Thoughts on Couch Potatoes Calling in Penalties

[chippa13]

Sometimes it is done to maintain context, but I agree, there can be excessive quoting going on, especially when people quote the post directly above them.

[Shilgy]

 

It's not possible for other players to watch every shot in their group close enough to ensure there is no violation. It is not unusual for a player to ground their own club in a hazard or sand trap without even knowing it, and which might only be apparent in a video review. So expecting all violations to be enforced by golfers calling penalties on themselves has limitations.

 

The other thing I will say (off-topic) is how can so many experienced posters of this forum not be able to edit "quotes" to only include the last comment they are responding to? We don't need to see the entire thread quoted every time.

Because when we are on our cell it is a pain in the ...I do if there are a couple long posts. If shorter ones like my post above that you are referring to I am too lazy. That's why.

[Shilgy]

Sometimes it is done to maintain context, but I agree, there can be excessive quoting going on, especially when people quote the post directly above them.

If the posts are flying hot and heavy and you just give it the ^^this and a note by the time you hit post the one you are referring to is no longer directly above you.

[Vindog]

If they adopt the new rules in 2019, these types of situations will hopefully be quickly resolved.

 

Official - "Lexi, we noticed on TV that it appeared you replaced your ball in a different spot than the original one on the green. Did you intend to mark the ball in a different spot?"

 

Lexi - "No, based on where I was standing, I thought I put it back in the same spot."

 

Official - "Thank you, no penalty since the player did all that could be reasonably expected under the circumstances, irrespective of any advantage gained."

 

Couch potatoes referees be damned!

 

That proposed rule change refers to spots that must be estimated, not balls that must be REplaced. It hypothetical but I doubt that such change would preclude a penalty stroke in that situation. Picking up a ball and placing it in a different location doesn't seem to fit those parameters.

 

Why not? The rule is about player integrity, estimation, and measurement. Since it's impossible to place a ball back in its original spot, I would argue a player is estimating where they replace a ball every time they mark it. In Lexi's situation, especially coming from the side, if she believed she put the ball back in the right spot, under new rule it would seem she would be covered and not penalized.

 

 

From the USGA PDF

 

Proposed Topic: Player’s reasonable judgment in estimating and measuring under a Rule

 

Current rule: A player’s judgment is given no particular weight or deference; the Committee decides any issue about the accuracy of the estimation or measurement based on a review of all facts.

 

New rule: When estimating or measuring a spot, point, line, area or distance under a Rule, a player’s reasonable judgment will not be second-guessed based on later evidence (such as video review) if the player did all that could be reasonably expected under the circumstances to make an accurate estimation or measurement.

 

Yes but it clearly was not the correct spot. I have doubts that this proposed change would have saved her as it (in my opinion) doesn't fit the parameter of an "estimation". In my interpretation, the rule change allows specifically for some variance in finding the elusive "exact spot" everyone is looking for, not picking it up and moving it elsewhere. Not knowing which side of the ball you were on doesn't seem to satisfy the "all that was reasonably expected" clause. But it at least gives them an out if they don't want to do anything about it. Seems like most of these changes just want to make the player less responsible. I don't know if I'm a huge fan of that direction per se.

 

I guess we'll find out soon enough!

[Vindog]

Usually I try to edit the quotes out, but clipping posts on a phone is a royal pain.

[nbg352]

Nbg, the usga does not have a commish. Think you're confusing the tour with the rules.

Commish {sic}

[chippa13]

Maybe he meant knish? Those are delicious.

[bladehunter]

Because they get paid for their performance/score? Not their refereeing abilities? This goes back to the question of "is golf a gentlemens game?" We all know Bobby Jones' quote for why he called a penalty on himself. Is golf going the way of other sports and trying to "get away" with infractions is common? Hmm-have the caddies paid by the hour and wear a striped shirt. That would solve the issue! :)

It's not possible for other players to watch every shot in their group close enough to ensure there is no violation. It is not unusual for a player to ground their own club in a hazard or sand trap without even knowing it, and which might only be apparent in a video review. So expecting all violations to be enforced by golfers calling penalties on themselves has limitations.

 

The other thing I will say (off-topic) is how can so many experienced posters of this forum not be able to edit "quotes" to only include the last comment they are responding to? We don't need to see the entire thread quoted every time.

