We are witnessing the stupidest decision I've ever seen in sports

[Jeff Fortson]

In 2006 I was playing 1st Stage of PGA Tour Q-School at Rancho California Golf Club in Murrieta, CA.  I was paired with Jason Day (name drop) in the final round.  The reason I bring this up is because of a Rules situation that happened to Jason in the first round of that event.  I really wish someone would ask him about it sometime.  It was one of the biggest debacles I've ever seen happen in a tournament. One of my best friends played with him in the round and this is how I remember what he told me about what happened.


I will try to describe it in as brief a way as possible.


Jason went for the green in two on #1, a reachable Par 5.  His second shot went over the green and into the middle of a very thick bush.  It was lodged in this bush so deep that you almost couldn't see it.  Jason told his playing competitor (my buddy) that he wanted to take relief from the concrete steps that went up the hill away from the green because he would be standing on them if he were to play the ball as it lies.  My friend told him that he would love to agree but that he should probably call an official over to handle the situation. Jason flagged down an official.  Jason told the official what he wanted to do.  The official said, "I'm not sure that ball is even playable." Basically, to make a swing at the ball was impossible as it was in the middle of an extremely dense bush and that the only reason Jason was asking for relief was due to the concrete steps being there, otherwise he wouldn't even consider playing it.  Jason insisted that he would definitely play the ball as it lies regardless of the concrete steps. The rules don't allow for a player to take relief from a situation that is basically impossible or unplayable. 


This is where it gets absolutely ridiculous.


The rules official tells Jason, "well if you make a swing at it and you demonstrate that the ball was playable I will give you relief." 


WHAT??!!


Jason immediate took a rip at the bush and the ball drops a couple inches deeper into the bush.  Jason says (paraphrasing here as I wasn't actually there), "See I made it move.  The ball was playable."  The rules official said he disagreed and that Jason demonstrated that it wasn't playable.  Jason is now fully confused at this point as is everyone else.  Three groups play through as the chief rules official on site show up to figure out what to do. The chief official tells Jason to play two balls.  First, he needs to play the current ball in play, counting the stroke he just took at it in the bush.  Second, he needs to play a second ball as if he would get the relief he had originally been looking for.  Jason made a 5 with the ball he took relief with, and made 9 with the ball he swung at in the bush, which included the swing he took at the bush to try to show the ball was playable and then also take an unplayable lie penalty to get it out of the bush (as the ball was truly unplayable after it dropped further in the bush). 


It took them 7 holes after calling PGA Tour HQ to come tell him to eat a 9. 


He ended up squeaking through by 1 or 2 shots.  Just imagine if he had missed getting through that 1st stage back in '06.  That could have potentially changed things in his life.  I still think he'd most likely be where he is today but who knows.


To this day it is the worst rules f**k up I've ever heard of.  A rules official told a player to take a swing at a ball so he could determine if a rule was applicable. At Q-School.  Unreal.  If anything this shows that the PGA Tour is capable of making massive mistakes in officiating.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

Even though I think that was a bit sketchy for Jason to ask for relief there...

No doubt that was an odd request by the rules official, can't believe he would tell him to hit away on it.

[jeffwarne]

Jeff,

Even though I think that was a bit sketchy for Jason to ask for relief there...

No doubt that was an odd request by the rules official, can't believe he would tell him to hit away on it.

I've seen an official call the bluff and tell a player to play it, then call him off once he appeared to be actually about to hit the shot

[Jon Wiggett]

Is the player not the sole judge of whether a ball is playable or not regardless of where it is? At what point would the rules official have decided the ball was playable? For the sake of argument, what if he had managed to get the ball out of the bush and on to the green? Does the rules official now insist he takes the relief? Is it now too late as he has already played a shot? Then there is the question of what happens if it is a situation where you must take relief from the steps? What if it was thick, long grass which was equally difficult as the bush?


Can of worms.

[Sean_A]

Jeepers, I was under the impression that for the variety of reasons that relief is allowed, a player could take a drop from any place on the course except from a hazard. Is this not the case?  I never heard of an official declaring a ball unplayable.


Ciao

[Jon Wiggett]

Another flaw in the Jason Day ruling is whether the ball is playable or not he would still be entitled to relief from the steps making the play-ability an irrelevant question. He his claiming relief for his stance not for the ball.

[Jeff Fortson]

Maybe the official didn't declare his ball unplayable but he definitely felt the stroke was clearly impracticable and/or unreasonable. Sorry if I suggested otherwise resulting in any confusion.


This is wording straight out of Rule 24-2


Exception:A player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interference by anything other than an immovable obstruction makes the stroke clearly impracticable or (b) interference by an immovable obstruction would occur only through use of a clearly unreasonable stroke or an unnecessarily abnormal stance, swing or direction of play.

[Sean_A]

Jeff


Thanks.  I guess the key is "clearly impracticable".  This decision isn't left up to the player?  Afterall, what is clearly impracticable for me is a day in the park for the likes of Tiger.


Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

Maybe the official didn't declare his ball unplayable but he definitely felt the stroke was clearly impracticable and/or unreasonable. Sorry if I suggested otherwise resulting in any confusion.


This is wording straight out of Rule 24-2


Exception:A player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interference by anything other than an immovableobstructionmakes thestrokeclearly impracticable or (b) interference by an immovableobstructionwould occur only through use of a clearly unreasonablestrokeor an unnecessarily abnormalstance, swing or direction of play.

Jeff:


I believe that Rule came out of the World Match Play event at Wentworth in the 1960's, where Jack Nicklaus' ball was stuck in a bush, and he wanted relief from a scoreboard that was in his line to the green, even though he clearly couldn't play the ball in that direction.  The referee refused to give him relief and insisted he play the ball as he could.  Not quite the same situation, but close.

[Jim_Coleman]

   I think two rules are being confused here.  One can take an unplayable lie from anywhere, including the fairway, with a stroke penalty.  It is only one one is trying to take free relief that the ball must be playable.       
   Here's an example of when one might take an unplayable lie from the fairway.  Player has a slippery down hill 3' putt on a very elevated green.  The ball misses the hole and travels 50 yards down a steep hill into the fairway.  The smart play is to declare the ball unplayable and replay the putt with a one stroke penalty.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jim,


whilst your point makes sense in the end who is to decide if the ball is playable? Also, a stroke is the forward movement of the club with the intention of fairly striking the ball. Can a rules official alter this? I suspect not. I would have thought that Day was within his rights to get relief and just because he might have to take 10 shot to get the ball out of the bush does not alter this.


As to the DJ situation. Had the players been left to sort it out themselves it would not have altered the result and I doubt anyone would have noticed. I wonder how often that actually happens?


Jon

[Dan_Callahan]

   I think two rules are being confused here.  One can take an unplayable lie from anywhere, including the fairway, with a stroke penalty. 

Except a hazard, right? You can declare any ball unplayable unless it is in a hazard (which does not include a bunker ... you CAN take an unplayable lie in a bunker).


Isn't that right? Or have I misunderstood for a very long time?

[Howard Riefs]

The new Dustin Johnson rule:


http://www.usga.org/rules-hub/2017-local-rule/new-local-rule.html


http://www.golfdigest.com/story/finally-a-rules-of-golf-change-we-absolutely-love


http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/usga-r-and-a-eliminate-penalty-golfers-who-inadvertently-move-their-balls-on-green


http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/usga-adds-local-rule-accidental-ball-movement

[Jay Mickle]

A fine beginning+.

[Pete_Pittock]

Only if the local rule is adopted by the golf club or the person in charge of the event.

[Pete Lavallee]

Pete,

How can a Club adopt the rule? Is a notice on the bulletin board sufficient or must it be printed on the scorecard or rules sheet?

[PThomas]

actually, the stupidest decision in sports is probably Pete Carroll's decision to pass at the end of the Super Bowl

[Pete_Pittock]

Pete,

How can a Club adopt the rule? Is a notice on the bulletin board sufficient or must it be printed on the scorecard or rules sheet?

Whoever in charge, either a committee, head pro, director of golf, just declares so and publishes it. Beyond that there is no right answer. It can be on the scorecard, it can be on the bulletin board, it can be part of the starter's spiel, it can be a PDF. In a tournament it should be on the notice to competitors.

[Matt MacIver]

I like it but in essence they just added a page to the rules, not take one away. One more thing to remember - is the local rule in effect today?

[MClutterbuck]

It is a good step in the right direction, a measure a lot of us said should be made just after the DJ incident. The odd thing is they are basically altering the Rules of Golf with a Local Rule, something that in theory is not allowed. They were hesitant to change a Rule before the scheduled change in 2020, something that obeys only to tradition, and with that they did away with a more important precedent. I would have changed the 3 Rules now. Easily done in this age of websites and apps. In any event, this is a fair change.

[Howard Riefs]

Because I know we all want to re-live this...


http://www.golf.com/tour-news/2017/06/02/2016-us-open-oral-history-oakmont-rules-controversy-dustin-johnson-wins

[Wade Whitehead]

Reading the article reminds me that the USGA was exonerated because of Johnson's play down the stretch.  He accepted the penalty because it made no difference in the outcome.  He won anyway.

If the penalty had cost him the championship or put him into a playoff the entire episode would be remembered differently.

WW

[Kalen Braley]

As the article stated, the blue coats dodged a massive bullet on this one.  If it had cost him the tourney it might have been the most brutal thing I've seen in sports....(Outside of the gag job the Yanks did against Boston a number of years back)! 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I contend that the real way in which the USGA screwed up was that the rules official (Mark Newell) on the scene screwed up. He didn't ask enough questions, didn't ask Dustin to demonstrate what had happened, etc.

Had he done so, DJ could have been assessed the penalty at the time, or they would have been FAR more likely to stick with his assessment. He asked basically one question, never had DJ demonstrate, and backed away saying "play on." It was a poor job of refereeing, IMO.