A way to avoid players breaching 6-6d by the way of TV viewing fans

[ScienceBoy]

Having read this months GM and the "Know the rules" section I pondered about how much live TV viewers are affecting competitions. Although I think it is a good deterrent to any potential cheat I also think it is punishing those who unintentionally change the outcome of their shot by generally a non statistically significant amount. (those familiar with the infamous p value will know what I am talking about) I think to be a cheat you must improve your chance of a better score by a statistically significant amount. This however is almost impossible to calculate with the amount of variables that exist within golf.

To resolve this I would suggest that only someone physically within the perimeter of the course can report a breech of rules. I do think that the tour can provide enough people at the venue to deal or spot any infringements.

What are your opinions on this possible solution? Are there any big flaws in it or do you think it might work?

 

[stevelev]

Re: A way to avoid players breaching 6-6d

I agree, especially as its not fair for some players who are televised to be more closely scrutinised than the palyed who get no air time.

I think the people who call in the breach of Harrington should be shot for what difference it made (none)

I also think they should change a few stupid rules, especially the likes of a penatly for improving the lie of your ball if you stand on it during a search. But if anoother person does it thats fine.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Re: A way to avoid players breaching 6-6d

I've been against any of these trials by TV that have come up. There are or should be enough rules officials with each game to provide advice and make an on the spot decision.

We never had this problem before saturated coverage and its a huge negative. Where does it end. I think there are clear cases where deliberate breaches of the rules need swift action (Saltman apart fromthe swift action bit) but if media intrusion is going to continue, there needs to be a two hour window for example between a player signing his card and a complaint being made. For the most part a player would be able to return to the scorers hut, review the evidence and amend the card before play ended for the day and not be D/Q'd for something they potentially weren't even aware of (Dustin and the bunker, Davis and the reed)

 

[Imurg]

Re: A way to avoid players breaching 6-6d

The problem I've always had with "trial by TV" is around the cut line.
What if an infringement is spotted after the cut has been made? The whole dynamic of the 3rd round is changed, the cut line may change, more people miss/make the cut.
If an infringement is spotted by ultra-slow-mo camera that couldn't have been spotted or known without it, should the infringement stand? Probably not as you're introducing a medium that might not be available to every shot during the competition.
They don't have cameras on every single shot in a tournament.
I say leave it to the officials. If necessary, get more officials.

 

[ScienceBoy]

Re: A way to avoid players breaching 6-6d

there needs to be a two hour window for example between a player signing his card and a complaint being made.

I like that bit a lot! If that was included with the ruling in the first post do you think it might be a solution.

No offense but as there has been many threads on the discussion of the results and problems as things stand I would like this thread to be more about if the ruling in the original post might work or if there are flaws with it. As well as any additions or amendments such as your good one about a time window.

The time window helps fix one major flaw (people contacting friends/relatives out watching on the course). If the viewer went straight to an official they would say they are not physically at the course and could not report an incident.

 

[Fyldewhite]

Yeah, it's an interesting debate and does penalise those on TV more. But that said they are the ones picking up the big money and titles.
I think the Harrington incident was rediculous and the way it was described in GM as the conversation with the rules official "in his head" was brilliant. Slow play is bad enough as it is without getting a rules official over every time you want to tell them that you believe the ball didn't move!!
I'd agree with some sort of limit but there's a danger that it gets to inflexible and a player gets away with something that was blatant but reported two minutes too late etc.

 

[MarkE]

To resolve this I would suggest that only someone physically within the perimeter of the course can report a breech of rules. I do think that the tour can provide enough people at the venue to deal or spot any infringements.

Great idea. Very simple to implement and no grey areas.

 

[viscount17]

To resolve this I would suggest that only someone physically within the perimeter of the course can report a breech of rules. I do think that the tour can provide enough people at the venue to deal or spot any infringements.

no, why should golf open up the refereeing to the gallery? it should take no more notice of them than of a phone-in referee.

at that level the event organisers should be providing enough <u>qualified</u> referees for each match.

 

[JustOne]

Slow play is bad enough as it is without getting a rules official over every time you want to tell them that you believe the ball didn't move!!

I agree however there are simple lessons to be learned. I marked a ball last week and my finger just brushed it, although the ball didn't move I just picked it up and replaced it so that I could be SURE it hadn't gone anywhere.....




....FWIW the cameras didn't spot anything and no-one phoned in to tell my club secretary