 

 

Only a select few in life get to be perfect.

[bladehunter]

The player is responsible for everything. Why punish the marker for the players mistake?

 

So then you see why I question having a marker at all ? It's just more evidence of the game not keeping up with the times , or not keeping the times out of the game. The game is riding the fence. I'm personally for it kicking the times out , but know that because of $ that isn't going to happen. So I think it will have to amend things to keep up with the times.

 

 

But to answer your question on the marker. Why punish the marker ? He/she also signed an incorrect card. If their job was done correctly surely they would have seen an egregious errors ... No?

Correct, no is the answer. There job is to record the hole by hole score. The markers job is most assuredly NOT to watch their fellow competitor for rules being broken. If they do see one they should, IMO, tell the other player immediately but their job is to play the game. Not to referee.

 

 

now to be clear im of course playing devils advocate.. But to answer you ... if a marker is to attest to the score....and that score is affected by the penalty that everyone in the group missed.. and the player is responsible for missing the penalty because she was responsible for the score as well...then how is the marker not also responsible for the missed penalty? I know that the marker isnt responsible.. But why not? would it not aide/increase the calling of panalties ?

Because they get paid for their performance/score? Not their refereeing abilities? This goes back to the question of "is golf a gentlemens game?" We all know Bobby Jones' quote for why he called a penalty on himself. Is golf going the way of other sports and trying to "get away" with infractions is common? Hmm-have the caddies paid by the hour and wear a striped shirt. That would solve the issue! :)

 

 

Lol. I don't disagree. But it then goes back to my point of why have them attest anymore anyway ? For pageantry sake ? I'm just attempting to point out some of the ways the game has changed and the direction it will continue to change at the pro level with regards to technology creep etc. and I seem to be the only one who sees it.

[Vindog]

Glittering prizes and endless compromises

Shatter the illusion of integri-TEEE

 

yeah!

[chippa13]

It isn't too often that you see a Rush lyric relevant to a discussion.

[Baitkiller]

Rush is always relevant

[bladehunter]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

[Mark_888]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

It's not only up to the field. The facts are (whether anyone likes it or not) that the fans have a say in this, not to mention the betting public. There is a reason why every major pro sport has video replay now (and even some college sports).

 

There is not enough time to review play of final holes before the scorecard is signed. A reasonable cut-off, something like 1-2 hours, might be OK. No penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard if penalized after card is signed and penalty comes from tournament officials.

 

What I fear is that the number of infractions will dramatically increase if tournament officials cannot impose penalties after play is completed.

[bladehunter]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

It's not only up to the field. The facts are (whether anyone likes it or not) that the fans have a say in this, not to mention the betting public. There is a reason why every major pro sport has video replay now (and even some college sports).

 

There is not enough time to review play of final holes before the scorecard is signed. A reasonable cut-off, something like 1-2 hours, might be OK. No penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard if penalized after card is signed and penalty comes from tournament officials.

 

What I fear is that the number of infractions will dramatically increase if tournament officials cannot impose penalties after play is completed.

 

 

The betting public ? So you are in favor of odds makers being able to dictate outcomes ? That's my worst fear

[Mark_888]

The betting public ? So you are in favor of odds makers being able to dictate outcomes ? That's my worst fear

Not odds makers, but people who wager. It's obvious that players will not tattle on each other, so someone has to take control of enforcement. Even without betting, I don't think fans are going to want to watch players who are not following the rules (to say it nicely).

 

I think the real problem is the penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard, that is completely ridiculous if it relates to a penalty imposed by tournament officials after play.

[North Texas]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

It's not only up to the field. The facts are (whether anyone likes it or not) that the fans have a say in this, not to mention the betting public. There is a reason why every major pro sport has video replay now (and even some college sports).

 

There is not enough time to review play of final holes before the scorecard is signed. A reasonable cut-off, something like 1-2 hours, might be OK. No penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard if penalized after card is signed and penalty comes from tournament officials.

 

What I fear is that the number of infractions will dramatically increase if tournament officials cannot impose penalties after play is completed.

 

 

The betting public ? So you are in favor of odds makers being able to dictate outcomes ? That's my worst fear

 

I'm with you. I absolutely don't want anyone who is betting on golf in any way, shape, or form to EVER have ANY say whatsoever in the outcome of any golf tournament. PERIOD!

