Correctly ruling for this unfortunate mishap

[I'_rather_be_golfing]

Playing a round of golf for money yesterday. My group is currently on the green. And I’m setup and ready to putt. When one of the guys in the group behind us hit into us. They yelled out for. So as I’m running out of the way not knowingly I kicked my ball by accident. Once we got that situation cleared up. I placed my ball back closes as possible to the original spot. The bummer here is my friends said that I’ll incur a 1 stroke penalty for moving my ball due to unnatural causes. I argued about it over and over again. And still haven’t paid up. Was the 1 stroke penalty the correct ruling? And golf is just really unfair. Or is there no penalty occurred? 

[nsxguy]

As of 2019, if you move the ball accidentally on the putting green you can replace it with no penalty.

[ND2005]

Rule 13.1d - No penalty for accidentally moving your ball on the putting green. If you don't know the exact location of the ball you are allowed to use your best estimate. 

 

Plus your friends are being dicks, you were trying to get to safety and they're gonna try to win a bet over this nonsense?

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rule-13-interpretations.html

Edited March 7, 2022 by ND2005

[I'_rather_be_golfing]

46 minutes ago, ND2005 said:

Rule 13.1d - No penalty for accidentally moving your ball on the putting green. If you don't know the exact location of the ball you are allowed to use your best estimate. 

 

Plus your friends are being dicks, you were trying to get to safety and they're gonna try to win a bet over this nonsense?

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rule-13-interpretations.html

Thank you, time to collect now. That’s great to know. 

[nsxguy]

3 hours ago, nsxguy said:

As of 2019, if you move the ball accidentally on the putting green you can replace it with no penalty.

 

And ACTUALLY, I just heard on the Bay Hill replay from yesterday that Jon Rahm's 10 inch putt that he missed, hitting it only about an inch, that he tried to stop the putter.

 

Rahm's 10 inch miss

 

“It just didn’t feel good in my hands, and I tried to stop, and I didn’t."

 

Well gents, if he DID try to stop the putter, he moved the ball accidentally on the putting green, no ?

 

i.e. he didn't make a stroke. So, he moved the ball accidentally.

 

Stroke

 

The forward movement of the club made to strike the ball.

But a stroke has not been made if the player:

 

Decides during the downswing not to strike the ball and avoids doing so by deliberately stopping the clubhead before it reaches the ball or, if unable to stop, by deliberately missing the ball.

 

Accidentally strikes the ball when making a practice swing or while preparing to make a stroke.

 

 

So shouldn't Rahm have been able to replace his ball and (re-)try the putt ???

 

What say you ?

[Schulzmc]

“The forward movement of the club made to strike the ball.

But a stroke has not been made if the player:

Decides during the downswing not to strike the ball and avoids doing so by deliberately stopping the clubhead before it reaches the ball or, if unable to stop, by deliberately missing the ball.”

 

Since he did not stop before it reached the ball, or deliberately miss the ball, it was a stroke.

 

In other words, he decided not to strike the ball but did not avoid doing so.

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Schulzmc

[Colin L]

43 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

And ACTUALLY, I just heard on the Bay Hill replay from yesterday that Jon Rahm's 10 inch putt that he missed, hitting it only about an inch, that he tried to stop the putter.

 

Rahm's 10 inch miss

 

“It just didn’t feel good in my hands, and I tried to stop, and I didn’t."

 

Well gents, if he DID try to stop the putter, he moved the ball accidentally on the putting green, no ?

 

i.e. he didn't make a stroke. So, he moved the ball accidentally.

 

Stroke

 

The forward movement of the club made to strike the ball.

But a stroke has not been made if the player:

 

Decides during the downswing not to strike the ball and avoids doing so by deliberately stopping the clubhead before it reaches the ball or, if unable to stop, by deliberately missing the ball.

 

Accidentally strikes the ball when making a practice swing or while preparing to make a stroke.

 

 

So shouldn't Rahm have been able to replace his ball and (re-)try the putt ???

 

What say you ?

What say I?   Read the rule again.  The forward movement has to be stopped without  the ball being struck or the clubhead deflected so that the ball is missed.  Rahm struck his ball.  That's it.

[MaccaRayDudley]

https://msga.org/usga-rules-i-accidentally-moved-my-ball-what-do-i-do-now/

 

If you are on the green it isn’t a penalty providing you replace your ball to its original position.

