Rule violation call at The Masters, win big - poll

I think it was more likely the Lexi call was made to win a wager; regardless, with the upcoming Masters tournament and emphasis on betting I have to ask, who among you would do such a thing if DQ'ing or assessing penalty strokes to a competitor meant you'd win money?

Lexi got robbed. She should of won.

Wk

Lexi got robbed. She should of won.

 

Wk

She should have not did what she did and she would not have had that problem.

I'd pay $100 to do it. It's my favorite part of watching golf on TV. I love how the tour allows and encourages active fan participation. Makes it much more exciting to watch feeling like I could potentially have a role in the outcome of the event.

The better question is would inform them immediately, or keep it quite until it would have the most effect, like the emotional turmoil that was caused this past weekend.

I think it was more likely the Lexi call was made to win a wager; regardless, with the upcoming Masters tournament and emphasis on betting I have to ask, who among you would do such a thing if DQ'ing or assessing penalty strokes to a competitor meant you'd win money?

Thanks for the post. I was just thinking this morning, we need another thread on Lexi and calling in rules infractions.

LOL...........the rules/tournament committee doesn't have to act on any spectator/viewer provided possible rules violations. If they don't act, people will eventually not bother.

If the player, marker, walking rules official, or a fellow competitor doesn't question a possible breach at the time it happens or before the player finishes their round, it's too late. Especially after the card has been signed and turned in to the tournament committee.

LOL...........the rules/tournament committee doesn't have to act on any spectator/viewer provided possible rules violations. If they don't act, people will eventually not bother.

 

If the player, marker, walking rules official, or a fellow competitor doesn't question a possible breach at the time it happens or before the player finishes their round, it's too late. Especially after the card has been signed and turned in to the tournament committee.

34-3/9 Resolution of Questions of Fact; Referee and Committee Responsibility

Resolving questions of fact is among the most difficult actions required of a referee, or the Committee as a whole. For example, these situations include a broad array of incidents such as determining whether a player caused a ball to move (Decision 18-2/0.5), whether a player played from outside the teeing ground (Decision 34-3/4), whether a stroke was made (Decision 14/1.5), the hole at which a wrong ball was played (Decision 15-1/3) and the state of a match (Decision 34-3/5).

In all situations involving questions of fact, resolution of the doubt must be made in light of all the relevant circumstances and evaluation of the weight of the evidence, including the balance of probabilities where applicable (Decision 15-1/3). When the Committee is unable to determine the facts to its satisfaction, it must resolve the matter in the fairest way (Decision 34-3/5).

Testimony of the players involved is important and must be given due consideration. In some situations where the facts are not decisive, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the player (Decisions 15-1/2 and 19-1/4.1); in others, the doubt should be resolved against the player (Decision 13-4/35.5 and 21/3). There is no hard-and-fast rule for evaluating the testimony of the players or for assigning the weight to be given to such testimony and each situation must be treated on its own merits. The proper action depends on the circumstances in each case and must be left to the judgment of the referee, or the Committee as a whole.

Testimony of those who are not a part of the competition, including spectators, must be accepted and evaluated (Decision 27/12). It is also appropriate to use television footage and the like to assist in resolving doubt.

It is important that any questions of fact be resolved in a timely manner such that the competition may proceed in an orderly way. Thus, the referee may be limited to evaluating the evidence available to him in a timely manner. Any such ruling is always subject to further review by the referee, or Committee as a whole as additional evidence becomes available.

If a judgment is made by a referee, the player is entitled to proceed on the basis of that ruling whether it is an interpretation of the Rules of Golf (Decision 34-3/1.5) or a resolution of a question of fact (Decision 34-3/7). In situations arising in both circumstances, if the ruling is found to be incorrect, the Committee may have the authority to make a correction (Decisions 34-3/1 and 34-3/7). However, in all circumstances, including both match play and stroke play, the referee or Committee is limited in its ability to make corrections by the guidance contained in Decisions 34-2/5, 34-2/6, 34-2/7, 34-3/3 and 34-3/3.3.

