[Jim Sweeney]

Fred: There are devices one can attach to a clubhead to aid alignment that would not be or are not approved for use during play. A strip of adhesive tape would be one. A similar situation would be a band aid placed on the top of the clubhead to reduce glare. (4-1/5)

Training clubs may be designed for exercise but also conform to the rules. They may be selected and used as one of the fourteen we are allowed. They may also perfom like clubs yet not conform to the rules; they would thus be non-conforming clubs if selected for play and the player would incur the appropriate penalty. Similarly, a conforming club could be modified to be a training aid. I have a 5 iron the shaft of which I filled with sand to use as a winter triainer. It conforms in every way, and I could select it for use. I could not carry it as a stretching device.

In Inkster's case, however, we are discussing a violation of Rule 14- Striking the Ball, not Rule 4- Clubs. It is an important distinction. The donut is designed to be a golf traiing aid. Other training aids such as putting alignment tools would fall under the same rule. That is what "like situations being treated alike" means. We aren't talking about clubs; we are talking about training aids. If she carried a stretching device- a wooden rod, for example, and used that, she'd e fime. As long as she did not use it as an alignment aid! 

[John Moore II]

The Rule makes sense.  It is intended to discourage people from having a whole flock of time-consuming hardware with them on the golf course.  Keep the game moving.  Keep people focused on playing the game, with real clubs.

the irony in that statement  is just too rich!

the only reason she thought she needed the thing was b/c there was a 1/2 hr back up in the 10th tee!

I would think a  gun would come more in handy in such a situation

That brings up another good point. I don't know the entire situation in this case, but it is not rare on the Men's tours to have some pretty long waits on the 1st and 10th tees for groups making the turn. I took a quick look at the US Open tee times this year. 2 hours and 12 minutes of times off each tee. So, a group that plays in 2 hours off #1 will have roughly a 20 minute wait before they can tee off #10 and start the back nine. At what point do you say a player might need to stretch or whatever? Especially among the older players or people with back injuries. If there is a rain delay that brings players off the course, pretty much without fail the players are allowed to hit balls again. Certainly the whole field is allowed to do this, but at what point would a long wait to make the turn become a similar situation?

[David Lott]

The missing headline here is:

Thirty Minute Wait!

How about a penalty for slow play up ahead?

Let's go, girls. Move it!

[John Moore II]

The missing headline here is:

Thirty Minute Wait!

How about a penalty for slow play up ahead?

Let's go, girls. Move it!

I almost posted that it was the tournaments fault to a certain degree, but then I looked very close at the tee times, they are spaced 11 minutes and only run for 2 hours 1 minute. No excuse there. There should be no 30 minute wait. That is slow play, plain and simple.

[Pete_Pittock]

Saturday tee times were off #1 & #10 with morning and afternoon waves and were 11 minute intervals. The tee should have been clear for a group making the turn in 2:15. Inkster was in the third group off in the afternoon wave. The hole on #10 was cut in the green's most difficult position. There should not have been a wait unless the groups were playing at a fast pace (4 hr round) or a number of groups towards the end of the morning wave were playing 8 9 and 10 as three shotters.

With veterans like Rankin and Inkster unaware of the rules at the end of their careers there must be a real slow learning curve out there. That is  on average understanding less than one rule a year in your chosen profession.

[David_Tepper]

Peter Pittock -

As I commented on one of the Dustin Johnson/PGA threads, it is hard to know which is more surprising...the lack of knowledge of the rules of golf among pro golfers or their indifference to learning them.

DT

[Tyler Kearns]

On Saturday, Jose de Jesus Rodriguez fired a 61 to take a commanding 3 stroke lead into the final round on the Canadian Tour. Apparently, he was very excited by his play, so excited, he forgot to sign his scorecard and left. DQ'd!! It is hard to fathom making such a mistake.

TK

[JohnV]

The other DQ of the week was Paul Azinger for not showing up for his pro-am tee time at the Traditions.

I would have no problem with Rule 14-3 being modified to allow the Committee to modify this to two strokes in the case of a one-time use of a minor swing aid such as a donut.  Obviously, the use of something like a swing-vest that would help straighten out a player's swing should still be a DQ.

