Varner ruling.

[Sawgrass]

What I find interesting is that this particular rule is something like 10 years old, going back to the beginning days of adjustable clubheads. I certainly don't remember it ever being violated before, does anyone else?

 

And in reading this, I believe that assembly on the course is acceptable.

For example, if a player is permitted to add a club (see Rule 4.1b(1)) or replace a damaged club (see Rule 4.1b(3)), club components brought from the clubhouse (such as the player’s locker), the golf shop, or a manufacturer’s truck, or other similar locations, are not considered to be “carried by anyone for the player during the round ” and are allowed to be assembled by the player or anyone else.

 

Ah, yes. That interpretation. So, the rules official is wrong?

 

< edit > It still could be a breach because of the club shaft being carried FOR the player. Methinks the rules official was focusing on the wrong details.

 

Which circles us back to what Thinking Plus asked, is it carried FOR the player if the player doesn’t know? I would guess technically it still is.

 

Just an unfortunate set of circumstances for him since he thought he was proceeding correctly.

Supporting my belief that the player should not be held responsible for that which he didn’t know is this:

 

9.6/3 – Player Learns That Ball Moved After Stroke Made

If it is not known or virtually certain that the player’s ball has been moved by an outside influence, the player must play the ball as it lies. If information that the ball was in fact moved by an outside influence only becomes known to the player after the ball has been played, the player did not play from a wrong place because this knowledge did not exist when the player made the stroke.

 

 

[davep043]

What I find interesting is that this particular rule is something like 10 years old, going back to the beginning days of adjustable clubheads. I certainly don't remember it ever being violated before, does anyone else?

 

And in reading this, I believe that assembly on the course is acceptable.

For example, if a player is permitted to add a club (see Rule 4.1b(1)) or replace a damaged club (see Rule 4.1b(3)), club components brought from the clubhouse (such as the player’s locker), the golf shop, or a manufacturer’s truck, or other similar locations, are not considered to be “carried by anyone for the player during the round ” and are allowed to be assembled by the player or anyone else.

 

Ah, yes. That interpretation. So, the rules official is wrong?

 

< edit > It still could be a breach because of the club shaft being carried FOR the player. Methinks the rules official was focusing on the wrong details.

 

Which circles us back to what Thinking Plus asked, is it carried FOR the player if the player doesn’t know? I would guess technically it still is.

 

Just an unfortunate set of circumstances for him since he thought he was proceeding correctly.

Supporting my belief that the player should not be held responsible for that which he didn’t know is this:

 

9.6/3 – Player Learns That Ball Moved After Stroke Made

If it is not known or virtually certain that the player’s ball has been moved by an outside influence, the player must play the ball as it lies. If information that the ball was in fact moved by an outside influence only becomes known to the player after the ball has been played, the player did not play from a wrong place because this knowledge did not exist when the player made the stroke.

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

[deadsolid...shank]

 

What I find interesting is that this particular rule is something like 10 years old, going back to the beginning days of adjustable clubheads. I certainly don't remember it ever being violated before, does anyone else?

 

And in reading this, I believe that assembly on the course is acceptable.

For example, if a player is permitted to add a club (see Rule 4.1b(1)) or replace a damaged club (see Rule 4.1b(3)), club components brought from the clubhouse (such as the player’s locker), the golf shop, or a manufacturer’s truck, or other similar locations, are not considered to be “carried by anyone for the player during the round ” and are allowed to be assembled by the player or anyone else.

 

Ah, yes. That interpretation. So, the rules official is wrong?

 

< edit > It still could be a breach because of the club shaft being carried FOR the player. Methinks the rules official was focusing on the wrong details.

 

 

Which circles us back to what Thinking Plus asked, is it carried FOR the player if the player doesn’t know? I would guess technically it still is.

 

Just an unfortunate set of circumstances for him since he thought he was proceeding correctly.

