[JMEvensky]

 There are players that go to, or beyond, the edge now and there will be in the future. Their reputation goes with them.

 No first-hand knowledge, but my sense is this isn't nearly as true as it was. From only a TV spectator's perspective, there seems to be a new normal--everybody goes along to get along.


 Maybe there's so much money available that nobody wants to rock the boat.


 I hope Pat Burke chimes in.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

No first-hand knowledge, but my sense is this isn't nearly as true as it was. From only a TV spectator's perspective, there seems to be a new normal--everybody goes along to get along.

Maybe there's so much money available that nobody wants to rock the boat.

That feels right to me too. We're well past the days of Tom Watson calling out Gary Player for improving his lie.

The backstopping we see today on the PGA Tour is more evidence of this "brotherhood" effect.

[Rick Lane]

Yep, agreed.    I also remember jumping off my couch when DiMarco hit out of the bunker on 18 at Augusta with Phil trying to win his first.    Blew it right over Phils mark and on his line.    Totally seemed intentional to me at the time. 

[JESII]

Each time I watch a guy that's receiving a free drop from an obstruction go right to the edge of their drop boundary to ensure the ball bounces outside it so they can place it I think of the Arnold Palmer story from Pebble Beach (I think).


They were apparently playing the Crosby in a nasty downpour and the greens had big swaths of casual water. Palmer, in taking relief from one of these areas, paced from his ball to the hole using smaller than normal strides then paced off in the relief direction using extra long strides. His caddy pointed it out and asked what he was doing...he apparently said if even one person in this crowd thinks he gained an advantage by doing this it wouldn't be worth it.


Out of curiosity, have these guys ever missed the tuft of grass they're aiming for from shoulder height (and extended)?

[John Kavanaugh]

Zac Blair is clearly our adopted favorite professional golfer. Where were his buddies when he finished 126 missing the playoffs? Does anyone believe he was cheated?

[Kalen Braley]

Jon,


In context, I meant the same thing, even if it came out different.  A dedicated referee/official that follows each group to watch over play.


My apologies on the 2nd part, I skipped right over the club part. However, I still don't see how this would be a deterrent.  Ive played in many informal basketball, football, and baseball games without officials/refs.  We still hashed it out and played the game to conclusion.  I can't imagine why club play couldn't still use this model. 


P.S.  If the clubs that can afford it, want to have some guys come out and officiate stroke play for the club championship, then by all means they should.

Kalen,


so how does what you are proposing differ from the present situation?


The leading groups already have an official following them and yet still situations such as the DJ US Open debacle occur. I doubt that the PGA Tour has the will to train and pay so many officials to follow the tour week in week out. Finally, it would just lead the players to referring to the official on every little thing slowing down the already snail pace of play.


Jon

Jon,


The officials in todays events are just there for reference, and the vast majority of time only chime in when asked.....as opposed to actively officiating each group and watching what they are doing....like every other sport, where the ref actively monitors and issues violations as observed.  There is always a judgement component to it, and this would be no different in golf...


P.S.  Every other major sports org on the planet has traveling groups of paid refs/officials.  I don't see why the PGATour couldn't do this as well.

[BHoover]

I have to say I’m not totally opposed to call-ins. It keeps the players honest because you never know who’s watching. It also has the effect of connecting fans with the game because they are part of the action.

Douche town called and they want their +1 back.

I guess you disagree with my opinion...or you’re just drunk...probably both.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Each time I watch a guy that's receiving a free drop from an obstruction go right to the edge of their drop boundary to ensure the ball bounces outside it so they can place it I think of the Arnold Palmer story from Pebble Beach (I think).

The ball would still have to roll two clublengths.

They were apparently playing the Crosby in a nasty downpour and the greens had big swaths of casual water. Palmer, in taking relief from one of these areas, paced from his ball to the hole using smaller than normal strides then paced off in the relief direction using extra long strides. His caddy pointed it out and asked what he was doing...he apparently said if even one person in this crowd thinks he gained an advantage by doing this it wouldn't be worth it.

Good for Mr. Palmer.

I think Mr. Palmer, Mr. Jones, etc. would be rolling over in their graves at the lessening of the responsibility to know the rules.

[John Kavanaugh]

How many people in the world could score 100% on the rules of golf exam? Is it more than 50?

[Kalen Braley]

How many people in the world could score 100% on the rules of golf exam? Is it more than 50?

+1000  - most spot on thing you've said in months John... maybe years.


The ruling bodies have made everything so ridiculously complicated, with exceptions/rulings up the ying yang....and the players are expected to get it right.  Every. Single. Time.


I think the complete lack of emapthy/understanding of being an fallible human in this thread is the biggest head scratcher to me...

[Rick Lane]

I think its the fact that there is so much $$ at stake for the pros, which I believe is what the fuss is about here.    It seems to me that getting rid of the call ins after the fact is a good idea, and giving it over to onsite officials, some of which will be looking at TV.   If, by the time its time for you to sign your card, no official has notified you of anything, then you are good.    That seems to be where we will be?   

[jeffwarne]

How many people in the world could score 100% on the rules of golf exam? Is it more than 50?

+1000  - most spot on thing you've said in months John... maybe years.


The ruling bodies have made everything so ridiculously complicated, with exceptions/rulings up the ying yang....and the players are expected to get it right.  Every. Single. Time.


I think the complete lack of emapthy/understanding of being an fallible human in this thread is the biggest head scratcher to me...