First, I might dispute the 30 minute wait, the average player over-estimates this kind of thing, but the 10th tee at Ghost Creek will backup when almost every player is trying to reach the par 5 in two.

[Garland Bayley]

The missing headline here is:

Thirty Minute Wait!

How about a penalty for slow play up ahead?

Let's go, girls. Move it!

Although those rockin' girls play slow, this one may not have been their fault. The course has 8, 9, & 10 as par 5s all reachable by at least some of the field. The local paper commented that this creates a logjam on the first day of competition.

[Dan Herrmann]

And the rules (without an overriding local rule) would have allowed her to chip and putt on the tee on which she was waiting.   I love golf, but I think the rules need a complete overhaul.    As they stand today, the rules are turning people away from the sport.

[Jay Cox]

I've never met or heard of anybody who either chose not to pursue golf or chose to quit golf because the rules were too complex for them.  I do, however, know plenty of people who simply play golf their own way, with mullies, gimmes, liberal drops, as many clubs as they want, do-overs, etc.

I agree with Shivas.  But I think the complexity of the rules -- and, more importantly, the number of rules that are inconsistent with playing a quick, enjoyable round of golf -- significantly increases the number of people who play golf their own way. 

[Paul OConnor]

Dave,

I agree.  Most recreational golfers I know are largely indifferent to the rules.  They're out having fun, drinking a couple beers, trying to hit their drives 300 yards.  They could give a shit about the rules.  Fluffing balls in the rough, re-raking bunkers before a shot, dropping a ball "in area" of lost ball, improper water hazard drops, teeing in front of markers, too many clubs, and of course the ubiquitous gimmes all are practiced on a regular basis by a huge percentage of golfers.

I would bet that the percentage of golfers who accurately record their score in FULL accordance with ALL the Rules of Golf is less than 5%.  

I think that pace of play and cost are the two items which account for the majority of decisions NOT to play golf.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Does anybody really believe this?  Or is it just one of those easy things to say?  
...

You nailed it!
Hard to believe anyone would believe it.

Seems just as likely (or, more likely) that people will be drawn to the game by the honorable way the players behave when caught inadvertently violating a rule.

[Jay Cox]

After thinking about this for another two minutes, I think Shivas, Garland, et al are underestimating the indirect impact the rules have in discouraging people from sticking with the game.

As several people have pointed out, most people don't play by the rules.  One big reason why they don't is because it would cause rounds to take much longer and therefore make golf less fun.  The result is that many friendly matches are played under a set of informal rules designed to create a roughly level playing field without requiring several minutes of thought to determine where to hit from or requiring a player to trek a hundred yards back towards the tee to drop in the right place.  There are a couple of problems with that:
(1) Most players are used to playing by slightly different informal rules, which can cause problems when playing with new players.
(2) Because the details of the rules are made up on the fly, the people in the match -- no matter how informal it is -- sometimes will disagree.
Those problems, I'd wager, turn at least some people off of golf.

I imagine that someone will respond "Well, they should just play by the rules."  But a seven-hour round among 30 handicaps who will either have to hit two provisionals per hole or schlep back to the previous spot when they can't find a ball every couple of holes wouldn't exactly encourage those players to keep up the game either.

[Doug Sobieski]

I've never met or heard of anybody who either chose not to pursue golf or chose to quit golf because the rules were too complex for them.  I do, however, know plenty of people who simply play golf their own way, with mullies, gimmes, liberal drops, as many clubs as they want, do-overs, etc.  I also know plenty of people who don't play because (a) swinging a golf club and getting the ball to go where you want it is fricking hard to do; (b) golf is hugely time consuming and getting more and more so all the time due to the cheater line (sorry, couldn't resist!); and (c) golf is very expensive.

I just don't buy this notion that the rules turn people away from the sport at all.  Am I the only one?

100% agreed. People getting into the game don't care. Time/money, however, are a different matter. I can't imagine someone playing less golf because of rules complications during their last skins game. The fringe players that I know don't play for anything anyway, so they aren't impacted.

The Rules haven't changed materially in decades, so I can't imagine them having a bigger impact on player retention today than in years past.

[George Pazin]

How many play by the rules when they're playing pickup hoops? Touch football? I doubt the rules are keeping out anyone who wouldn't be put off by a hundred other things associated with golf. The Rules might stop casual golfers from entering local tournaments, that's probably about it.