Supporting my belief that the player should not be held responsible for that which he didn’t know is this:

 

9.6/3 – Player Learns That Ball Moved After Stroke Made

If it is not known or virtually certain that the player’s ball has been moved by an outside influence, the player must play the ball as it lies. If information that the ball was in fact moved by an outside influence only becomes known to the player after the ball has been played, the player did not play from a wrong place because this knowledge did not exist when the player made the stroke.

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

 

Dave, here is a case for interpretation, by us. I read the statement that Varner and his caddie knew about after they had been told. I didn’t get anything out of it that indicated he knew the scorer was carrying it the entire time. That’s just how the starement read to me.

[davep043]

 

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

 

Dave, here is a case for interpretation, by us. I read the statement that Varner and his caddie knew about after they had been told. I didn’t get anything out of it that indicated he knew the scorer was carrying it the entire time. That’s just how the starement read to me.

I'm going to quote the stuff again, so I don't have to keep going back for it:

[The club] cannot be assembled on the golf course. His caddie was told that when he asked one of our officials. So he left it there on the tee, and the walking scorer picked it up and took it on the golf course, and Harold and the caddie were aware of this. So when they brought the head out and assembled it out there, it broke Rule 4.

 

To me this reads that HV and the caddie were aware pretty much as soon as the scorer picked it up, and well before they assembled the club. But I wasn't there, you could be right, I could be wrong. Its just an odd situation, one I can't ever remember hearing about.

[deadsolid...shank]

 

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

 

Dave, here is a case for interpretation, by us. I read the statement that Varner and his caddie knew about after they had been told. I didn’t get anything out of it that indicated he knew the scorer was carrying it the entire time. That’s just how the starement read to me.

I'm going to quote the stuff again, so I don't have to keep going back for it:

[The club] cannot be assembled on the golf course. His caddie was told that when he asked one of our officials. So he left it there on the tee, and the walking scorer picked it up and took it on the golf course, and Harold and the caddie were aware of this. So when they brought the head out and assembled it out there, it broke Rule 4.

 

To me this reads that HV and the caddie were aware pretty much as soon as the scorer picked it up, and well before they assembled the club. But I wasn't there, you could be right, I could be wrong. Its just an odd situation, one I can't ever remember hearing about.

 

My mistake Dave. I hadn’t seen the second statement. I’ve been going on the first long statement that was issued. At least I don’t believe that was part of the first statement was it? Because I agree with you, that one seems pretty clear.

[Sawgrass]

 

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

I am speaking in general. I’ve been frustrated in not knowing the details of this specific instance but suspect the ruling was valid.

[davep043]

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

 

Dave, here is a case for interpretation, by us. I read the statement that Varner and his caddie knew about after they had been told. I didn’t get anything out of it that indicated he knew the scorer was carrying it the entire time. That’s just how the starement read to me.

I'm going to quote the stuff again, so I don't have to keep going back for it:

[The club] cannot be assembled on the golf course. His caddie was told that when he asked one of our officials. So he left it there on the tee, and the walking scorer picked it up and took it on the golf course, and Harold and the caddie were aware of this. So when they brought the head out and assembled it out there, it broke Rule 4.

 

To me this reads that HV and the caddie were aware pretty much as soon as the scorer picked it up, and well before they assembled the club. But I wasn't there, you could be right, I could be wrong. Its just an odd situation, one I can't ever remember hearing about.

 

My mistake Dave. I hadn’t seen the second statement. I’ve been going on the first long statement that was issued. At least I don’t believe that was part of the first statement was it? Because I agree with you, that one seems pretty clear.

I think different reports have quoted different portions of the same official's statement. That one is from the Golf Digest article that blade linked earlier

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/players-championship-2019-harold-varner-iii-gets-unusual-two-stroke-penalty-for-assembling-a-club-on-the-course/amp

[ThinkingPlus]

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

I am speaking in general. I’ve been frustrated in not knowing the details of this specific instance but suspect the ruling was valid.