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, MaccaRayDudley said:

https://msga.org/usga-rules-i-accidentally-moved-my-ball-what-do-i-do-now/

 

If you are on the green it isn’t a penalty providing you replace your ball to its original position.

As posted above, Rahm made a stroke.  It counted as a stroke and he must play the ball from where it came to rest (which he did).

[taporsnap17]

On 3/8/2022 at 5:23 AM, ND2005 said:

Rule 13.1d - No penalty for accidentally moving your ball on the putting green. If you don't know the exact location of the ball you are allowed to use your best estimate. 

 

Plus your friends are being dicks, you were trying to get to safety and they're gonna try to win a bet over this nonsense?

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rule-13-interpretations.html

 

Agreed, OP needs better friends.

[nsxguy]

On 3/7/2022 at 3:34 PM, Colin L said:

What say I?   Read the rule again.  The forward movement has to be stopped without  the ball being struck or the clubhead deflected so that the ball is missed.  Rahm struck his ball.  That's it.

 

On 3/10/2022 at 11:12 PM, rogolf said:

As posted above, Rahm made a stroke.  It counted as a stroke and he must play the ball from where it came to rest (which he did).

 

So, just to revisit this situation, the USGA confirmed your opinions that Rahm made a stroke.

 

Since the USGA & R&A Rules are identical, how do you suppose the article linked below happened ? Or is a spectator coughing while making the stroke a reason for a re-do ?

 

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/pro-earns-putting-do-over-bizarre-stroke/?utm_campaign=forecast&utm_source=golf.com&utm_medium=email&utm_content={date(&utm_term=GOLFcom Top Stories Newsletter

[Mr. Bean]

18 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

Since the USGA & R&A Rules are identical, how do you suppose the article linked below happened ? Or is a spectator coughing while making the stroke a reason for a re-do ?

 

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/pro-earns-putting-do-over-bizarre-stroke/?utm_campaign=forecast&utm_source=golf.com&utm_medium=email&utm_content={date(&utm_term=GOLFcom Top Stories Newsletter

 

Not sure what you are trying to say. Pieters made a stroke because he did not stop his club in time. Someone coughing in the audience is irrelevant. There used to be a Decision about it saying that distractions are a common occurrence on a golf course and not a reason for cancelling a stroke. That principle still exists very strongly.

[nsxguy]

37 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Not sure what you are trying to say. Pieters made a stroke because he did not stop his club in time. Someone coughing in the audience is irrelevant. There used to be a Decision about it saying that distractions are a common occurrence on a golf course and not a reason for cancelling a stroke. That principle still exists very strongly.

 

The article is entitled "Pro earns putting do-over after bizarre stroke"

 

From the article...........

 

“You had no intention of hitting the ball,” Pieters was asked. “No,” he replied, and when he informed the official that this happened while he was on the putting green, the official concluded, “No penalty, and you replace your ball.” 

 

It is under the loose interpretation of the word “accidentally” where Pieters is allowed to get this ruling. According to Rule 13.1d, “there is no penalty for accidentally causing a ball to move.” And Pieters is clear that he did not intend to make the ball go forward once he decided that the coughing patron was a distraction. Therefore, the rest of his stroke was an accident, even if just a moment earlier it was not an accident at all when he drew the club away from the ball. You are forgiven if you are confused, but we can all trust in the result of the accidental putt. It went all of four feet when it was supposed to go about 40. That tells us everything we needed to know.

 

The above is exactly what happened to Jon Rahm earlier in this very thread except Rahm didn't claim any interference from a spectator's action, in this case a supposed cough.

 

If you recall, Rahm went to hit his putt, tried to stop but couldn't, and accidentally nudged his ball some 4 inches. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by nsxguy

[Mr. Bean]

10 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

The article is entitled "Pro earns putting do-over after bizarre stroke"

 

From the article...........

 

“You had no intention of hitting the ball,” Pieters was asked. “No,” he replied, and when he informed the official that this happened while he was on the putting green, the official concluded, “No penalty, and you replace your ball.” 

