If super slo-mo and zoom lenses weren't allowed...

[sui generis]

It really is that simple. You can't ignore it, not with those competing at the highest level for some of the more prestigious titles. To ignore it is a disservice to her competitors and to the game itself.

 

I would bet there were players who called violations on them self during the tournament. Paying the price for violating the rules is an integral part of the game.

 

Do you believe that Anna felt that sand move? Do you think that if there were a team of people around that shot that they would have "seen" it to call it on her, or suggest to her that maybe she brushed the sand?

 

I'd venture that not one single set of eyes would have caught it, and that no player would have felt that minute of an interaction with the sand. None.

 

Part of the question is do the rules have limits? Do they apply at a microscopic level? As the technology is very fast approaching an incredible high level of scrutiny.

 

It will not be long until the technology has all areas of the golf course on high res film and everything is recorded with the smallest of detail and penalties could be assessed for a variety of infractions that the players have no way of knowing happened in real time.

 

Decision 18/4 is the guide.

[Nessism]

That camera was fixed in the bunker so all players in that bunker were treated in the same way.

 

I doubt anyone even used the camera unless the player that hit into the bunker was in contention. Regardless anyway, it's pretty much a fact that the players in the lead have a freaking super hi def camera pointing at them at almost all times. It's an unfair level of scrutiny.

[lchang]

So, I've still seen no counter-arguments to this proposed change (or something similar), then?

 

"[if an infraction occurred] that was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time, a player's determination ... will be deemed to be conclusive, even if that determination is later shown to be incorrect through the use of sophisticated technology."

 

Everyone's for it? Or are people actually concerned about either a) dishonest competitors and/or 2) microscopic issues affecting the game?

 

Still no mention of advantage anywhere in the rules. And the practical effect of the change above would yield no difference to how the game is played, only on the margins of how televised events were adjudicated. Seems like win-win to me.

 

You already have a counter-example that (apparently) you rejected out of hand (see the last line in your own post #48).

 

dave

 

Ok, I guess that's fair--I was pretty dismissive of it. So if we had "my" rule change, Nordqvist--and others--could continue to live close to the edge in bunkers. Were we all counting on zoom lenses to keep them from doing that? Is anyone saying that golfers in the (recent) past able to live closer to that edge, and now they no longer do because of camera technology? (Are you saying that, Dave, or just pointing out my inconsistency)

 

And most importantly: are fans and players OK with going back to "the way it was"... Just hard for me to believe that fellow competitors and fans would be pissed that, for example, Nordqvist didn't get penalized for that infraction on 17. (Hmmm, let me think: there would be two possible reasons: 1) They think she should have known or felt it. So she's a cheater. A legit reason to be pissed. 2) They wish that super camera technology could be used to catch these at-the-margin, indetectable-by-humans rules violations. Number two seems so far-fetched. I don't think anyone in this thread has been in that camp?)

[2bGood]

It really is that simple. You can't ignore it, not with those competing at the highest level for some of the more prestigious titles. To ignore it is a disservice to her competitors and to the game itself.

 

I would bet there were players who called violations on them self during the tournament. Paying the price for violating the rules is an integral part of the game.

 

Do you believe that Anna felt that sand move? Do you think that if there were a team of people around that shot that they would have "seen" it to call it on her, or suggest to her that maybe she brushed the sand?

 

I'd venture that not one single set of eyes would have caught it, and that no player would have felt that minute of an interaction with the sand. None.

 

Part of the question is do the rules have limits? Do they apply at a microscopic level? As the technology is very fast approaching an incredible high level of scrutiny.

 

It will not be long until the technology has all areas of the golf course on high res film and everything is recorded with the smallest of detail and penalties could be assessed for a variety of infractions that the players have no way of knowing happened in real time.

 

Decision 18/4 is the guide.

 

Yes I think it is a good good, and should be expanded from just movement of the ball.

[sui generis]

It really is that simple. You can't ignore it, not with those competing at the highest level for some of the more prestigious titles. To ignore it is a disservice to her competitors and to the game itself.

 

I would bet there were players who called violations on them self during the tournament. Paying the price for violating the rules is an integral part of the game.

 

Do you believe that Anna felt that sand move? Do you think that if there were a team of people around that shot that they would have "seen" it to call it on her, or suggest to her that maybe she brushed the sand?

 

I'd venture that not one single set of eyes would have caught it, and that no player would have felt that minute of an interaction with the sand. None.

 

Part of the question is do the rules have limits? Do they apply at a microscopic level? As the technology is very fast approaching an incredible high level of scrutiny.

 

It will not be long until the technology has all areas of the golf course on high res film and everything is recorded with the smallest of detail and penalties could be assessed for a variety of infractions that the players have no way of knowing happened in real time.

 

Decision 18/4 is the guide.

 

Yes I think it is a good good, and should be expanded from just movement of the ball.

 

It's a swell concept and is used as legitimate guidance by the Committee in many other situations.

[Shilgy]

That camera was fixed in the bunker so all players in that bunker were treated in the same way.

 

I doubt anyone even used the camera unless the player that hit into the bunker was in contention. Regardless anyway, it's pretty much a fact that the players in the lead have a freaking super hi def camera pointing at them at almost all times. It's an unfair level of scrutiny.

