Protectig from the sun-Legal or not.

[Chieflongtee]

Is it legal to put your bag or your caddy in such a position that you are blocking the shade:

STORY

[mpare]

That's cutting a pretty fine line with respect to the interpretation of that rule. What struck me at the time when I witnessed that on the tube was the unusual placement of Phil's bag on the tee. In fact, I watched the rest of the round to see if the bag was similarly positioned again. It wasn't. Humm.

[jvincent]

There was definitely some discussion about where the fans were standing with respect to the shadow of the bag.

[Hacker]

I've never seen a bag placed in that position either..........I wonder what the outcome would have been had the "offender" been a lesser known......

[Pinshark]

very fine line here. A lot of room for controversy. I believe this should be an infraction...He should have gotten the fan to move IMO.

[Pinshark]

I've never seen a bag placed in that position either..........I wonder what the outcome would have been had the "offender" been a lesser known......

did not want to go there but he is the defending champ

[Hacker]

did not want to go there but he is the defending champ

............AND Smiley Phil

I wonder if a Stephen Ames or Shingo Muryama would have received the same ruling....

[spackler]

............AND Smiley Phil

I wonder if a Stephen Ames or Shingo Muryama would have received the same ruling....

They wouldn't have been televised in the first place, so no couch official would've been able to call it in.

[Hacker]

They wouldn't have been televised in the first place, so no couch official would've been able to call it in.

Good point...........

[jonf]

can i just say...what a dumb rule...i would have been pretty disheartened with golf in general if he had been DQ'd for something like that.

[BC MIST]

They wouldn't have been televised in the first place, so no couch official would've been able to call it in.

If something is done to shield the player from the affect of the sun, it is a violation. Dec.14-2/3. If the bag was so placed as to shelter the ball from the sun, there would be no violation. Which one was it?

To the comment above if a player broke a rule and no one saw him do it, did he break a rule? Why does a rules infraction have to be seen and reported ONLY by a rules official or a fellow competitor/opponent? Golf is not hockey, basketball, football et al. One of golf's most important characteristics is that it is a game of honour, played by honest people who call penalties on themselves, a classic example of which is what Mark Wilson did at the Honda Classic. That a spectator, TV viewer, or hot dog stand vendor reported a possible infraction is what makes the game greater than all the rest. To disallow this kind of reporting severely weakens the basic structure of the game.

[AAA]

Is it legal to put your bag or your caddy in such a position that you are blocking the shade:

STORY

Just what rule makes it illegal? I couldn't find one.

[Chieflongtee]

Rule 14-2 of the Rules of Golf states: “A player must not accept physical assistance or protection from the elements.”

[Kiwi battler]

I can hold an umbrella above my head with one hand while playing a stroke , but cant have it held ..
IMO i could place my bag beside my ball to block the suns glare off my wedge "which i did last week"

Placing his bag seems fine to me , having the crowd move in a way that blocks the sun is assisting his play of the ball , nope ....needs to be looked at
No different than having them squish up to block the wind that gusting and effecting his balance .......

[AAA]

Rule 14-2 of the Rules of Golf states: “A player must not accept physical assistance or protection from the elements.”

Just what protection was he, not the ball, getting?

[Golfbum]

All I have to say is this
ARM CHAIR RULES OFFICIAL

If that had been Woods and Super Caddy, I bet the phone would never been made.

[Nat Williams]

If that had been Woods and Super Caddy, I bet the phone would never been made.

I bet the phone would have never stopped ringing ... as much as people love Tiger (and this board is proof of it) a LOT of people would like to see him fall.

[BC MIST]

Just what protection was he, not the ball, getting?

Q. May a player's caddie purposely stand between the player and the setting sun's so that the sun's glare is not in the player's face while he is playing a stroke. A. NO.

Since it was the bag(equipment) that was placed on the tee, and not the caddie, there was no infraction and is a non issue. Even if the sun was still "UP" a little, the bag is not tall enough to block the sun from the players face. Much ado about nothing.

[pvs1313]

i COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE!

WHAT MAKES THE GAME GREAT IS THE FACT THAT EACH COMPETITOR IS TRUSTED TO CALL THEMDEWLVES ON THEIR OWN INFRACTIONS, OR BE CALLED BY THEIR FELLOW COMPETITOR.

i T HINK IT IS LUDICRIOUS THAT A BUNCH OF DUMB COUCH JOCKEYS CALL IN RULES VIOLATIONS,

ONE ADDITION NEEDED TO THE RULES, IF NOT CALLED ON THE PLAYING FEILD, THEN NOT A VIOLATION, NEEDS TO BE CALLED BEFORE CARD SUIGNED AND HANDED IN.

LEAVE THE FANS AS JUST THAT, FANS TO WATCH, NOT TO GET INVOLCED. That a spectator, TV viewer, or hot dog stand vendor reported a possible infraction is what makes the game greater than all the rest. To disallow this kind of reporting severely weakens the basic structure of the game.[/quote]

[BC MIST]

All I have to say is this
ARM CHAIR RULES OFFICIAL

If that had been Woods and Super Caddy, I bet the phone would never been made.

