’ve all learned.  The ball has to overhang for the two rules in question to kick in; anyone’s opinion about dropping or not is irrelevant.
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #66 on: September 06, 2021, 05:03:36 PM »
I just can't get over that some of you's still believe that ball had any chance of suddenly just dropping in  ::)


Completely agreed, after her opponent picked it up it had zero chance...

Rob Marshall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #67 on: September 06, 2021, 05:13:14 PM »
I just can't get over that some of you's still believe that ball had any chance of suddenly just dropping in  ::)


Completely agreed, after her opponent picked it up it had zero chance...


Why didn’t Nellie tell her not to touch it? She watched her pick it up?
« Last Edit: September 06, 2021, 06:54:10 PM by Rob Marshall »
If life gives you limes, make margaritas.” Jimmy Buffett

Brian_Ewen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #68 on: September 06, 2021, 05:28:52 PM »
KARMA  8)

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #69 on: September 06, 2021, 06:35:05 PM »
Quote
Peter

Trust and verify.

Ciao

With Patrick Reed, for sure.  But not with Sagstrom.


Sorry, as this situation proved to be the case, trust and verify.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #70 on: September 06, 2021, 06:43:15 PM »
Nellie had plenty of time to tell her not to pick it up. The Euro did not IMO rush to pick it up and contrary to what Nellie said she watched the Euro pick it up. After it was picked up she said nothing.

None of this has any bearing on the issue. Besides, the entire thing happened in 7 seconds!

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #71 on: September 06, 2021, 06:52:44 PM »
If you haven't seen it, this piece by Michael Bamberger explains it well.

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/rare-ruling-at-solheim-cup-unfortunate-also-sensible/

Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #72 on: September 06, 2021, 06:54:52 PM »
And anyone who considers that karma had anything to do with the European team's victory, discredits the effort it took for those dozen women to win at singles, on opposing soil, when all the evidence suggested otherwise. Shame on you for suggesting that some fairy dust had anything to do with it.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #73 on: September 06, 2021, 07:31:40 PM »
These people are hitting a ball that doesn't move on a perfectly manicured course in ideal weather. After spending a lifetime honing world class God given skills the only thing that matters is karma, spite, anger, joy and momentum. Just don't open your mouth and jinx it.

Kyle Harris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Solheim Rules Kerfuffle
« Reply #74 on: September 06, 2021, 08:26:57 PM »
Is don’t touch your opponent’s ball unless it will cause them no ill effect too common sense here?
http://kylewharris.com

Constantly blamed by 8-handicaps for their 7 missed 12-footers each round.

Thank you for changing the font of your posts. It makes them easier to scroll past.