Are rules officials becoming endangered?

[Axiom]

Wondering if local associations are finding it more difficult to attract rules officials. Ours is. If so, what are the reasons you're seeing?

Edited April 11, 2023 by Axiom

[Newby]

1 hour ago, Axiom said:

Wondering if local associations are finding it more difficult to attract rules officials. Ours is. If so, what are the reasons you're seeing?

My County (in England) has recruited about a dozen new referees who have passed the R&A level 2 in the last two years. With a few more on the way I gather.

[Colin L]

14 minutes ago, Newby said:

My County (in England) has recruited about a dozen new referees who have passed the R&A level 2 in the last two years. With a few more on the way I gather.

Perhaps we would recruit a few more referees in Scotland if Scottish Golf put on a Level 2 course. There hasn't been one since before Covid.

[Mr. Bean]

6 hours ago, Axiom said:

Wondering if local associations are finding it more difficult to attract rules officials. Ours is. If so, what are the reasons you're seeing?

 

On club level we share your concern. On national level we still have enough engaged people and some more to come but attracting new folks is a continuous task.

 

On club level the reason seems to be lack of appreciation.

 

1) People do not feel a referee is necessary.

2) An assigned referee is not rewarded in any way. On a 14-hour day nutrition is needed and that should be offered by the club.

3) On cub level referee is not respected.

 

I used to manage the referees at my home club years ago. I organized the training, both indoors as well as outdoors, took the tests, maintained the levels of referees, scheduled refrees to competitions, etc. I got fed up as there were not enough volunteers who were really engaged and the club did not support the referee training nor rewarding.

 

It takes a lot of effort to manage what I have managed and I hope other clubs have what it takes to appreciate it. Volunteers do things at their own will but if they do not get any appreciation they will stop doing that. At our club the management has not understood it.

Edited April 11, 2023 by Mr. Bean

[Axiom]

5 hours ago, Newby said:

My County (in England) has recruited about a dozen new referees who have passed the R&A level 2 in the last two years. With a few more on the way I gather.

That doesn't seem like many. Do you know how level two compares to the 100 question exam in the US? 

[rogolf]

36 minutes ago, Axiom said:

That doesn't seem like many. Do you know how level two compares to the 100 question exam in the US? 

Trying to "compare" exams between Associations is not easy or beneficial.  Generally, it is up to each Association to identify what they will accept as equivalents, e.g., USGA might say that R&A Level 2 is equivalent to x% in the USGA 100 question exam.

[Newby]

48 minutes ago, Axiom said:

That doesn't seem like many. Do you know how level two compares to the 100 question exam in the US? 

No idea but level 2 is in effect the minimum for county and national championships. It's run over 2 1/2 days by the county and the national authority (in this case England Golf).

Level 3 (TARS) is aimed at International tournament referees and administrators.

And I believe the R&A is introducing a new qualification for referees working the pro tours

 

https://www.randa.org/en/rules/rules-seminars

[Axiom]

2 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

On club level we share your concern. On national level we still have enough engaged people and some more to come but attracting new folks is a continuous task.

 

On club level the reason seems to be lack of appreciation.

 

1) People do not feel a referee is necessary.

2) An assigned referee is not rewarded in any way. On a 14-hour day nutrition is needed and that should be offered by the club.

3) On cub level referee is not respected.

 

I used to manage the referees at my home club years ago. I organized the training, both indoors as well as outdoors, took the tests, maintained the levels of referees, scheduled refrees to competitions, etc. I got fed up as there were not enough volunteers who were really engaged and the club did not support the referee training nor rewarding.

 

It takes a lot of effort to manage what I have managed and I hope other clubs have what it takes to appreciate it. Volunteers do things at their own will but if they do not get any appreciation they will stop doing that. At our club the management has not understood it.

Where I have lived in the Pacific Northwest of the United States, I have never seen rules officials at the club level. As you've noted, club players as well as the PGA Professionals at clubs, don't think they're necessary. Even though club tournaments have entry fees and award prizes, there is no sense that rules should be followed, or even that all players should play by the same set of rules. It's the wild west!