[Vindog]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

 

More like "The field" doesn't want any more eyes on it.

[bladehunter]

So immelman and dimarco "inside the locker room " just addressed call ins. And both agreed. Absolutely not after the card is signed. "The field " speaks again. It doesn't want the extra protection

 

More like "The field" doesn't want any more eyes on it.

 

True. That's basically what I'm saying too. It's circular. The field doesn't want protection , or extra oversight. Same same. Exactly the point I've tried to make. That's its alwasy been this way. Now someone turned the closet light on.

[KyGolf]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

[bladehunter]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

 

ive played in alot of tournaments and attested to alot of scores.. i have never asked someone what they got on a hole....unless i was unclear on a drop/ penalty etc.... as a marker you have to keeo their scrore ...or else whats the point? if you arent paying attention then its just the other guys word.. well if its that hen why copy that same word down in two spots?

[Shilgy]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

 

ive played in alot of tournaments and attested to alot of scores.. i have never asked someone what they got on a hole....unless i was unclear on a drop/ penalty etc.... as a marker you have to keeo their scrore ...or else whats the point? if you arent paying attention then its just the other guys word.. well if its that hen why copy that same word down in two spots?

I gotta agree with Blade. I'm not watching for infractions like Lexi's but I know how many strokes the guy made. Unless I see him slashing repeatedly in the hay then I'll ask. :)

[KyGolf]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

 

ive played in alot of tournaments and attested to alot of scores.. i have never asked someone what they got on a hole....unless i was unclear on a drop/ penalty etc.... as a marker you have to keeo their scrore ...or else whats the point? if you arent paying attention then its just the other guys word.. well if its that hen why copy that same word down in two spots?

 

 

I play in a bunch of tournaments every year where I have to attest to a fellow competitor or team score. Most of the time I know exactly how many strokes they have made, but I still ask. If I am on one side of a fairway and you are in a bunker on the other side, I am not going to run over an watch you to see if you grounded your club. I am too old to run that far, and that's what TV replays and call-ins are for.

[whr]

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source?

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

 

1) I'm against call-ins, but if they are going to continue accepting them, I'd like to see a rules change where the player must receive a penalty before they tee off in their next round. IMO, once that shot is hit, a prior rounds score is solidified and cannot be affected by some couch potato or lazy official who decided not to review the emailed "infraction" until the next day. Telling her on the 13th hole was completely unacceptable.

 

2) It's time to define what an acceptable source is. Blade makes a great point about betting public concern. On question 2, nothing would happen to their reputation, unless they intended to cheat. What if Lexi's "infraction" had taken place on Sunday, and not noticed until Monday afternoon? Under the current rules nothing would have happened and we all would be congratulating her on your major victory. Would you be outraged and do you think Lexi's reputation would be damaged?

[Mark_888]

1) I'm against call-ins, but if they are going to continue accepting them, I'd like to see a rules change where the player must receive a penalty before they tee off in their next round. IMO, once that shot is hit, a prior rounds score is solidified and cannot be affected by some couch potato or lazy official who decided not to review the emailed "infraction" until the next day. Telling her on the 13th hole was completely unacceptable.

 

2) It's time to define what an acceptable source is. Blade makes a great point about betting public concern. On question 2, nothing would happen to their reputation, unless they intended to cheat. What if Lexi's "infraction" had taken place on Sunday, and not noticed until Monday afternoon? Under the current rules nothing would have happened and we all would be congratulating her on your major victory. Would you be outraged and do you think Lexi's reputation would be damaged?

 

The issue of how the tournament officials decided to review the video is a red herring. It shouldn't matter where they get their tips from, and there is no way to enforce such a limitation anyway. Tournament officials are not in an isolation booth during that time period. What if officials are just about to start the process of reviewing something, and a viewer calls in or emails a tip at the same time? Then you have a controversy that would be a complete and total nightmare. If tournament officials don't want to receive tips, that fine, but putting something in the rules about that is not the answer.

 

The real issue, as you pointed out, is that there needs to be a time limit as to when a penalty can be assessed by tournament officials. Before a player tees off on the next round is more than reasonable. Also, the 2 stroke penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard needs to be waived if the penalty is assessed by tournament officials after the round has been completed.

