[Tom Huckaby]

Bogey:

As one of the others present for the shivas example at KPII, I too must applaud that.  Which of us would uttered even a peep had he gone ahead and fixed that pitchmark?  Hell I had forgotten even that that was the rule...

BUT... I can't say I am applauding JJ Henry.  Oh, I'm not decrying him either or trying to denigrate him in any way... To me it's more in a perfect world of golf where the spirit of the rules matters as much as the letter of the law, that doesn't happen.  He did nothing wrong... but he did nothing exemplary either.

And you know I am the farthest thing from a holier than thou purist.  I just do keep thinking back to DLIII two years ago (which TEP just described and I referred to early in this thread), and Clarke earlier this year... Those are rules-related actions that ought to be applauded.  Henry's ought to be given no second thought, really.

BTW, no way I do this in our club championship... we wouldn't be playing lift clean and place!

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Shivas:

Well, that's the point.  Of course YOU would have screamed bloody murder - because the rule is crystal clear and fundamental to you.  And of course this rules-knowledgeable and rules-abiding forum is not the place for me to make that statement, either.

BUT...I can tell you with absolute conviction that outside of my rounds with people in this forum and in real competition, 99% of others I play with would have fixed that mark and putted that - and I wouldn't have said a word.  In fact I - as your partner and team-mate that day - was so damn surprised you chipped that - it made me really take notice about how lax with the rules I personally had become, due to these influences.  

TH

[Michael Moore]

JJ's actions were wholly within the rules of golf in force at the time.

They also seem to be against the spirit of the rules.

Tom (and all) -

In all earnestness, what is the spirit of the rules of golf?

Tufts wrote about the two great principles of the rules, play it as it lies and don't touch the ball. But surely we can differentiate between principles and spirit.

The only thing I can come up with is "call penalties on yourself when no one is looking." But really, that is clearly spelled out in the rules and does not need to be wrapped in sentimentality.

What's the spirit of the rules of golf?

[Tom Huckaby]

Michael:

That is an exceedingly difficult question.

But I guess I will answer very simply:  to me the spirit of the rules is fundamentally "play it as it lies", as you say - and part of that to me means also not taking advantages you know you shouldn't, even if the rules say you can.  Play the ball as it lies, not as it COULD lie.  Maybe that makes sense.. likely not.

In any case I do believe this is exemplified by DLIII in the instance TEP describes, and Darren Clarke when he chipped out earlier this year when overnight his lie was improved such that he could have hit a wood.  Perhaps you remember that instance.

In any case, again, I absolutely concur that there is nothing WRONG with what JJ Henry did.  I just don't feel like praising him for it.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Oh, BTW, let's not forget where that disastrous chip ended up...

The shot wasn't thaaat freakin' hard...

Oh I do remember that part... I just come to praise shivas, not bury him.

 

[TEPaul]

"Michael:

That is an exceedingly difficult question."

Not really. I've got to go mow a field but when I get back I'll be glad to explain what that old fashioned "Spirit" was and how it related in a Rules context. At least I'll explain it the way the likes of Macdonald and Max Behr did.

[Tom Huckaby]

TEP:

By saying you're going to invoke Macdonald and especially Behr, I believe you just proved the correctness of my statement.

 

I do look forward to your thoughts, though.  I am crystal-clear in my own mind what the spirit of the rules is... I just find quantifying it in words others will understand to be exceedingly difficult.

TH

[Tim Pitner]

I don't play much tournament golf so I'm no rules expert.  But, I don't see how Henry's actions are defensible.  He can move his ball within six inches and then decides to place the ball on a sprinkler head to get further relief.  That's gaming the system and it's not right.  End of story.  It's disappointing and I'm frankly surprised that Lehman encouraged it.  

[JohnV]

As an opponent, I might or might not have called Shivas if he had fixed the pitch mark.  In match play, that is my choice.  I might decide that it isn't worth worrying about and ignored it, either because it didn't help that much or because I didn't want to get in an argument about it or piss him off and make him play better.

Or I might have decided that it gave him an advantage that I didn't want to give him and called it.

Or I might have kept my mouth shut, thinking he might do it again later in the match when it would be more crucial and I could call that one instead of this one.

Match play allows me the choice as long as we don't discuss it which would be agreeing to waive the rule.  If Shivas looked up after fixing it and said, "Oops, I can't do that."  The penalty would have to be enforced.