+1


Yes the players should know the rules better...BUT


First-they are complicated and take time to learn-fair enough-they should know them-
Secondly, they keep changing, and now they've throwning the word "Intent" really?
at least before on  windy day you knew not to ground your putter-now you have to determine whether YOU made it move-pretty hard to determine unless you actually struck it-very subjective. before it was very simple AND you replaced it,


Finally, there is this notion that the 2 shot post scorecard penalty is now about not knowing the rules.(or claiming that if you're a cheater)
In Lexi's case, she knew the rule-she just either A. cheated (see below) or
B. accidentally put it back in the wrong place resulting in a two shot penalty. Adding 2 more is just silly as it's not ignorance of the rules but rather not knowing that she made a mistake until the next day.
and if she WASN'T cheating, and the next day callin was disallowed, who really cares about an inch if not on purpose.


If she cheated,(and a few videos have surfaced suggesting that it was a habit) 4 shots isn't nearly enough


There comes a point where if we assume we need a rule and a million eyes/cameras to police every shot and every player, that suddenly we become like other sports and no longer playing a game of honor.

[George Pazin]

Most painful thread I've read in awhile. So much loose thinking, it almost defies belief. And that's from a pretty strong group of thinkers; makes me worry about the future for everything.


Oh well. Won't affect my life in the slightest, guess I shouldn't care. I do look forward to sitting down with JohnV someday over a beer and discussing the in's and out's of the Rules, outside of a public forum. Can't imagine he'd have much good to say about it, but he is generally a positive guy and will likely brighten my day with the upside I'm missing.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The ruling bodies have made everything so ridiculously complicated, with exceptions/rulings up the ying yang....and the players are expected to get it right.  Every. Single. Time.

They don’t have to know everything. Officials are scattered about the course to help. An hour or two of study covers 98% of the stuff you run into. Maybe more.

Players have a responsibility to know and follow the rules. Now they’ll be incentivized NOT to know them.

[John Kavanaugh]

The ruling bodies have made everything so ridiculously complicated, with exceptions/rulings up the ying yang....and the players are expected to get it right.  Every. Single. Time.

They don’t have to know everything. Officials are scattered about the course to help. An hour or two of study covers 98% of the stuff you run into. Maybe more.

Players have a responsibility to know and follow the rules. Now they’ll be incentivized NOT to know them.

It must be easy winning all those best teacher awards when you deal with nothing but geniuses. None of the golfers I know, including every club professional and assistant, can pick up 98% of the rules in a couple of hours. Most if not every ruling is won by the guy with the strongest personality because no one really knows for sure.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

It must be easy winning all those best teacher awards when you deal with nothing but geniuses. None of the golfers I know, including every club professional and assistant, can pick up 98% of the rules in a couple of hours. Most if not every ruling is won by the guy with the strongest personality because no one really knows for sure.

I didn’t say 98% of the Rules.

[John Kavanaugh]

I have played 50 years and either played or witnessed approximately 800,000 strokes. Of those 800,000 strokes I have had less than 100 serious rules disputes only resulting is calling in to the pro shop for a ruling less that 5 times. If 2% was the deciding factor that would be 16,000 rulings or 320 per year. In other words a ruling every 3 holes.


My point is that knowing even 98% of what you need to know is not knowing near enough. By my somewhat rough calculations a perfect situation would require knowing 99.999375% of all possibilities. That is an unreasonable standard in any situation. i.e.:5 out of 800,000 opportunities.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

John, rulings aren’t needed on each stroke. 98% of situations in which one has to think about the Rules are covered by brief study.

If you’re a PGA Tour player call an official for the 2%.

[SL_Solow]

Barney, you should come up and play in some of our CDGA tourneys.  Strong personalities who lack rules knowledge get shut down regularly. As for the general discussion, its a complex issue because of the irregularity and size of the playing field.  All of the decisions in the book are based on actual situations.  In stroke play where we are trying to protect the entire field, its important to be consistent. Harder than it looks sitting at home watching the tube.

[John Kavanaugh]

You haven't lived until you argue with a stranger in Chicago. I thought I had seen and heard it all until a few days ago when a cyclist in London thought I had cut him off as I was walking across the street. To watch a man stop, put his bicycle on his shoulder and come at me calling me the C word was the highlight of my year. It all ended peacefully when a masterfully dressed English businessman of Indian heritage came to my defense. We literally were going to go Cowboy and "Indian" on the bloke.

[Ronald Montesano]

calls in

[ward peyronnin]

A couple observations. First players are still incentivized to call infractions because it is a penalty for fellow competitors to knowingly disregard the rules and the rules guys on this thread know this. Which brings me to the other observation that there are two kinds of rules officials I have worked with; those that assume they are there to help the player and the field and start from the vantage that the player wants to get it right and those that assume the player is just guilty until proven innocent and he wants to notch one more call on his belt.

If the rules operated the latter way why are players allowed the final say as to where a ball crossed the hazard which depends on them honorably behaving?

[George Pazin]

First players are still incentivized to call infractions because it is a penalty for fellow competitors to knowingly disregard the rules and the rules guys on this thread know this.

What makes you think they wouldn't simply claim they didn't see it or didn't know the infraction? That's certainly the direction we're headed, and certainly what Phil implied last year when attempting to exonerate Lexi.


"What move? I see bigger moves on ball markers all the time..."


It seems to me that pros do not want the responsibility of watching fellow competitors. Without call ins to make anyone look bad, they have all the more reason to just go along to get along.

[Kalen Braley]

Speaking of Phil...


Here's a guy who has no trouble bending/breaking the rules for Insider Trading, and everyone still thinks he's going to be honorable on the course??


 

[John Kavanaugh]

We mark our balls after our first putt in case the ball settled in a hole. Moving the ball out of a hole on the putting green isn't cheating no matter what the rules say.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()