[bobfoster]

1 hour ago, Axiom said:

Where I have lived in the Pacific Northwest of the United States, I have never seen rules officials at the club level. As you've noted, club players as well as the PGA Professionals at clubs, don't think they're necessary. Even though club tournaments have entry fees and award prizes, there is no sense that rules should be followed, or even that all players should play by the same set of rules. It's the wild west!

My experience also. I've belonged to numerous clubs over the years, and even at club championships maybe only a handful of times was there a rules official with any sort of formal credentials or accreditation. (I'm talking specifically about Rules credentials - not being certified as a PGA Pro, which emphasizes things like teaching, course and tournament management and etc. far more than the nuances of rules. Not saying PGA Pros don't have a firm grasp of the rules, but even PGAT guys with tour cards - who presumably have a serious grasp of the rules -  sometimes ask for rules officials. It is a very specialized field.)

 

For exactly the reasons you mention Axiom. There's a feeling that they just aren't needed. In truth (and this is just my experience), by far the norm is what someone at one of my clubs years ago called "TFFIO" - "The Foursome Figures It Out" ... i.e., no one calls for a rules official, but if something is in question, it is common to ask for opinions from others in the group. Of course that leads to very random results ... depending on how knowledgeable a given foursome is. 

 

Bottom line, (it is different in some other countries I've played in, but) in America there is a (slightly) casual attitude towards the RoG at the club level. If I had to try to put it into words, it would be "we mostly play by the RoG". 

 

In practice, it there is a rules continuum with weekenders (with breakfast balls and foot wedges) on one end, and the PGAT on the other, I'd say most club championships are usually 1/2 - 2/3s towards the PGAT. They are by no means as loose as weekenders, but are also no where near the strict RoG at levels that would need trained rules officials. 

 

Which actually makes sense to me. On the PGAT, a single ruling can mean the difference between 4th place and 6th ... literally tens (or even hundreds) of thousands of dollars. A local club championship? Difference between 4th and 6th is the difference between RayBan sunglasses or a Sunday bag and a branded golf towel. 

 

Sorry ... rambling again ... 

[rogolf]

We're fortunate at our club to have three active and nationally-certified referees.  The golf shop staff have our phone numbers and will call for assistance when competitions are going on.

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, rogolf said:

We're fortunate at our club to have three active and nationally-certified referees.  The golf shop staff have our phone numbers and will call for assistance when competitions are going on.

 

Phone numbers of all nationally certified referees are public in my country so anyone can call anytime to any of us. However, that is far from having a referee on site as giving rulings is only a small part of tasks of a referee, as you know.

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, bobfoster said:

Which actually makes sense to me. On the PGAT, a single ruling can mean the difference between 4th place and 6th ... literally tens (or even hundreds) of thousands of dollars. A local club championship? Difference between 4th and 6th is the difference between RayBan sunglasses or a Sunday bag and a branded golf towel. 

 

In my world it is not the placement but playing by the Rules. Wrong decisions within a foursome tend to live long and are hard to correct afterwards. This TFFIO is one reason why average golfers have rather poor knowledge of RoG.

 

Btw, PGAT players aks for a referee even though they know what to do but simply because they want to avoid penalties afterwards (formerly DQ) for having made a slight error in dropping which they did not notice. Sort of assurance.

[bobfoster]

18 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

In my world it is not the placement but playing by the Rules. Wrong decisions within a foursome tend to live long and are hard to correct afterwards. This TFFIO is one reason why average golfers have rather poor knowledge of RoG.

 

Btw, PGAT players asks for a referee even though they know what to do but simply because they want to avoid penalties afterwards (formerly DQ) for having made a slight error in dropping which they did not notice. Sort of assurance.

I will agree that a lot of the requests for Rules Officials on the PGAT are largely CYA requests. By the same token - I'll reiterate my initial point. The strict RoG are complex and ornate, and there are very good reasons why PGAT guys would be risk adverse and say "better safe than sorry". Sometimes so complex that even the Rules officials get it wrong.