It is a matter of opinion that "arm chair rules officials" should not be able to point out infractions, but it is a matter of fact, that they can. If you look past removing any influence that they may have you should be able to see a host of very negative implications for the game.

Consider this simple scenario: Tiger leading by 1 playing from a hanging lie in the left rough on 18 at Augusta. The camera focuses in on the lie as Tiger addresses the ball and the ball moves downward 1/2 inch. Tiger hits the ball makes par and wins by one. Now, 50,000,000 people saw the ball move (Penalty 1 stroke) and the ball not replaced (Penalty 1 stroke) so Tiger really lost by 1 stroke. He accepts the green jacket, the million plus in prize money, all the accolades, for NOT winning The Masters. If spectators or anyone watching on TV are NOT allowed to report infractions, this scenario will become common place. And this what you want for golf? Please explain to us why this scenario is OK with you(or pvs13131) . Can you imagine the hue and cry when this is replayed hundreds of times on TV? Tiger fans would probably be happy knowing that he cheated to win, but most golfers probably would not.

Because most of us have a hockey, football, baseball type mindset, where players try to get away with breaking the rules, unless they get caught by the on field officials, I can understand why your opinion exists and many others support it. However, golf is not an officiated sport like the others and one must look at it differently.

If you are playing by yourself and you play the wrong ball, your score is automatically two strokes higher, whether someone is there to call you, you call your self or whatever. There is no choice. It's automatic. A high stick in hockey not seen and called by the officials, is NOT a high stick. But a broken rule in golf is a broken rule, regardless of who sees it. Therein lies the subtle difference.

[spackler]

The problem in allowing couch officials is that tv coverage is not complete and universal. Not every player faces the same level of 'officiating' and your scenario above fails when a lesser known player wins a tournament with a Saturday/Sunday charge. What happened Thursday or Friday? Who knows.

[jonf]

Yes, but a violation is a violation. Certainly you can't call what you don't see, but why shouldn't they call what they do see (regardless of whether they received any help in doing so)

[spackler]

Yes, but a violation is a violation. Certainly you can't call what you don't see, but why shouldn't they call what they do see (regardless of whether they received any help in doing so)

Depends on what you're aiming for, fairness or just a perception of fairness. I'd prefer that each hole in a tournament was mashalled by a rules official at the tee, for the approach shots, and at the green. All players benefit from the same level of officiating and are subject to equal scrutiny.

[Golfbum]

I agree that the coverage is not the same for every golfer in the tournament. I also agree (and I know better) that a Rules Violation is such and should be dealt with accordingly.

In the case of Phil and the golf bag, it was dealt with accordingly. No penalty occurred. End of discussion as far as the Committee decided.

I for one do not like the idea of Arm Chair Refs calling in rules violations in golf, for the simple fact that not everyone knows the rules of golf. They think they do, but in reality they do not. I for one will admit I do not know every rule in the book. So why would I call in what I perceived to be a violation?

Do not get me started on hockey refs I see enough missed calls in JR B let alone the Pro Level.

[BC MIST]

The problem in allowing couch officials is that tv coverage is not complete and universal. Not every player faces the same level of 'officiating' and your scenario above fails when a lesser known player wins a tournament with a Saturday/Sunday charge. What happened Thursday or Friday? Who knows.

By this logic then, because Joe Smuck was not seen by a camera on Thursday and Tiger was on Sunday, we should let everything go. I don't think so. Sure, not every infraction will be dealt with, but dealing with those that ARE seen is a heck of a lot better than letting everything go. Would you apply your logic to a cop that caught you for going 80 km/h in a 50 km/h zone? The guy in front of you was doing 80 also and because he got away with it, so should you?

The other reality is that there would be more infractions seen by spectators on site than there would be caught on camera. Ignore all of those, too? It would not take too long before some players would start dropping the ball more than 1 club length or finding the NICEST point of relief instead of the nearest. Think that this would not happen? Some marginal Tour players would have a field day. Does the solution of having 54 rules officials on site make sense. Actually, would you probably want to have two in each fairway because one could not cover both sides so the number would go up to 72.

My question re-written below has still not been answered by you nay sayers.

Tiger leading by 1 playing from a hanging lie in the left rough on 18 at Augusta. The camera focuses in on the lie as Tiger addresses the ball and the ball moves downward 1/2 inch. Tiger hits the ball makes par and wins by one. Now, 50,000,000 people saw the ball move (Penalty 1 stroke) and the ball not replaced (Penalty 1 stroke) so Tiger really lost by 1 stroke. He accepts the green jacket, the million plus in prize money, all the accolades, for NOT winning The Masters. Can you imagine the hue and cry when this is replayed hundreds of times on TV? Please explain to us why this scenario is OK.