If I was a referee in the match, I'd have no choice, I'd have to call it.  A friend of mine was refereeing a match at the US Mid-Am in 1998 when a player did just that.  He saw it and so did the opponent.  He called the player on it.  The player asked, "What does that mean?".  He said, "It means we're going to the next hole."

[JohnV]

Tom Paul,  I don't think your hypothetical would be an agreement to waive a rule, just not to use one that is optional.  But, if one player decided to use it at a crucial time, the other couldn't cry foul.

Tim Pitner,  That is the issue.  There is nothing against the rules in doing it, but to do it leaves a bad taste in many people's mouth.  To many it isn't the true spirit of the game to use a rule in a manner such as that.

[PThomas]

To many it isn't the true spirit of the game to use a rule in a manner such as that.

John has perfectly summed it up

[JESII]

Defining THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME[/i] may not be easy, but recognizing it sure is.

[Michael Moore]

Tom Paul -

I'm going to bed and you're still mowing that goddamn meadow at midnight? Give it a rest!

Q. What's so special about the rules of golf that there has to be a "spirit" of the rules? The rules of football, baseball, etc. have no such "spirit".

A. Golf is played out in the world. Anything could happen.

Q. What then is this "spirit"?

A. EQUITY. LIKE SITUATIONS SHALL BE TREATED ALIKE. Period, end of story, Q.E.D. The only situation where anyone could invoke this precious "spirit" of the rules is one that is not covered by the rules or the decisions on the rules. A new situation where equity is not clear. The first gut to say "hey, my ball is in a gopher hole." The first guy to say "hey, my clubhead flew off during the downswing". What is equitable?

What Mr. Henry did was a pure embodiment of the "spirit" of the rules of golf. Like situations shall be treated alike.

[B. Mogg]

Tom Paul -

I'm going to bed and you're still mowing that goddamn meadow at midnight? Give it a rest!

Q. What's so special about the rules of golf that there has to be a "spirit" of the rules? The rules of football, baseball, etc. have no such "spirit".

A. Golf is played out in the world. Anything could happen.

Q. What then is this "spirit"?

A. EQUITY. LIKE SITUATIONS SHALL BE TREATED ALIKE. Period, end of story, Q.E.D. The only situation where anyone could invoke this precious "spirit" of the rules is one that is not covered by the rules or the decisions on the rules. A new situation where equity is not clear. The first gut to say "hey, my ball is in a gopher hole." The first guy to say "hey, my clubhead flew off during the downswing". What is equitable?

What Mr. Henry did was a pure embodiment of the "spirit" of the rules of golf. Like situations shall be treated alike.

Mike

Football (soccer) does have a "spirit of rules".  Often times when a player is injured the other team will kick the ball out of play.  When play resumes the team with the injured player has the throw in, but they nearly always throw in and give the ball back to the other side.

Ciao

Sean

Football have spirit!? As demonsrated by the Italian strikers and rest of continental teams going down like a dropped suitcase whenever they have a sniff of a penalty? The only people still demonstrating this sprit are the poms etc and look where that gets them!

[Adam Clayman]

MM- The spirit of the rules are founded more in the introduction than within in them (at least the modern ones) Older rules sheets, like the one from Muirfield (circa 1744) exude the spirit of the sport, also.

The travesty of this LC&C event had nothing to  do with the rules or the procedures JJ followed, it had to do with the venue.

Play that comp on a real Irish links and there would have been no need for LC&C rule. That's the travesty!

[Tom Huckaby]

shivas:

All that is understood.  And your respect and knowledge for the rules, both in letter and in spirit, remains exemplary.  BTW, you made a 5 after the skulled chip.  

But here's another point:  if I was your opponent that day... and you HAD fixed that ballmark on the fringe... I swear I wouldn't have said a word.  And as JV says, that would have been my right.  Half of that would have been because at that point in time I had forgotten that you can't do that under the written rules (no lie - just conditioning from lax rules playing, also not seeing that happen for a LONG time); but the more important half would have been because in the spirit of the rules as I see them, you ought to be able to fix that mark, in that situation.  It's just silly to me that a ball that would obviously be putted now can't, because a pitch mark is three inches from where it could be fixed.  Oh I know why the rule has to exist, and I believe it's a good rule.  But in that instance... shit, fix it and putt it.   I don't want to win a hole due to something so silly.

Which also might be why I lose more matches than I should... no ruthless killer am I... hmmmmm... separate issue.  

In any case, that's more the point FOR ME of discussing that instance, as a witness.  I understand absolutely perfectly why there's no way you fix that mark - I'd feel the same - or let's say I would have had I been more familiar with the rule at the time!  But from that point forward, hell yes, I feel the same.