It would really be good if the USGA issued a very detailed statement about this ruling so folks would know for sure exactly why the penalty was assessed. I would guess by now they have been consulted and provided all the specifics.

[deadsolid...shank]

I just went back and looked at the original,

“I guess they (the scorer) were thinking they were helping out or whatever, but when Harold and his caddie were aware that a walking scorer was carrying the golf club and it was assembled on the golf course, that's when it violated the rule.”

 

See, I read that has they became aware of at the time of assembly. Like they put it together and someone then mentioned that the scorer carried it along. After the fact. I think several people are seeing it this way.

 

It seems reasonable to me that, after they had just discussed the rule with him and him being told he couldn’t take the shaft on the course with him, Varner would have then known not to assemble it at that point (if he knew the scorer had carried the shaft along). He left it on the tee because he knew they couldn’t bring it.

 

I think we here are more concerned about it than he is!

[BiggErn]

How incredibly contradictory are the two sentences below. Players need an on-course attorney to research every footnote and exception before they do anything on the course today. What is the purpose of allowing a player to retrieve or bring parts onto the course if it isn't to "assemble" them. And, how are they brought or retrieved without being "carried" ???

 

 

 

4.1b(4)/1 – Club Components May Be Assembled When Not Carried By or For Player

Rule 4.1b(4) restricts a player from building a club from parts that he or she is carrying or parts that any other person is carrying for him or her. It does not restrict the player from retrieving parts to build a club or having parts brought to him or her.

If you can't figure this through, you should either play on without the club or hire your attorney. I have no issue with the wording, but as I noted some may find it confusing.

 

It shouldn’t be confusing when your seeking advice from the officials the entire time to make sure you don’t muck it up.

[Sawgrass]

How incredibly contradictory are the two sentences below. Players need an on-course attorney to research every footnote and exception before they do anything on the course today. What is the purpose of allowing a player to retrieve or bring parts onto the course if it isn't to "assemble" them. And, how are they brought or retrieved without being "carried" ???

 

 

 

4.1b(4)/1 – Club Components May Be Assembled When Not Carried By or For Player

Rule 4.1b(4) restricts a player from building a club from parts that he or she is carrying or parts that any other person is carrying for him or her. It does not restrict the player from retrieving parts to build a club or having parts brought to him or her.

If you can't figure this through, you should either play on without the club or hire your attorney. I have no issue with the wording, but as I noted some may find it confusing.

 

It shouldn’t be confusing when your seeking advice from the officials the entire time to make sure you don’t muck it up.

Sure. If that’s what happened.

[BiggErn]

How incredibly contradictory are the two sentences below. Players need an on-course attorney to research every footnote and exception before they do anything on the course today. What is the purpose of allowing a player to retrieve or bring parts onto the course if it isn't to "assemble" them. And, how are they brought or retrieved without being "carried" ???

 

 

 

4.1b(4)/1 – Club Components May Be Assembled When Not Carried By or For Player

Rule 4.1b(4) restricts a player from building a club from parts that he or she is carrying or parts that any other person is carrying for him or her. It does not restrict the player from retrieving parts to build a club or having parts brought to him or her.

If you can't figure this through, you should either play on without the club or hire your attorney. I have no issue with the wording, but as I noted some may find it confusing.

 

It shouldn’t be confusing when your seeking advice from the officials the entire time to make sure you don’t muck it up.

Sure. If that’s what happened.

 

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong but they wait until he hits a shot before they access a penalty. Not only is the rule pretty skewed but the officials did a crappy job in helping a player who was clearly trying to do the right thing.

[HitEmTrue]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

[BiggErn]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

 

There was an interview during the broadcast where a rules official said HV approached them about what to do. He tried to downplay it instead of admitting they failed a guy trying to do the right thing.

[bladehunter]

It’s is bothersome to me that he went to the officials before the round and asked for guidance and ended up penalized. You’d really think they could have spared a guy to see it complete to make sure they did it right since it was such an odd thing to do.