 

This might make people giggle a bit: https://golf.com/instruction/rules/15-weirdest-rules-blunders-violations-2022/

[Mr. Bean]

9 hours ago, bobfoster said:

The strict RoG are complex

 

Yes, they are rather complex but so is the game. Then again, I would say 99,9% of the situations where Rules need to be applied are very simple and require only elementary knowledge, although in many cases some judgement and/or estimation. It is rare to have ruleswise a really complex situation in a competition. And based on my own experience the errors made by experienced referees are wrong judgement calls. They do know the Rules. 

 

Btw, there are no Rules officials anymore. For the past 4,5 years they have been called Referees.

[Mr. Bean]

9 hours ago, bobfoster said:

This might make people giggle a bit: https://golf.com/instruction/rules/15-weirdest-rules-blunders-violations-2022/

 

Apart from the Garcia case the players were to blame and nothing extraordinary in those Rules that were applied. Elementary errors by professional players. I bet they remember from then on and will not repeat the same mistake.

 

It pays off to know the Rules.

[IndyArcher]

3 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Apart from the Garcia case the players were to blame and nothing extraordinary in those Rules that were applied. Elementary errors by professional players. I bet they remember from then on and will not repeat the same mistake.

 

It pays off to know the Rules.

 

Explain the Matsuyama violation. So if it was a sharpie it would have been okay, but because it was white-out or something similar, it was deemed to be a substance that could alter the flight/spin of the ball?

[davep043]

2 hours ago, IndyArcher said:

 

Explain the Matsuyama violation. So if it was a sharpie it would have been okay, but because it was white-out or something similar, it was deemed to be a substance that could alter the flight/spin of the ball?

Yeah, Sharpies are used to mark balls all the time, and is acceptable on the face of a club too, apparently the "film" is so insubstantial it can't significantly impact the flight or spin of the ball.  A thicker coating, like white-out, definitely CAN do that, so he was DQ for using that club.  A clubface is pretty much "sacred territory", its best to leave it completely alone, other than cleaning it.

[Mr. Bean]

4 minutes ago, davep043 said:

Yeah, Sharpies are used to mark balls all the time, and is acceptable on the face of a club too, apparently the "film" is so insubstantial it can't significantly impact the flight or spin of the ball.  A thicker coating, like white-out, definitely CAN do that, so he was DQ for using that club.  A clubface is pretty much "sacred territory", its best to leave it completely alone, other than cleaning it.

 

Exactly.

[IndyArcher]

1 hour ago, davep043 said:

Yeah, Sharpies are used to mark balls all the time, and is acceptable on the face of a club too, apparently the "film" is so insubstantial it can't significantly impact the flight or spin of the ball.  A thicker coating, like white-out, definitely CAN do that, so he was DQ for using that club.  A clubface is pretty much "sacred territory", its best to leave it completely alone, other than cleaning it.

 

I guess I just envisioned a thin line of white-out. I guess it could impact something, but I would honestly think it would be a negative impact. Stinks for Hideki!

[ChipNRun]

In St. Louis area, the Metropolitan Amateur Golf Association and the Missouri Golf Association handle training of local tournament rules officials. After their training, they get to practice in the one- and two-day golf events preceding the year-end tournaments.

 

In daily play, a half-dozen officials are roaming the course, each favoring one of the hazard or OB landing areas until called upon. Each foursome gets a rules sheet at start of play, with announcements highlighting any unusual or ambiguous rules features.

 

Most of discussion involves whether we are playing USGA rules or local rules on hole X. Example: No. 1 at Glen Echo CC - local rules say tee shot over right-side fence is unplayable lie - one stroke penalty. But, USGA rules say it is OB, stroke and distance penalty. Tournament organizers need to decide which rule holds.

 

These officials, plus the veterans, also act as rules officials for regional tournaments with mixed am and pro player fields.

[Mr. Bean]

9 minutes ago, ChipNRun said:

In St. Louis area, the Metropolitan Amateur Golf Association and the Missouri Golf Association handle training of local tournament rules officials. After their training, they get to practice in the one- and two-day golf events preceding the year-end tournaments.