Certainly that point is moot in this case considering they were in a two women playoff. But I understand where you are coming from. My concern is also should it just be from the telecast? My understanding is a Fox staffer noticed it from another unused feed. What if he was an Anna fan and did not report it?

[SHIVAN]

Did Brittany Lang have all her sand shots for four days taped in zoomed in high def? If not, why not?

[sui generis]

Did Brittany Lang have all her sand shots for four days taped in zoomed in high def? If not, why not?

 

I thought her name was Bethany?

 

Anyway, what has been seen cannot be "unseen." If you want TV golf then this is the price we pay. The Committee's job is to get it right.

[SHIVAN]

Were all her sand shots documented in high def? Or not? If not, why not?

 

Maybe she shouldn't have even been in the playoff due to touching the sand twice in day one.....

 

The rabbit hole is deep.

[SHIVAN]

I'm saying the committee is getting it completely wrong. If not every shot is reviewed in high def, they are not catching all the grains of sand moving, the loose impediments in other hazards moving, the ball moving when sticks are removed, the improper replacement of the ball in front of your marker on the green, etc, etc, etc.

 

They are missing quite a lot. Guaranteed. 100%.

[DaveLeeNC]

I'm saying the committee is getting it completely wrong. If not every shot is reviewed in high def, they are not catching all the grains of sand moving, the loose impediments in other hazards moving, the ball moving when sticks are removed, the improper replacement of the ball in front of your marker on the green, etc, etc, etc.

 

They are missing quite a lot. Guaranteed. 100%.

 

That is true (although I don't know exactly what "a lot" is). But imperfect is not the same as wrong. Nor does it preclude 'the best path available".

 

My personal opinion is that the USGA and R&A needs to take a harder look that they seem to have taken at how to handle some of this hi-def, "sometimes you got some and sometimes you don't", stuff. But just my opinion and they may well have already done this.

 

dave

[HighSpeedScene]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

[SHIVAN]

I'm saying the committee is getting it completely wrong. If not every shot is reviewed in high def, they are not catching all the grains of sand moving, the loose impediments in other hazards moving, the ball moving when sticks are removed, the improper replacement of the ball in front of your marker on the green, etc, etc, etc.

 

They are missing quite a lot. Guaranteed. 100%.

 

That is true (although I don't know exactly what "a lot" is). But imperfect is not the same as wrong. Nor does it preclude 'the best path available".

 

My personal opinion is that the USGA and R&A needs to take a harder look that they seem to have taken at how to handle some of this hi-def, "sometimes you got some and sometimes you don't", stuff. But just my opinion and they may well have already done this.

 

dave

 

In this case, imperfect application of review is getting it wrong. Period.

 

If the measure is "getting it right", then imperfect is unacceptable. There is either RIGHT or WRONG.

 

Sorry.

[SHIVAN]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

[Sawgrass]

A much simpler solution is to have everybody avoid touching the sand in preparation for a stroke. Then, penalize the few people who we catch violating that Rule.

 

Oh wait, we already do that! Okay then, let's move on.

[2bGood]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

You have gotten a few versions of the answer, but her is mine again for the record:

 

Golf violations should be ignored if they can not be perceived using normal human senses.

[KyGolf]

My ball is lying in deep rough. While everyone is watching you play your shot, I nudge the ball with my toe into a clear spot 6" away, so now I have a clear swing at the ball. No one sees it because they were watching you play, but the camera picks it up. No penalty?

[MrJones]

A much simpler solution is to have everybody avoid touching the sand in preparation for a stroke. Then, penalize the few people who we catch violating that Rule.

 

Oh wait, we already do that! Okay then, let's move on.

 

I'm all for this but I want the same level of scrutiny put on every player for every shot.

 

Everyone should play by the rules but it's not fair if I've got an a high def super slo mo replay camera watching my every shot (also being reviewed in the van) while you might have old Tom Troubleseeing standing 60 yards away "observing" you. With the camera, I can be told I violated a rule without even knowing I did so. You could blatantly cheat and no one would be the wiser.

 

If we're going to go on the honor of some participants, would should go by all.

[HighSpeedScene]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

[jacot23]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

 

Yes and no. If an infraction can clearly be seen at normal playback speed without zooming then yes, otherwise leave it be.

[MrJones]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

 

I think that depends...do we want to be fair to the players? Or fair to the game?

 

I think the answer for most will be to honor the game. But it means players won't be treated equally in the same contest.

[wfwp]

The spy satellite imagery, weather report, seismology report, cell phone videos, media cameras are all in and 5 different players should have made the cut and the actual winner should be ??? because over the 4 days all unseen by the naked eye infractions have been applied.

[justasgood]

Especially like we saw with Nordqvist where one freaking grain of sand moved and she gained no advantage.

 

Let's put this "one grain of sand" nonsense to bed. Take a look at this video and observe the track her club left in the sand from her backswing that would have been clear to anyone looking in with a naked eye.

