Cink DQ from Zurich Event--Strange ruling

[John_Findlay]

This is the worst ruling I've ever heard of. How can you test the condition of a bunker that you're not in, simply because you stepped in another one? Ludicrous. The referee and rules committee for this tournament should hang their heads in shame.

 

[RGuk]

This is the worst ruling I've ever heard of. How can you test the condition of a bunker that you're not in, simply because you stepped in another one? Ludicrous. The referee and rules committee for this tournament should hang their heads in shame.

Not a word out of place J_F. I agree.....

 

[John_Findlay]

And what about this part of the rule?

3. If the player makes a stroke from a hazard and the ball comes to rest in another hazard, Rule 13-4a does not apply to any subsequent actions taken in the hazard from which the stroke was made.

 

[par_par_par_treble]

i wonder how many of us would have been disqualified from comps over the years for odd rulings like this, if we had the same policing

 

[backwoodsman]

This is the worst ruling I've ever heard of. How can you test the condition of a bunker that you're not in, simply because you stepped in another one? Ludicrous. The referee and rules committee for this tournament should hang their heads in shame.

Sorry folks, but whilst I appreciate everyone's indignation on behalf of Cink, it wasn't a bad ruling - it was merely a rule - admittedly one of those that gives the occasional "odd" situation, but just a rule nonetheless. Had he known the rules and or followed them he could have easily avoided the penalty of 2 shots, then not been in the position of signing for a wrong score. All it would have taken would have been a "sorry, chaps, can't rake it just now. Do me a favour & rake it after I've played my next shot..."

 

[John_Findlay]

"sorry, chaps, can't rake it just now. Do me a favour & rake it after I've played my next shot..."

How does that work in a monthly medal, then, when the next bunker is 180 yards away and the fourball behind you are nowhere to be seen? Testing the condition of a similar hazard, my arse! How can 2 bunkers 180 yards apart be similar?

 

[rgs]

The ruling is right but i think it is stupid-Cink had already stood in the bunker therefore he was "testing the Sand" before he played the initial shot-he got more feedback on the course conditions than any info the caddie could impart at the next bunker--
Typical conversation between player and caddie at the next bunker
Cink--"in another bunker what did you learn from raking the last bunker"
Caddie--"Nice soft sand but not as much info as you did by shuffling your feet in the sand"

One simple way to get over these types of rulings is to ban raking bunkers during pro events-no raking no problem would make pros think about aiming for bunkers on difficult holes.

 

[backwoodsman]

How does that work in a monthly medal, then, when the next bunker is 180 yards away and the fourball behind you are nowhere to be seen? Testing the condition of a similar hazard, my arse! How can 2 bunkers 180 yards apart be similar?

I wasn't talking monthly medal - Cink would have had more than enough people to do it for him. For the monthly medal I guess it's just tough and you leave it unraked.

I guess if one doesn't like the idea, then one tries to hit a tee shot somewhere where you don't have to stand in a bunker to play your second? After all, hazards aren't there as decoration - they are supposed to make life awkward.

 

[John_Findlay]

Same rules for us, though, Backwoodsman. Feel it's terribly unfair (and certainly not what the rules would intend) to be DQ'd for having to stand in a bunker to play a shot and then not having the etiquette to rake it for other players. Stupid rule. Needs changing.

 

[backwoodsman]

I see where you're coming from - it is a tad tough to be penalised for raking a bunker when it's giving you no info about a bunker 180 yards away. But would you think differently if he had just duffed the shot sideways into an adjacent bunker where conditions were pretty much similar? That's what the rule is for I suppose - and they don't allow for any difference. From another thread, that why the rules are already at 70 odd pages & seem to keep getting longer

And he wasn't actually DQ for standing in the bunker or for not raking...

 

[viscount17]

Can we send this thread to the R&A and get a ruling or an explanation of the ruling?

 

[teetime72]

Brings us back to my post of yesterday.

We would be better off playing to `fag packet rules`,at least we might all understand them without the need for an inquest.