Shocking to me that Inkster didn't know the rule in question...even if you can't cite the Rule, I'd think you'd know a doughnut on the club was a no-no.

[Fred Yanni]

George,

Apparently her playing partners didn't know the rule, the caddies didn't know the rule and all of the spectators around her didn't know the rule (or didn't say anything) or someone other than a TV viewer would have called her on it.  

The more I think about this situation it seems there were probably quite a few groups of players on the tee as well since it was a long delay and not one person called her on it.  There may have even been an official nearby as well if there was a long delay.  It was a colassal miss by everyone and we are just saying Julie should have known better.  In reality it seems that no one around her knew the rule either -  its just a hysterical situation.  

[George Pazin]

Fred, I'm not criticising Juli or anyone else around, or even anyone on this thread who didn't know the rule, it's just surprising to me that I'd know that rule and she and her caddy wouldn't.

I will say, I always enjoy the Rules threads and I'm always saddened by my own knowledge level. I think I have a pretty good instinct for what is and is not allowed, but not generally what the penalties are.

[Fred Yanni]

George sorry I was not trying to imply you were being critical of anyone  - I had no idea about this rule as you can tell from my earlier posts on this thread.

I am just laughing as the more I think about the situation, the more I laugh.  There seems to have been a number of players on the tee that could have called a violation but did not.   Probably because they had no idea about that rule either.   I wonder what their reactions were when they found out about the DQ? 

[Chuck Brown]

Fred, I'm not criticising Juli or anyone else around, or even anyone on this thread who didn't know the rule, it's just surprising to me that I'd know that rule and she and her caddy wouldn't.

I will say, I always enjoy the Rules threads and I'm always saddened by my own knowledge level. I think I have a pretty good instinct for what is and is not allowed, but not generally what the penalties are.

I'm with George.  I get purely selfsh pleasure out of these Rules controversies.  Sometimes I shake my head and wonder how a plyer could have been so dumb.  Most of the time I say (to myself) "Of course!  Yeah, that was a violation.  Good thing it wasn't me; I might have done the same."  And always, I am amused by the ingenuity and attention of a tv viewer at home who sure as hell knows the Rules.  I enjoy the fact that there are such people.  I confess that I love the fact that golf is NOT like other sports where such a sequence of events would be unthinkable.  Who wants golf to be like other sports?

[John Moore II]

I've said it before, but allowign TV viewers to call in is not fair to all players. Only those players on TV are subject to this. So, maybe the top 15 or 20 in an event, plus a few other notable players. That prevents the rules from being enforced in equity to all.

[George Pazin]

I've said it before, but allowign TV viewers to call in is not fair to all players. Only those players on TV are subject to this. So, maybe the top 15 or 20 in an event, plus a few other notable players. That prevents the rules from being enforced in equity to all.

I understand your point, but is it really any different than if a Rules official happens to be in position to see a violation? Unless there are officials with every player, I don't see much difference.

One thing that is important to note, with regard to our friendly couch potato Rules Official: if you know where or who to call, you're probably not the average "That was clearly pass interference!" kind of viewer.

[John Moore II]

I've said it before, but allowign TV viewers to call in is not fair to all players. Only those players on TV are subject to this. So, maybe the top 15 or 20 in an event, plus a few other notable players. That prevents the rules from being enforced in equity to all.

I understand your point, but is it really any different than if a Rules official happens to be in position to see a violation? Unless there are officials with every player, I don't see much difference.

One thing that is important to note, with regard to our friendly couch potato Rules Official: if you know where or who to call, you're probably not the average "That was clearly pass interference!" kind of viewer.

Yes, it is different. The rules official is not more apt to focus on a specific group of players. A camera is more likely to follow Michelle Wie or Juli Inkster than a rules official. Its the officials job to view the whole course and field; the camera has no such job, in fact, the cameraman's job is almost opposite that.

[George Pazin]

What about the recent PGA, where only the last 5 groups or whatever had officials assigned to each group? Were those guys unfairly penalized?

[Joe Perches]

Sad.

Perhaps tournament organizers should put 4' by 3/8" pipes and elastic bands near the 1st and 10th tees.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()