 

In daily play, a half-dozen officials are roaming the course, each favoring one of the hazard or OB landing areas until called upon. Each foursome gets a rules sheet at start of play, with announcements highlighting any unusual or ambiguous rules features.

 

Most of discussion involves whether we are playing USGA rules or local rules on hole X. Example: No. 1 at Glen Echo CC - local rules say tee shot over right-side fence is unplayable lie - one stroke penalty. But, USGA rules say it is OB, stroke and distance penalty. Tournament organizers need to decide which rule holds.

 

These officials, plus the veterans, also act as rules officials for regional tournaments with mixed am and pro player fields.

 

Wow... I am speechless...

[ChipNRun]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

Wow... I am speechless...

 

Please clarify. And, I'm not trying to attack what you are saying. Please clarify.

 

NOTE:

• In one-day events to build up season standing points, such a situation is normally resolved in favor of local rule.
• In mid-season or year-end major tournaments, USGA always holds.

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, ChipNRun said:

 

Please clarify. And, I'm not trying to attack what you are saying. Please clarify.

 

 

I was referring to what I bolded. It makes me speechless when a Committee makes up their own rules instead of using the official ones.

[ChipNRun]

24 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

I was referring to what I bolded. It makes me speechless when a Committee makes up their own rules instead of using the official ones.

 

OK, you likely have more formal rules training than most of us. Please clarify the "rule" on local rules. Many golf clubs have local rules printed on the back of the score card. The over-the-fence / unplayable lie was one such rule. That fence section had been built to keep high schoolers from taking short cut across the fairway... but the greens committee felt is unduly narrowed the fairway landing area. So, a compromise.

 

It seems to fit the guidance that "A Local Rule is a modification of a Rule or an additional Rule that the Committee adopts for general play or a particular competition."  (From USGA.Rules.Committee) 

 

 

[Mr. Bean]

54 minutes ago, ChipNRun said:

 

OK, you likely have more formal rules training than most of us. Please clarify the "rule" on local rules. Many golf clubs have local rules printed on the back of the score card. The over-the-fence / unplayable lie was one such rule. That fence section had been built to keep high schoolers from taking short cut across the fairway... but the greens committee felt is unduly narrowed the fairway landing area. So, a compromise.

 

It seems to fit the guidance that "A Local Rule is a modification of a Rule or an additional Rule that the Committee adopts for general play or a particular competition."  (From USGA.Rules.Committee) 

 

 

 

Well, I commented on what you wrote:

 

"Example: No. 1 at Glen Echo CC - local rules say tee shot over right-side fence is unplayable lie - one stroke penalty. But, USGA rules say it is OB, stroke and distance penalty."

 

I have not been on that course nor do I know where that fence is situated, so I can only comment on what you wrote. And if what you wrote is correct then there is no power on a committee to overrule a Rule of Golf unless that is specifically allowed in the Model Local Rules.

 

So, is that fence an OB line and described in the Local Rules? If it is then a ball on the other side of that fence is Out of Bounds. If not, that ball is in play. But I have a hard time to understand when and why does unplayable ball Rule come into picture here...

 

What you wrote:

 

"It seems to fit the guidance that "A Local Rule is a modification of a Rule or an additional Rule that the Committee adopts for general play or a particular competition." "

 

does not mean that a committee may adopt any Local Rule they wish. That is why there are Model Local Rules from which the committees may choose from. Any other Local Rule is not allowed unless specifically granted by USGA/R&A and that is not very common, not at all.

 

 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Mr. Bean

[ChipNRun]

2 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

So, is that fence an OB line and described in the Local Rules? If it is then a ball on the other side of that fence is Out of Bounds. If not, that ball is in play. But I have a hard time to understand when and why does unplayable ball Rule come into picture here...

 

I had a copy of the course scorecard from last year, but it contains no mention of local rules for the course.

 

At the circuit match in question (from three years ago???) we got a local rules sheet, annotated with USGA parallel rules. It mentioned that USGA rules overrode the local fence / unplayable rule. But, a second rule declared as ground under repair patches of some odd, spiny weed in the rough between two of the holes. This is all from memory, I don't have the sheet anymore.