 

In the end it’s on the player. But there’s no doubt that they could have made the situation go according to the rule and spare the penalty if they had basically supervised the driver being replaced.

[nsxguy]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

 

There was an interview during the broadcast where a rules official said HV approached them about what to do. He tried to downplay it instead of admitting they failed a guy trying to do the right thing.

 

A rules official ? Was is the rules official ?

 

Problem is, without the 2 people directly involved sitting down and discussing it with Tour officials, we're unlikely to get the complete story of who said what and when. All we have right now is fragments and misstatements by media (a la the GD article with the wrong heading).

 

The only things we "need" to know is what the official told Varner when Varner first asked him (pre-round) about the procedure, how complete the official's explanation was, and whether or not HV knew the marker had picked up the shaft and carried it along.

 

Since HV didn't make the cut (by plenty) this becomes a non-story. It's an unusual situation but certainly one that could happen again. Hopefully the Tour will relay the story to the rest of the Tour Pros so they are aware of the tripping up over the rule.

 

"We" may never hear the whole story. :dntknw:

[bigeasy]

I know that you cannot adjust your club during a round and also you cant take practice swings with a club trainer (Julie Inkster) during a round, I dont play golf for a living lol. Simple knowledge of the rules, even though he missed the cut, could have been huge

[bladehunter]

Except he didn’t adjust a club during the round nor did he swing a swing aide during the round.

 

Also didn’t ride a camel during the round. Wth ?

[LeoLeo99]

In this case, however, the official says that HV and his caddie both knew that the scorer was carrying the shaft. They apparently didn't know it was against the rules to assemble a club using that shaft, because it had been carried along for them. This might be similar to the player in the interpretation knowing that his ball had been moved by an outside influence, but not realizing that he was required to replace it. In each case, the player has knowledge of what is happening, but doesn't know that it is against the rules.

I am speaking in general. I’ve been frustrated in not knowing the details of this specific instance but suspect the ruling was valid.

It would really be good if the USGA issued a very detailed statement about this ruling so folks would know for sure exactly why the penalty was assessed. I would guess by now they have been consulted and provided all the specifics.

 

Agreed. A better use of the USGA's PR team than worrying about JT.

[Mr. Bean]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

 

There was an interview during the broadcast where a rules official said HV approached them about what to do. He tried to downplay it instead of admitting they failed a guy trying to do the right thing.

 

In the interview the referee said that Varner and his caddie KNEW the scorer was carrying the shaft. So they KNEW that it was not lying on the tee where it should have lied.

 

What remains unclear is if any referee or other official had noticed that the scorer as carrying the shaft. In the very least someone might / should have noticed the situation once Varner started to assemble the club. Apparently nobody paid any attention to that because an alert referee would have stopped him and explained there is a breach about to take place.

[Sawgrass]

 

Also didn’t ride a camel during the round.

We don’t know that . . .

[Sawgrass]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

 

There was an interview during the broadcast where a rules official said HV approached them about what to do. He tried to downplay it instead of admitting they failed a guy trying to do the right thing.

While I clearly don’t know, it’s my guess that the official told him the right thing to do but the player dealt with it in a slightly different mway, not realizing that those changes were meaningful.

 

An official’s goal would be to help the player avoid penalty. Whose “fault” it is that didn’t happen is in the details. But it would be/would have been easy for the official to accept responsibility if it had been his fault, and this would go away. The fact that he didn’t suggests to me that he can’t.

[Colin L]

]

Also didn't ride a camel during the round.

 

Probably just as well. It could well have been a breach of the transportation policy.

[Roadking2003]

This one is not good. Who gave him the advice?

 

The real problem is the silly rule.

[Roadking2003]

What an assinine rule. So you can assemble a club on the range, but not on the course? It's stupid rules like this that give golf a bad name.

