I still believe--hope--that the new "reasonable judgment" standard in the proposed USGA rules would cause a different outcome in the future. That's what Golf Digest thinks. We'll see.
Jim,
That proposed revision cannot possibly include the act of replacing a ball on the putting green. It's clearly intending to address reasonable attempts (yet still wrong) to judge where a ball entered a hazard or where the nearest point of relief from GUR or an obstruction is. Those items are occasionally unprovable...marking and replacing a ball on the green is hardly a mystery.
Jim, the proposed revision would apply in this situation and this is directly from the USGA's recent statement on the incident...
"As part of their Rules Modernization initiative, the USGA and The R&A have been discussing the use of video evidence and have developed a proposed new standard to limit its use when a player is estimating or measuring a spot, point, line, area or distance. Proposed new Rule 1.3a(2) provides that ”so long as the player does all that can be reasonably expected under the circumstances to make an accurate estimation or measurement, the player’s reasonable judgment will be accepted even if later shown to be wrong by other information (such as video technology).” When the proposed new Rules take effect in 2019, the committee would apply this new standard in determining whether there would be any penalty in this type of situation."
Proposed Rule: Under new Rule 1.3a(2), whenever required to estimate or measure a spot, point, line, area or distance, the player’s reasonable judgment would be accepted if:
The player did all that could be reasonably expected under the circumstances to make a prompt and accurate estimation or measurement.
This means that the player’s reasonable judgment would be upheld even if later shown to be wrong by other information (such as video technology).
Reasons for Change:
The Rules generally rely on the integrity of the player, and this is a natural and appropriate extension of this trust in the player.
There are many times when the Rules require a player to estimate or measure a spot, point, line, area or distance, such as when the player:
•Uses a ball-marker to mark a ball’s spot, and then replace the ball, or
•Needs to find a reference point or reference line for taking relief (such as the nearest point of complete relief or the line from the hole through the spot of an unplayable ball), or to determine the extent of a relief area (such as measuring a fixed distance from a reference point or reference line).
Such judgments need to be made promptly, and players often cannot be precise in doing so.
So long as the player did all that could be reasonably expected under the circumstances:
•The player gets no penalty for any small inaccuracies, irrespective of any advantage gained.
Accepting a player’s reasonable judgment would limit “second-guessing” that can arise from the use of enhanced technology (such as video review when golf is televised).