 

I just try to obey the rules. The golf demi-gods don't consult me on what they should be.

[Newby]

14 hours ago, ChipNRun said:

Example: No. 1 at Glen Echo CC - local rules say tee shot over right-side fence is unplayable lie - one stroke penalty. 

Presumably the fence is not normally identified as an OB margin. If that is so, the area beyond is just part of the course and the club may deem it as a Penalty Area/No Play Zone from which the player would get penalty relief.

When you say 'unplayable', the club has no authority to deem a ball as such. Only the player can do that.

This would be an unauthorised local rule and probably make handicap scores non qualifying.

 

But did you mean 'No Play Zone'? These may be either a Penalty Area (with penalty) or an Abnormal Course Condition (without penalty).

[ChipNRun]

4 hours ago, Newby said:

If that is so, the area beyond is just part of the course and the club may deem it as a Penalty Area/No Play Zone from which the player would get penalty relief.

 

This is, in fact, what the situation was. I get the idea the fence - probably erected for legal reasons - impinged on the original width of the fairway.  I'm well aware of the Penalty Area/No Play Zone designation; in our region, this classification would capture "the prairie grass/environmentally sensitive areas" that got designated during the early 2000s. If your ball comes to rest in these areas, don't enter to retrieve -  take one stroke penalty and drop. The local rules described it as an environmentally sensitive area, one stroke penalty. Rarely did everyday golfers hear about Penalty Area/No Play Zone.

 

Net result: We are addressing an interaction of the letter of the law and the accounting principle of materiality. If every fifth golfer hits a tee shot over the fence, and under the tainted local rule has a score one stroke too low, will this error in GHIN calculations cause the emerging world HDCP system to collapse?

 

And, we can address quality control if you want. If, say, 98% of golfdom's local rules fit the standardized formats, I think life can go on.

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

Note: I was not aware that USGA had standardized formats for local rules until I started reading this thread.

[Colin L]

19 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

........That is why there are Model Local Rules from which the committees may choose from. Any other Local Rule is not allowed unless specifically granted by USGA/R&A and that is not very common, not at all.

 

 

 

That doesn't seem to be quite what is said in Committee Procedures.   The guidance on other local rules clearly allows for a Committee to write a Local Rule that isn't covered by the MLRs:

Occasionally a Local Rule may be warranted where no model language has been provided.  Where this is the case, the Committee should write the Local Rule in clear and simple terms.  But most importantly, the Local Rule should be aligned with the purpose statements in the Rules of Golf and Model Local Rules.

 

It's only if a Committee wants a Local Rule that isn't covered by the guidelines that it should consult with the USGA/R&A:

If the Committee believes that a Local Rule not covered by these guidelines may be needed because of local abnormal conditions that interfere with fair play, it should consult with The R&A .

[Mr. Bean]

13 minutes ago, Colin L said:

That doesn't seem to be quite what is said in Committee Procedures.   The guidance on other local rules clearly allows for a Committee to write a Local Rule that isn't covered by the MLRs:

Occasionally a Local Rule may be warranted where no model language has been provided.  Where this is the case, the Committee should write the Local Rule in clear and simple terms.  But most importantly, the Local Rule should be aligned with the purpose statements in the Rules of Golf and Model Local Rules.

 

It's only if a Committee wants a Local Rule that isn't covered by the guidelines that it should consult with the USGA/R&A:

If the Committee believes that a Local Rule not covered by these guidelines may be needed because of local abnormal conditions that interfere with fair play, it should consult with The R&A .

 

That is what has been written but in the past any LR not according to the Rules must have been approved by the RBs. I find it utterly strange if that practise has been changed. Otherwise any committee has the power to make any LR as the statement uses the infamous word "should"...

 

Besides, who decides whether

 

"the Local Rule should be aligned with the purpose statements in the Rules of Golf and Model Local Rules."

 

a LR is aligned... ?

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Mr. Bean