 

It is under the loose interpretation of the word “accidentally” where Pieters is allowed to get this ruling. According to Rule 13.1d, “there is no penalty for accidentally causing a ball to move.” And Pieters is clear that he did not intend to make the ball go forward once he decided that the coughing patron was a distraction. Therefore, the rest of his stroke was an accident, even if just a moment earlier it was not an accident at all when he drew the club away from the ball. You are forgiven if you are confused, but we can all trust in the result of the accidental putt. It went all of four feet when it was supposed to go about 40. That tells us everything we needed to know.

 

The above is exactly what happened to Jon Rahm earlier in this very thread except Rahm didn't claim any interference from a spectator's action, in this case a supposed cough.

 

If you recall, Rahm went to hit his putt, tried to stop but couldn't, and accidentally nudged his ball some 4 inches. 

 

Ok, I did not read the last part as I thought the article had already finished.

 

IMO that was an incorrect ruling. The Definition of Stroke is very clear and Pieters should not have given a re-do. The fact that he did not intend to hit his ball after he heard the cough is irrelevant as originally he DID have the intention and he DID start his downswing.

 

Bad call.

[Colin L]

It's a rules quiz question.  Choose from one of the following answers.

 

A. There was more to the matter than has been reported and the the referee got it right for a reason we don't know.

 

B. I and others have completely misread and misunderstood the Definition of what is and what isn't a stroke .

 

C. The referee got it wrong.

 

I'm going for C.

 

 

[antip]

6 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Not sure what you are trying to say. Pieters made a stroke because he did not stop his club in time. Someone coughing in the audience is irrelevant. There used to be a Decision about it saying that distractions are a common occurrence on a golf course and not a reason for cancelling a stroke. That principle still exists very strongly.

Agree. Decision was 1-4/1 saying "Distractions are a common occurrence which player's must accept." Mapping summary says outcome is unchanged but there is no 2019 reference. 

That official got it wrong. The only way a stroke can cease after intentionally starting the downswing is by not making contact with the ball. 

[Augster]

8 hours ago, Colin L said:

It's a rules quiz question.  Choose from one of the following answers.

 

A. There was more to the matter than has been reported and the the referee got it right for a reason we don't know.

 

B. I and others have completely misread and misunderstood the Definition of what is and what isn't a stroke .

 

C. The referee got it wrong.

 

I'm going for C.

 

 

C. 
 

Nobody gets them all right all the time. 
 

Good for Pieters. Bad for golf. 

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, Augster said:

C. 
 

Nobody gets them all right all the time. 

 

True, but there were TWO referees and BOTH of them got it wrong. That should not happen.

[davep043]

In my very new (non-paying) career in officiating golf, I've been told that there are two kinds of officials.  Some have made a bad ruling, the rest WILL make a bad ruling.  If the reporting is correct, this was a bad ruling.  The other possibility, the player decided to try to abort the stroke before the club started moving forward, told the officials that, so it wasn't a stroke.  I don't know what was said, what the player's intent was, what the officials had to base their ruling on.

[Mr. Bean]

11 minutes ago, davep043 said:

In my very new (non-paying) career in officiating golf, I've been told that there are two kinds of officials.  Some have made a bad ruling, the rest WILL make a bad ruling.  If the reporting is correct, this was a bad ruling.  The other possibility, the player decided to try to abort the stroke before the club started moving forward, told the officials that, so it wasn't a stroke.  I don't know what was said, what the player's intent was, what the officials had to base their ruling on.

 

True, we do not know what REALLY happened but this piece of the article gives us a clue:

 

"“I was over the ball, and went back, and the kid coughed,” Pieters explained. “I went to stop but I didn’t and I hit the ball.” Basically, he was in the middle of stopping when his putter head made contact with the ball, which he didn’t intend to do. And as an astute man of the Rules, Pieters knew that unless there was direct intention to hit the ball, he should be able to replay from the initial spot without penalty. "

 

If Pieters had not started his downswing I cannot imagine how he could not have stopped his club before the contact with the ball. So to me it is clear he had started his downswing and the video confirms he indeed had.

 

The second part about "astute man of the Rules" is not correct as he ORIGINALLY had the intention to hit the ball and then he changed his mind. There is not such thing as "direct intention" in the Rules, that is probably something the author of the article invented himself.