-------------

Here's how things played out: Varner began his round at TPC Sawgrass on the par-4 10th with just 13 clubs, his driver being the only one missing from his bag because it had cracked on the range prior to the round. Varner asked rules officials if he could replace it, and they said yes. This is allowed under Rule 4.1b, which states that a player who begins a round with fewer than 14 clubs may add clubs during the round up to the 14-club limit. Varner informed rules officials that his plan was to have his agent take the cracked driver back to the locker room and come back out with a new one.

That's where things got confusing.

Varner wanted to still use the shaft he had in the cracked driver, but with a new driver head. But under the same Rule 4.1b, Varner could NOT take the shaft with him on to the course, have a driver head brought out and assemble the club during play. So Varner left the shaft back at the tee, hoping to have his agent get it assembled off the course then brought out to him. However, a walking scorer mistakenly brought the shaft out on the course, and when the driver head was brought out, too, they assembled the club on the course in violation of the rule.

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/players-championship-2019-harold-varner-iii-gets-unusual-two-stroke-penalty-for-assembling-a-club-on-the-course

[Roadking2003]

]

Also didn't ride a camel during the round.

 

Probably just as well. It could well have been a breach of the transportation policy.

 

It's OK to ride a camel as long as the camel isn't named "cart".

[deadsolid...shank]

From what I understand he conferred with the officials the entire time to make sure he didn’t do anything wrong

 

Where did you come to this understanding? It would be nice if there were an interview with the player somewhere.

 

There was an interview during the broadcast where a rules official said HV approached them about what to do. He tried to downplay it instead of admitting they failed a guy trying to do the right thing.

 

In the interview the referee said that Varner and his caddie KNEW the scorer was carrying the shaft. So they KNEW that it was not lying on the tee where it should have lied.

 

What remains unclear is if any referee or other official had noticed that the scorer as carrying the shaft. In the very least someone might / should have noticed the situation once Varner started to assemble the club. Apparently nobody paid any attention to that because an alert referee would have stopped him and explained there is a breach about to take place.

 

Mr Bean, did you hear or read another interview? There are two printed statements in here, and as Dave and I were discussing, there are a couple different interpretations of that statement. I read it as they (Varner and the caddie) knew the scorer had carried the shaft after it was assembled and they were told about it. Others are reading it if they knew the scorer was carrying it all along.

[Mr. Bean]

 

Mr Bean, did you hear or read another interview? There are two printed statements in here, and as Dave and I were discussing, there are a couple different interpretations of that statement. I read it as they (Varner and the caddie) knew the scorer had carried the shaft after it was assembled and they were told about it. Others are reading it if they knew the scorer was carrying it all along.

 

I read this:

 

https://www.golfdige...-the-course/amp

 

And no, I do not know if this is what REALLY happened.

[Dpavs]

Mr Bean, did you hear or read another interview? There are two printed statements in here, and as Dave and I were discussing, there are a couple different interpretations of that statement. I read it as they (Varner and the caddie) knew the scorer had carried the shaft after it was assembled and they were told about it. Others are reading it if they knew the scorer was carrying it all along.

 

The way I am reading the situation is that at some point they became aware the official was carrying the club for them and that is the problem. What I am gathering is that it really does not matter at what point that was, even if this was at a point just prior to assembling the club, it was how they proceeded after that point that caused the penalty.

[deadsolid...shank]

 

Mr Bean, did you hear or read another interview? There are two printed statements in here, and as Dave and I were discussing, there are a couple different interpretations of that statement. I read it as they (Varner and the caddie) knew the scorer had carried the shaft after it was assembled and they were told about it. Others are reading it if they knew the scorer was carrying it all along.

 

I read this:

 

https://www.golfdige...-the-course/amp

 

And no, I do not know if this is what REALLY happened.

 

Thanks. I had seen the GD article mentioned, but had not read it. In that one, the rules officials says rhe club cannot be assembled on the course. In the first statement the problem was stated as carrying the components on the course. Who knows!?