[AAA]

If you are playing by yourself and you play the wrong ball, your score is automatically two strokes higher, whether someone is there to call you, you call your self or whatever. There is no choice. It's automatic. A high stick in hockey not seen and called by the officials, is NOT a high stick. But a broken rule in golf is a broken rule, regardless of who sees it. Therein lies the subtle difference.

Good post

[spackler]

I realize you and I will never agree on this but I will restate my points and then agree to disagree. I will say that a penalty is a penalty and if knowingly incurred and ignored, that person is cheating.

By this logic then, because Joe Smuck was not seen by a camera on Thursday and Tiger was on Sunday, we should let everything go. I don't think so. Sure, not every infraction will be dealt with, but dealing with those that ARE seen is a heck of a lot better than letting everything go.

In fact I said that the level of on course scrutiny should be raised so that more infractions are either prevented or caught. It's near impossible for a top golfer to cheat, it should be made the same for the guy struggling to retain his card.

Would you apply your logic to a cop that caught you for going 80 km/h in a 50 km/h zone? The guy in front of you was doing 80 also and because he got away with it, so should you?

I thought we were talking about golf? In advocating more on course officiating, I am advocating a system where all of the 'speeders' get caught, not just the ones seen on tv. This is a sporting event and the whole point of having rules is to make sure that the best player wins through application of talent and execution. Rules should be applied equally and fairly and every person in the field should bear the same level of scrutiny.

The other reality is that there would be more infractions seen by spectators on site than there would be caught on camera. Ignore all of those, too? It would not take too long before some players would start dropping the ball more than 1 club length or finding the NICEST point of relief instead of the nearest. Think that this would not happen? Some marginal Tour players would have a field day. Does the solution of having 54 rules officials on site make sense. Actually, would you probably want to have two in each fairway because one could not cover both sides so the number would go up to 72.

If that were true, wouldn't it be happening already? And if so, shouldn't something be done about it? My point was that tournaments should rely more, and increase the number of, rules marshalls. If you had an official at every tee, at every approach shot and at every green, wouldn't that suffice? An official would be present for every shot and drop. I doubt this would slow down play any (full field rounds are already approaching 6 hours), it might even speed it up as rules officials would not have to be called over for rulings, they would be right there. You could easily recruit 100 rules officials/tournament.

My question re-written below has still not been answered by you nay sayers.

Tiger leading by 1 playing from a hanging lie in the left rough on 18 at Augusta. The camera focuses in on the lie as Tiger addresses the ball and the ball moves downward 1/2 inch. Tiger hits the ball makes par and wins by one. Now, 50,000,000 people saw the ball move (Penalty 1 stroke) and the ball not replaced (Penalty 1 stroke) so Tiger really lost by 1 stroke. He accepts the green jacket, the million plus in prize money, all the accolades, for NOT winning The Masters. Can you imagine the hue and cry when this is replayed hundreds of times on TV? Please explain to us why this scenario is OK.

It's obviously not ok, that's why a rules official should be there. The corresponding question is what happens when someone calls it in on Tiger, he accepts the penalty and loses the Masters by 1 to Stephen Ames who had no such scrutiny on the same shot on 18 on Friday, when he was 6 off the lead?

[dbleber]

I knew you couldn't have someone hold an umbrella over you while it rained, but I didn't think about the sun before. Always learning with this game.

I find it kind of odd how a TV viewer can call in and suggest a video review at the masters. Imagine if you could do that in Hockey! Seems like they should have a rule that if the rules official on the ground and/or the player does not notice/see the infraction that once he tees off or plays his next shot then it's over with. Kind of like hockey and goal review if the puck drops before they go upstairs then that's it. JMO.

[Kiwi battler]

Now i think about , equity suggests what he did was fine

He had 2 options , get the spectators to move .....so the ball would be in the sun
or , get them to bunch together so the ball would be in shadow , or use the bag

Either senerio he gains no advantage , so no penalty IMO

BUT , had it been a tree waving in the breeze with broken shadow moving around his ball , then the crowd issue is a NO ..... and the bag one can be debated

As for couch potatoes ringing in , down under we do have something similar setup for some sports , where people can ring in and have violence off the ball looked into ....and some serious actions taken if its proved

[BC MIST]

I find it kind of odd how a TV viewer can call in and suggest a video review at the masters. Imagine if you could do that in Hockey! Seems like they should have a rule that if the rules official on the ground and/or the player does not notice/see the infraction that once he tees off or plays his next shot then it's over with. Kind of like hockey and goal review if the puck drops before they go upstairs then that's it. JMO.

When we equate officiating in golf with officiating in hockey, golf is doomed.

It is so simple to take a stance against the current process but a much greater challenge to see the negative implications for golf. Respect for the rules goes down the tubes if you take away the accountability that currently exits. Perhaps I am missing something obvious but I just cannot comprehend how 50,000,000 viewers on TV and perhaps thousands or hundreds of spectators in person, can see a player break a rule as in my example above, and some of you actually think that this is OK. Very strange indeed.