LOL...........the rules/tournament committee doesn't have to act on any spectator/viewer provided possible rules violations. If they don't act, people will eventually not bother.

 

If the player, marker, walking rules official, or a fellow competitor doesn't question a possible breach at the time it happens or before the player finishes their round, it's too late. Especially after the card has been signed and turned in to the tournament committee.

Referee" is one who is appointed by the Committee to decide questions of fact and apply the Rules. He must act on any breach of a Rule that he observes or is reported to him.

poll above is pretty telling of how people feel on this

LOL...........the rules/tournament committee doesn't have to act on any spectator/viewer provided possible rules violations. If they don't act, people will eventually not bother.

 

If the player, marker, walking rules official, or a fellow competitor doesn't question a possible breach at the time it happens or before the player finishes their round, it's too late. Especially after the card has been signed and turned in to the tournament committee.

 

34-3/9 Resolution of Questions of Fact; Referee and Committee Responsibility

 

Resolving questions of fact is among the most difficult actions required of a referee, or the Committee as a whole. For example, these situations include a broad array of incidents such as determining whether a player caused a ball to move (Decision 18-2/0.5), whether a player played from outside the teeing ground (Decision 34-3/4), whether a stroke was made (Decision 14/1.5), the hole at which a wrong ball was played (Decision 15-1/3) and the state of a match (Decision 34-3/5).

 

In all situations involving questions of fact, resolution of the doubt must be made in light of all the relevant circumstances and evaluation of the weight of the evidence, including the balance of probabilities where applicable (Decision 15-1/3). When the Committee is unable to determine the facts to its satisfaction, it must resolve the matter in the fairest way (Decision 34-3/5).

 

Testimony of the players involved is important and must be given due consideration. In some situations where the facts are not decisive, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the player (Decisions 15-1/2 and 19-1/4.1); in others, the doubt should be resolved against the player (Decision 13-4/35.5 and 21/3). There is no hard-and-fast rule for evaluating the testimony of the players or for assigning the weight to be given to such testimony and each situation must be treated on its own merits. The proper action depends on the circumstances in each case and must be left to the judgment of the referee, or the Committee as a whole.

 

Testimony of those who are not a part of the competition, including spectators, must be accepted and evaluated (Decision 27/12). It is also appropriate to use television footage and the like to assist in resolving doubt.

 

It is important that any questions of fact be resolved in a timely manner such that the competition may proceed in an orderly way. Thus, the referee may be limited to evaluating the evidence available to him in a timely manner. Any such ruling is always subject to further review by the referee, or Committee as a whole as additional evidence becomes available.

 

If a judgment is made by a referee, the player is entitled to proceed on the basis of that ruling whether it is an interpretation of the Rules of Golf (Decision 34-3/1.5) or a resolution of a question of fact (Decision 34-3/7). In situations arising in both circumstances, if the ruling is found to be incorrect, the Committee may have the authority to make a correction (Decisions 34-3/1 and 34-3/7). However, in all circumstances, including both match play and stroke play, the referee or Committee is limited in its ability to make corrections by the guidance contained in Decisions 34-2/5, 34-2/6, 34-2/7, 34-3/3 and 34-3/3.3.

Yes; timely manner to me means before player signs his scorecard for the round and turns it in. Not a day or days after the fact.

poll above is pretty telling of how people feel on this

Agreed. But post that same pole in the Rules forum and it would probably >90% would call it in for free. Some of those guys seem to love the rules more than golf itself, especially the minutia that has no material impact on the outcome of a shot. It's almost like a religion to them and to speak poorly of the rules or USGA is like blasphemy.

poll above is pretty telling of how people feel on this

 

Agreed. But post that same pole in the Rules forum and it would probably >90% would call it in for free. Some of those guys seem to love the rules more than golf itself, especially the minutia that has no material impact on the outcome of a shot. It's almost like a religion to them and to speak poorly of the rules or USGA is like blasphemy.