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Mr. Bean

[Mr. Bean]

It seems the ruling has been declared incorrect:

 

"After reviewing the incident soon after Pieters had played the hole, Mark Litton, the DP World Tour chief referee on site decided that under the definition of a stroke, Thomas’ attempt not to strike the ball failed and the fact that he made contact with the ball meant the stroke should have counted. (Litton was not present for the original ruling, according to the DP World Tour). The ball should have been played from the position where it came to rest."

[antip]

This is from the R&A:

Grant Moir, Director of Rules at The R&A explains a recent ruling that occurred on the DP World Tour.

One phrase we often use during our Rules seminars for aspiring referees is “there are two types of referees, those who have made mistakes and those who are going to make mistakes”. As with all other sports, referees are human and can get it wrong from time to time, and in golf, it is then a matter for the Committee as a whole to work out how best to handle the incorrect ruling.Such a situation arose at the recent Open de France at Le Golf National and, as happens from time to time, I received a call from  Mark Litton, Chief Referee on the DP World Tour. If the Tour staff call between Thursday and Sunday you tend to know that it is not a social call, and on this occasion it was in relation to a ruling with Thomas Pieters.Mark was calling from the TV “truck” as he was watching footage of an incident involving  Pieters where he had commenced his downswing for a putt, but he had been distracted and had tried to stop his swing before the putter reached the ball. Unfortunately, he had failed to do so, and the putter had struck the ball and moved it a few feet. Under the definition of “stroke”, a stroke is made when the player has begun the forward movement of the club to strike the ball. But, if the player decides during the downswing not to strike the ball and avoids doing so by deliberately stopping the clubhead before it reaches the ball or, if unable to stop, by deliberately missing the ball, then a stroke has not been made. In Pieters’ case, while he had tried to stop making the stroke, by hitting the ball he had failed to do so, and therefore a stroke had been made.The real difficulty occurred when, having called in the referee, there was a misunderstanding as to what had occurred and the referee incorrectly ruled that the player had not made a stroke, and that he had accidentally moved the ball. The referee instructed the player to replace the ball, and as the incident occurred on the putting green, advised that there was no penalty under Rule 13.1d(1). By the time Mark had been alerted to the incident, Pieters had completed the hole and was continuing his round. One of the first things the Rules Team at The R&A will look to establish when we receive a call like this is how much time we have to consider the ruling. Especially when it is an unusual situation, we don’t always have the answer straight away, and knowing that there is a little bit of time to think things over can be very helpful. Mark and I had a brief chat about the situation and he undertook to send me the footage of the incident, and I asked for a little time to review the section in the Official Guide that provides guidance on how to handle wrong rulings by referees in stroke play (Section 6C(11)).I watched the video, and confirmed that a stroke had been made, meaning that this was not an accidental movement of the ball and that Rule 13.1d did not apply. I then consulted the Official Guide, and found the part of Section 6C(11) which deals with the situation where a player in stroke play is incorrectly advised that a stroke does not count. This guidance provides that where a referee in stroke play incorrectly advises a player that their stroke does not count and to play again without penalty, the ruling stands and the player's score with the replayed stroke is the player's score for the hole.This was the closest guidance available for what had happened. Arguably Pieters’ case was slightly different in that the referee didn’t say the stroke didn’t count, but that a stroke had not been made. So, as I often do, I ran the query past my colleagues in the Rules Team, and we agreed that it would be the correct course of action to apply this guidance to the Pieters situation.A call back to Mark followed, where I explained our thinking, and independently he had reached the same conclusion that the initial stroke would not be counted as the referee had, in effect, cancelled it, so the player’s score for the hole would be as he had played following the ruling. Despite there being no need to adjust Pieters’ score for the hole, Mark wanted  to meet with Pieters at the end of the round to explain the situation. The main reason for this was to make sure that Pieters would know what the correct outcome should have been, should such an unusual situation happen again in the future.

[Mr. Bean]

The draft wrote by Grant leaves me wondering if there were two referees making this incorrect ruling or only one. From another source I read that the 1st referee was doubtful about the moving of the ball not being a stroke and asked for a 2nd opinion and the 2nd referee made the incorrect call and apparently persuaded the 1st referee to agree. Grant mentions only one referee.

 

I wonder if the correct thing would have been to make Pieters play two balls and watch the incident on a video. After all, the video leaves no doubt at all.