But if someone else does it?  Of course it depends on the situation.... but it if's three inches off the green, where a pitchmark should never happen... in match play.... hell if you want to fix it go ahead.  That's part of the spirit of the rules to me.

TH

[JohnV]

Which also might be why I lose more matches than I should... no ruthless killer am I... hmmmmm... separate issue.  

You and David Toms.

in match play.... hell if you want to fix it go ahead.

Just don't tell him that if he asks if he can fix it or else you are both going home unhappy.

[Tom Huckaby]

JV - understood re both of those.. particularly the first.

But say it's just a simple match, or in any case match play where no one else is effected but me and my opponent.

Now I get how one can't agree to waive the rules... but if we do, what happens?  How can we BOTH lose?

TH

[George Pazin]

Aren't you DQ'd if you agree to waive the rules?

After reading this thread - and every other rules thread - I realize how inadequate my knowledge of the rules is.

[Tom Huckaby]

Aren't you DQ'd if you agree to waive the rules?

After reading this thread - and every other rules thread - I realize how inadequate my knowledge of the rules is.

You certainly are in stroke play, and in a match play tournament you'd both be DQ'd.

My question is what happens if it's just a simple match, or another match in which no one else is effected?  How can you be DQ'd from that which doesn't exist?

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

Tom Paul -

I'm going to bed and you're still mowing that goddamn meadow at midnight? Give it a rest!

Q. What's so special about the rules of golf that there has to be a "spirit" of the rules? The rules of football, baseball, etc. have no such "spirit".

A. Golf is played out in the world. Anything could happen.

Q. What then is this "spirit"?

A. EQUITY. LIKE SITUATIONS SHALL BE TREATED ALIKE. Period, end of story, Q.E.D. The only situation where anyone could invoke this precious "spirit" of the rules is one that is not covered by the rules or the decisions on the rules. A new situation where equity is not clear. The first gut to say "hey, my ball is in a gopher hole." The first guy to say "hey, my clubhead flew off during the downswing". What is equitable?

What Mr. Henry did was a pure embodiment of the "spirit" of the rules of golf. Like situations shall be treated alike.

Michael,
I know you're playing devil's advocate here, because I know you love the game and its best traditions.  One of those best traditions is that "real" golfers don't need an official with them, or even an opponent watching; we police ourselves because it's the right thing to do.

Obviously, Love and Clarke believed that the spirit (or intent, if you will) of the Rules can be violated even if the letter of the Rules are maintained.  Placing a ball on a sprinkler head?  Why in the world would the Rules have EVER intended THAT?  

The answer is, of course, that the Rules wouldn't intend that.  Henry and Lehman found a loophole and marched right through it to a slightly more level lie.  Love and Clarke saw loopholes and judged that the Rules aren't about loopholes; they're about playing the game fairly, and they acted accordingly.

Both can't be "right", though both are correct.  Love and Clarke are in harmony with the intent of the Rules, and therefore living in the "spirit" of the game.  Henry missed the boat (about which he may or may not care, which is certainly his option), and he wasn't wrong.  But there's no way he was acting in the spirit of the game, and I know that you know that.

[JohnV]

Aren't you DQ'd if you agree to waive the rules?

After reading this thread - and every other rules thread - I realize how inadequate my knowledge of the rules is.

You certainly are in stroke play, and in a match play tournament you'd both be DQ'd.

My question is what happens if it's just a simple match, or another match in which no one else is effected?  How can you be DQ'd from that which doesn't exist?

TH

And if you are playing a stroke play competition between just you and your buddy you can concede a putt and nobody will be affected.

When it is just two of you, you can always do what you want, only you know what is going on and only you have a stake.

[Craig Sweet]

If taking advantage of "loop holes" in the rules to win one for the country so offends, perhaps we shouldn't get our panties in such a wad over the outcome of the Ryder Cup?

I believe so long as we place all this pressure to perform and win on our teams, we shall see more and more of this pushing the rules envelope.

[Tom Huckaby]

JV:

Cool.  Clearly one can't waive the rules, and the penalty is DQ, either in stroke play or match play competition.  Rule 1-3 is crystal clear.   But man I was thinking there was some weird existential rules thing that was gonna mean two offenders like this outside of a tournament are deleted from the universe or something ....

 

[JohnV]

Tom,

In the end, you should just hope that the god you answer to after life isn't a rules nut.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()