Exactly my point. And they also do not appreciate anyone outside the circle posting there. It truly is a religion. One I have questioned the legitimacy of thrice now and receive no real response. But whatever. Things are about to change whether they like it or not. Public outrage will force it.

Timely manner after receiving the information.

I'd pay $100 to do it. It's my favorite part of watching golf on TV. I love how the tour allows and encourages active fan participation. Makes it much more exciting to watch feeling like I could potentially have a role in the outcome of the event.

They love golf more than they like the TV spectacle that is pro golf

Add an option to the list: 4 free master's tickets each year for life.

Then watch GolfWrx turn that poll upside-down.

So - what is the email address(es) and phone number(s) to contact the Masters rules committee referee? This information should be made readily available, shouldn't it?

I think it was more likely the Lexi call was made to win a wager; regardless, with the upcoming Masters tournament and emphasis on betting I have to ask, who among you would do such a thing if DQ'ing or assessing penalty strokes to a competitor meant you'd win money?

So - what is the email address(es) and phone number(s) to contact the Masters rules committee referee? This information should be made readily available, shouldn't it?

The fact that it isn't should tell us that it isn't just some couch potato that gets through.

You think someone assessed a 4 shot penalty to win a bet?

You are running seriously late for your flat earther meeting.

I would never do it, but she committed a rules infraction lol

I would depend on whether I like the player or not. I have Slugger White's number on speed dial. I call in 7 or 8 violations on Mickelson every round but they never act on them.

It's not the people e-mailing or calling it's the tour taking them seriously....someone said Lexi always marks her ball from the side...just a habit so maybe it's not the most accurate way to mark your ball.

Lexi got robbed. She should of won.

 

Wk

She violated the rules and I'm a Lexi fan. I do take exception to a viewer call-in, however. Should not be allowed.

poll above is pretty telling of how people feel on this

I'd suggest the poll is more a reflection of what people *think* the right answer should be.

I suspect at least 80% of the people on this forum, would trying to be calling in a rules violation if they saw it and though they could get through to someone.

We live in the world Andy Warhol talked about, everyone wants their 10 minutes of fame.

A year ago Anna Nordqvist was in the bunker and the cameras picked up the fact she moved a grain of sand..she had no idea and neither did anyone else on the course...I remember the announcers saying after the zoom in slow motion..."Oh my she definitely moved the sand" so it was the network or them or whoever that notified officials and she lost a major. Not much different from a fan calling in because golf rules are very detailed and even pros don't know them all....it is what it is because golf rules are so intricate.

A year ago Anna Nordqvist was in the bunker and the cameras picked up the fact she moved a grain of sand..she had no idea and neither did anyone else on the course...I remember the announcers saying after the zoom in slow motion..."Oh my she definitely moved the sand" so it was the network or them or whoever that notified officials and she lost a major. Not much different from a fan calling in because golf rules are very detailed and even pros don't know them all....it is what it is because golf rules are so intricate.

It was the bunker cam that picked up the club touching the sand. Unfortunate for Anna, but she took the chance by hovering her club so close to the sand. The rule is , you can't touch the sand, appropriate penalty assessed.

A year ago Anna Nordqvist... Not much different from a fan calling in because golf rules are very detailed and even pros don't know them all....

Are you implying that Anna did not know the rule she was penalized on?

A year ago Anna Nordqvist... Not much different from a fan calling in because golf rules are very detailed and even pros don't know them all....

 

Are you implying that Anna did not know the rule she was penalized on?

Not sure how you make that leap...I'm saying she had no clue she touched the sand and without the bunker cam which I'm sure isn't there to catch sand touchers neither would officials or anyone else....officials never would have looked at the footage unless they were told by "outside" spectators.