 

http://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/2016/07/10/anna-nordqvist-touched-sand-bunker-club-lost-u-s-womens-open-55862/

 

That was the result of the ball rolling in the sand. Her club barely touched a grain and caused a small amount to roll forward.

[HitEmTrue]

Especially like we saw with Nordqvist where one freaking grain of sand moved and she gained no advantage.

 

Let's put this "one grain of sand" nonsense to bed. Take a look at this video and observe the track her club left in the sand from her backswing that would have been clear to anyone looking in with a naked eye.

 

http://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/2016/07/10/anna-nordqvist-touched-sand-bunker-club-lost-u-s-womens-open-55862/

 

That was the result of the ball rolling in the sand. Her club barely touched a grain and caused a small amount to roll forward.

 

It was a small clump of sand, not a grain. The clump broke apart.

 

[SHIVAN]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

 

What you absolutely should not do is enforce violations in one manner with one player, and in another manner with another player. The mere description of that occurring is NOT protecting the player or the field. It is setting up one enforcement policy for some players and one enforcement policy for others.

 

Either ALL shots are viewed, and reviewed, under high def hyper zoom, or none should be.

 

If the USGA wants to actually get it right, they merely need two officials with each group who are specifically tasked with watching each shot of each player in the group. If the two officials can not perceive a grain of sand moving, and the player did not call it on themselves because they could not feel the sand being moved, it's goo with me -- even if FOX zooms in 400x with a 4k capable camera and broadcasts it over all the air waves.

 

Yes, it is good with me if the player, the FC's, the caddies, and the two rules officials "miss" something like that because it is imperceptible to the human senses. I will go further and tell you that the takeaway on almost every shot in the sand is displacing sand from the movement of air around the ball. If you had a powerful enough camera, you could see it. Every shot from the sand. Bet on it.

[SHIVAN]

But it means players won't be treated equally in the same contest.

 

The game, and the field, are to be protected, in equity. Sorry.

[Sawgrass]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

 

What you absolutely should not do is enforce violations in one manner with one player, and in another manner with another player. The mere description of that occurring is NOT protecting the player or the field. It is setting up one enforcement policy for some players and one enforcement policy for others.

 

Either ALL shots are viewed, and reviewed, under high def hyper zoom, or none should be.

 

If the USGA wants to actually get it right, they merely need two officials with each group who are specifically tasked with watching each shot of each player in the group. If the two officials can not perceive a grain of sand moving, and the player did not call it on themselves because they could not feel the sand being moved, it's goo with me -- even if FOX zooms in 400x with a 4k capable camera and broadcasts it over all the air waves.

 

Yes, it is good with me if the player, the FC's, the caddies, and the two rules officials "miss" something like that because it is imperceptible to the human senses. I will go further and tell you that the takeaway on almost every shot in the sand is displacing sand from the movement of air around the ball. If you had a powerful enough camera, you could see it. Every shot from the sand. Bet on it.

 

I'll take that bet.

[SHIVAN]

You guys want this to be the NBA where it's not steps unless it is called, or the NFL where it's not holding unless it's called, or the NHL where it's not slashing unless the arm goes up.

 

I've never gotten a cogent answer on this question: in golf, which violations should we ignore and which should we penalize?

 

Penalize them ALL with every shot reviewed in high def, or cut out the half measures, where only some shots are reviewed. You can not continue to only review some shots and call it good.

 

Nobody says it's good. Not one single person.

 

So we should ignore violations?

 

What you absolutely should not do is enforce violations in one manner with one player, and in another manner with another player. The mere description of that occurring is NOT protecting the player or the field. It is setting up one enforcement policy for some players and one enforcement policy for others.

 

Either ALL shots are viewed, and reviewed, under high def hyper zoom, or none should be.

 

If the USGA wants to actually get it right, they merely need two officials with each group who are specifically tasked with watching each shot of each player in the group. If the two officials can not perceive a grain of sand moving, and the player did not call it on themselves because they could not feel the sand being moved, it's goo with me -- even if FOX zooms in 400x with a 4k capable camera and broadcasts it over all the air waves.

 

Yes, it is good with me if the player, the FC's, the caddies, and the two rules officials "miss" something like that because it is imperceptible to the human senses. I will go further and tell you that the takeaway on almost every shot in the sand is displacing sand from the movement of air around the ball. If you had a powerful enough camera, you could see it. Every shot from the sand. Bet on it.

 

I'll take that bet.

 

You understand the size of grains of silica, right? You are betting on something you can't perceive with the naked eye? LOL.

 

Hit up youtube for super-slo mo videos, and watch dust, particulate matter, move with simple movement from the wings of flies and gnats, and get back to me. You'd lose the bet, but then again, the technology for a handheld portable camera is not there yet. When it is, you will be Ok with penalizing folks?

 

Company deals in some areas of nano-tech. You'd be amazed at what you can't see....

[SHIVAN]

Just look at this video, and understand there is particulate matter fundamental to sand/silica that is half as small as what you can see here. Integral to the composition of sand.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dG9hb3_blo

[Stuart_G]

If you don't address the ball with your club anywhere near the sand, it doesn't matter how small it is, you wont have any chance of touching it. It's not a penalty to cause some sand to move, it's only a penalty if actual physical contact is made.