[Vindog]

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source?

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

 

1) I'm against call-ins, but if they are going to continue accepting them, I'd like to see a rules change where the player must receive a penalty before they tee off in their next round. IMO, once that shot is hit, a prior rounds score is solidified and cannot be affected by some couch potato or lazy official who decided not to review the emailed "infraction" until the next day. Telling her on the 13th hole was completely unacceptable.

 

2) It's time to define what an acceptable source is. Blade makes a great point about betting public concern. On question 2, nothing would happen to their reputation, unless they intended to cheat. What if Lexi's "infraction" had taken place on Sunday, and not noticed until Monday afternoon? Under the current rules nothing would have happened and we all would be congratulating her on your major victory. Would you be outraged and do you think Lexi's reputation would be damaged?

 

Well, most of GOLFWRX would have done the right thing and vacated the trophy, from what I understand. ;)

 

I think that the Championship, and the tournament committee, would have felt that their reputation was tarnished.

[tannyhoban]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

Good for you. Can you assure the field they were applied equitably? No, you cannot. Only those on camera are subjected. Maybe drones for each player in the field?

[KyGolf]

1) I'm against call-ins, but if they are going to continue accepting them, I'd like to see a rules change where the player must receive a penalty before they tee off in their next round. IMO, once that shot is hit, a prior rounds score is solidified and cannot be affected by some couch potato or lazy official who decided not to review the emailed "infraction" until the next day. Telling her on the 13th hole was completely unacceptable.

 

2) It's time to define what an acceptable source is. Blade makes a great point about betting public concern. On question 2, nothing would happen to their reputation, unless they intended to cheat. What if Lexi's "infraction" had taken place on Sunday, and not noticed until Monday afternoon? Under the current rules nothing would have happened and we all would be congratulating her on your major victory. Would you be outraged and do you think Lexi's reputation would be damaged?

 

The issue of how the tournament officials decided to review the video is a red herring. It shouldn't matter where they get their tips from, and there is no way to enforce such a limitation anyway. Tournament officials are not in an isolation booth during that time period. What if officials are just about to start the process of reviewing something, and a viewer calls in or emails a tip at the same time? Then you have a controversy that would be a complete and total nightmare. If tournament officials don't want to receive tips, that fine, but putting something in the rules about that is not the answer.

 

The real issue, as you pointed out, is that there needs to be a time limit as to when a penalty can be assessed by tournament officials. Before a player tees off on the next round is more than reasonable. Also, the 2 stroke penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard needs to be waived if the penalty is assessed by tournament officials after the round has been completed.

 

 

There is a time limit. It is after the final round is completed and the competition is closed. If there is no penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard there is no incentive for a player to self report an infraction that wasn't noticed immediately.

[KyGolf]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

Good for you. Can you assure the field they were applied equitably? No, you cannot. Only those on camera are subjected. Maybe drones for each player in the field?

 

 

Another straw man. An infraction occurred or it didn't. The fact that another infraction may have happened elsewhere doesn't change that fact.

[tannyhoban]

There are so many straw men in this thread a crow wouldn't get within a mile of it.

 

The ball was lifted and immediately placed on a different spot. The proposed "dumbing down" of the rules would not make any difference in this case.

 

Phil Mickelson said ".......". Paragon of honesty and virtue that he is, you going to hang your hat on that?

 

A fellow competitor does not have the opportunity to police every action a player makes, he records the score the player tells him he made. It is up to the player to follow the rules and honestly report his score. The marker signs for what the player reports to him. Courtesy dictates that he inform the player of a breach if he happens to observe one, but it is still up to the player to include that in his score.

 

A rules infraction is brought to the attention of the rules officials, they are supposed to ignore it due to the source? What would that do to the player's reputation if it came to light after the competition was closed?

 

I am fine with the rules as they are. No changes necessary.

 

Good for you. Can you assure the field they were applied equitably? No, you cannot. Only those on camera are subjected. Maybe drones for each player in the field?

 

 

Another straw man. An infraction occurred or it didn't. The fact that another infraction may have happened elsewhere doesn't change that fact.

 

Not a straw man. Even rules officials do not always get it right. Card signed, score posted. Nothing should change that. Not a thing. And after reviewing here from my couch, it's time to move on. I win.