Dustin Johnson potential penalty

[woody69]

I was having this discussion with a mate last night and he was asking me why the rule exists. He was saying the movement provided no advantage to the player, he should have just been able to replace with no penalty and continue. However, I would suggest we forget about accidental or deliberate and if an advantage is gained, if the ball moves on the green whether by actions caused by the player, or outside influence then just replace and play on. The player gains no advantage, but doesn't get penalised either. Keep the rule in place for off the green.

I kind of agree with him I think.

 

[rulefan]

And if your ball at 20' from the hole, is caught be the wind and blows into the hole?

 

[bobmac]

I wouldn't be surprised if the rule was looked at and revised for the next edition.

Maybe they could add a new section to cover 'Telekinesis

 

[williamalex1]

Maybe they could add a new section to cover 'Telekinesis

I thought you were going 4K :smirk:

 

[Tommo21]

I’ve said plenty on twitter about this.

Anyway, quite simply, we have a shower of big wigs who deicide in all probability DJ caused the ball to move. Not when he was about to address the ball, they’re not claiming he touched it, but after his two practice strokes, when he sits the ball on the surface just before he moves the blade behind the ball. That’s the bit where they thought he could have caused the ball to move.

It may well be true, but we are now in the realms of whoever is available at the time, for them to decide if you probably moved the ball....without addressing it or touching it....what a joke.
Not one person on this planet can make that call unless you hit your putter into the ground about one inch from the ball.

The USGA have made a monumental mistake and have dismissed the probability, notice the word probability, that just once, probably just once, in the whole entire tournament, because of the super fast greens, slopes and borrows, there could be a fair chance that someone’s ball will move off its mark without touching it, addressing it or anything else for that matter.

It’s farcical and all they have done is turn a rule, a rule that most of us are well aware of and understood, upside down with no way of knowing.

 

[woody69]

And if your ball at 20' from the hole, is caught be the wind and blows into the hole?

You could handle that as it currently is, i.e. the fact it has blown in the hole means the ball is holed out with his last stroke, but if it doesn't then just replace (rather than the current rule that he plays from where is comes to rest).

 

[Region3]

I think we are at one end of that natural progression now - if you cause it to move it gets replaced and you get penalised; if something else does you play it where it lies and don't get penalised. It's pretty simple as an underlying rule!

Right now it's "guilty until proven innocent". I think that needs to change and could be the next step.

 

[delc]

And if your ball at 20' from the hole, is caught be the wind and blows into the hole?

Provided you personally have not caused the ball to move or played a stroke at it, you have holed out with your previous shot (as the rules stand), which is fair enough.

 

[chrisd]

Provided you personally have not caused the ball to move or played a stroke at it, you have holed out with your previous shot (as the rules stand), which is fair enough.

Hardly fair in my opinion

you hit the ball to 20 foot on a par 3, mark you ball and clean it, you then replace it and a gust of wind moves it and runs it down the slope and in the hole for a hole in one?

Is that the way it should be??

 

[woody69]

Hardly fair in my opinion

you hit the ball to 20 foot on a par 3, mark you ball and clean it, you then replace it and a gust of wind moves it and runs it down the slope and in the hole for a hole in one?

Is that the way it should be??

Why not? That is how it is currently.

 

[delc]

Hardly fair in my opinion

you hit the ball to 20 foot on a par 3, mark you ball and clean it, you then replace it and a gust of wind moves it and runs it down the slope and in the hole for a hole in one?

Is that the way it should be??

Sometimes balls come to rest for a few seconds, but then start rolling again, particularly on slick sloping and exposed greens. How would you legislate for this?

 

[drdel]

I offered my solution in the original post.

Allow the referee on the spot the authority to decide instantly: he/she has the context, circumstances and the playing partners view at the time.

In the DJ case both his playing partner Lee Westwood and the group's ref agreed no penalty. If was obvious that the movement was only very slight, hence no material advantage !

 

[woody69]

I offered my solution in the original post.

Allow the referee on the spot the authority to decide instantly: he/she has the context, circumstances and the playing partners view at the time.

In the DJ case both his playing partner Lee Westwood and the group's ref agreed no penalty. If was obvious that the movement was only very slight, hence no material advantage !

This is a red herring and shouldn't be part of the debate. whether it created an advantage or not is irrelevant

 

[Slab]

This is a red herring and shouldn't be part of the debate. whether it created an advantage or not is irrelevant

Agree that this incident is nothing special in terms of material advantage as many rules penalise when there's no material advantage (touching a few grains of sand in a bunker, ball moving millimeters on the fairway of a 600 yard par5 etc etc)

That's just the way the rules need to be in order to prevent some measurement needing to be defined, zero tolerance an all that

But it also needs said that one of the fundamental reasons for these rules is to protect the rest of the field (& if there is no material advantage) what are they being protected from?

 

[chrisd]

Sometimes balls come to rest for a few seconds, but then start rolling again, particularly on slick sloping and exposed greens. How would you legislate for this?

Easy, If the ball moves without being caused to do so by the player it is replaced as near as possible to the original spot without penalty. If it wont stay on the spot it goes to where it will stay but no nearer the hole. I really don't see how you can mark, lift, clean and place a ball and then call it a hole in one if its blown in by a gust of wind anymore than if you follow the same process and it rolls clean of the green into a water hazard.

 

[woody69]

Easy, If the ball moves without being caused to do so by the player it is replaced as near as possible to the original spot without penalty. If it wont stay on the spot it goes to where it will stay but no nearer the hole. I really don't see how you can mark, lift, clean and place a ball and then call it a hole in one if its blown in by a gust of wind anymore than if you follow the same process and it rolls clean of the green into a water hazard.

I don't really understand what you are saying, because this is exactly what the rules say now?! Are you suggesting that this should change?

 

[chrisd]

I don't really understand what you are saying, because this is exactly what the rules say now?! Are you suggesting that this should change?

Absolutely I'm saying it should change.

 

[delc]

Right now it's "guilty until proven innocent". I think that needs to change and could be the next step.

The removal of Rule 18-2b from the latest version of the rules partly resolves this issue. With that rule in place, you were almost automatically penalised if the ball moved after you addressed it.