Haotong Li penalty

[Slab]

As one of the other caddies said...
If it was that fine a judgement, how can a referee see it from his buggy on the other side of the green?
The ruling must have been given after viewing a TV replay

The rule uses the word "deliberately"
In my view, as Li is moving towards the ball, the caddy is "deliberately" moving away.

Poor decision.

What would be the issue if it was spotted by an official on a tv (I know phone-ins are out now but also thought as part of it that live monitoring/replays would be used by officials)

 

[Imurg]

What would be the issue if it was spotted by an official on a tv (I know phone-ins are out now but also thought as part of it that live monitoring/replays would be used by officials)

Caddy's words not mine but I'm largely in agreement.
If TV replay is needed to make the judgement it doesn't sit comfortably with me of everyone else is t being scrutinized for the whole round as well.
A bit like having VAR at some FA cup matches but not others.

 

[Cue_147]

I think he's been made a scapegoat here... they wouldn't of applied the penalty if it was Rose, Mcilroy etc.

They've just wanted to make a statement and he's an easy target.

 

[Slab]

Caddy's words not mine but I'm largely in agreement.
If TV replay is needed to make the judgement it doesn't sit comfortably with me of everyone else is t being scrutinized for the whole round as well.
A bit like having VAR at some FA cup matches but not others.

Kinda agree but as I understood it the officials are not just sitting watching the feed we get at home, they have the feeds from all the cameras round the course so everyone is as likely or unlikely to be picked up for something, providing the cameras are rolling of course (cos they don't always record those not in contention)

 

[Orikoru]

Having seen that video, that is absolutely bloody scandalous. If I was Li I would be suing them for loss of earnings, with the video as evidence. He's been quite literally robbed.

 

[Slab]

Having seen that video, that is absolutely bloody scandalous. If I was Li I would be suing them for loss of earnings, with the video as evidence. He's been quite literally robbed.

I have a huge amount of sympathy for Li, but taking emotion and the layman's view of fairness out of it (& bearing in mind the rule as its written) what do you think his case would be?

 

[Orikoru]

I have a huge amount of sympathy for Li, but taking emotion and the layman's view of fairness out of it (& bearing in mind the rule as its written) what do you think his case would be?

What do you mean? We've all watched the video and largely agreed that he is innocent of the rule break he or his caddy was punished for. So them erroneously docking him 2 shots has cost him however much it was in prize money.

 

[Slab]

What do you mean? We've all watched the video and largely agreed that he is innocent of the rule break he or his caddy was punished for. So them erroneously docking him 2 shots has cost him however much it was in prize money.

All I can see is folk saying he's not behind him or he hasn't addressed it
But we now know:

• He doesn't have to be behind him/on his line to breach the rule, just close to the line is enough (& he's clearly close to the line)
• Its not when he addressed it that the rule is breached, its when the player begins to address it (& he's clearly begun to address it)

 

[Orikoru]

All I can see is folk saying he's not behind him or he hasn't addressed it
But we now know:

• He doesn't have to be behind him/on his line to breach the rule, just close to the line is enough (& he's clearly close to the line)
• Its not when he addressed it that the rule is breached, its when the player begins to address it (& he's clearly begun to address it)

There is absolutely no way he deserves a two shot penalty for that video I just watched. That is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

There is absolutely no way he deserves a two shot penalty for that video I just watched. That is absolutely ridiculous.

Perhaps if Lii hadn’t been so used to using his caddy so deep with the putting process he might not have fallen foul of the rules that he should have known and made sure he wasn’t transgressing.

 

[garyinderry]

All I can see is folk saying he's not behind him or he hasn't addressed it
But we now know:

• He doesn't have to be behind him/on his line to breach the rule, just close to the line is enough (& he's clearly close to the line)
• Its not when he addressed it that the rule is breached, its when the player begins to address it (& he's clearly begun to address it)

There is a huge case that he hasn't even begun to address the ball until well after the caddy has cleared.

Address the ball means to set the club in behind the ball.

Setting a stance is completely different.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

If people want to see what a caddy looks like really lining up a player then take a look at footage from the US LPGA, presumably now from last year if they are enforcing this rule. The lining up there used to be as blatant as could be. I haven't watched the ladies game for a while so I would assume that they have tidied this up. Totally different ball game.

 

[Slab]

There is a huge case that he hasn't even begun to address the ball until well after the caddy has cleared.

Address the ball means to set the club in behind the ball.

Setting a stance is completely different.

Just trying to get it settled in my head too but as far as I see its no longer about addressing the ball, its in breach when a player 'begins to take his stance' and he sure done that part from what I see

 

[clubchamp98]

Can you imagine if that was Phil Mickelson.

What about a Jim Furyk where he addresses the ball but then backs away again where would his address start.
Address to me is putting the club behind the ball and this is another unessessary change .

 

[fowlero]

I think he's been made a scapegoat here... they wouldn't of applied the penalty if it was Rose, Mcilroy etc.

They've just wanted to make a statement and he's an easy target.

This incident reminds me of the 14 year old who was penalised 2 shots for slow play at the Masters a few years ago. Pick an easy target who isn't a household name and penalise them to make a point without upsetting any of the big names and their sponsors / media supporters! a really poor decision to say the least

 

[Slab]

The caddy bows down and takes another look after the player has replaced the ball, that can only be for checking the line, not assistance in reading the putt

 

[Capella]

The caddy bows down and takes another look after the player has replaced the ball, that can only be for checking the line, not assistance in reading the putt

Okay, I'm lost. What is the purpose of checking the line if not helpgin the player to read the putt?

But either way, and no matter why the caddie was standing where he was standing, he did not help Li with his alignment. And therefore it should not be punishable. I think it is stupid to punish a player because his caddie did not jump to the side fast enough. If he really had corrected (or confirmed) Li's position when taking the stance, yes, definitely, go for the penalty. But like this? Especially becasue it happened on the 18th green, it looks to me like someone did not want Li to come in tied for third and was keeping an extra eye out for anything they could put on him as a penalty.

 

[robinthehood]

I've watched the video and I'd say it's a fair cop. The trouble with these incidents is people attach emotion to them and question the advantage etc.

 

[BTatHome]

Whilst it seems harsh, the rule change does cover it fairly well....

New Rule: Under Rule 10.2b(4):

• The previous prohibition is extended so that, once the player begins taking a stance for the stroke, and until the stroke is made, the player’s caddie must not deliberately stand on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball for any reason.
• There is no penalty if the caddie accidentally stands on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball, rather than in trying to help in lining up.

 

[Slab]

Whilst it seems harsh, the rule change does cover it fairly well....

New Rule: Under Rule 10.2b(4):

• The previous prohibition is extended so that, once the player begins taking a stance for the stroke, and until the stroke is made, the player’s caddie must not deliberately stand on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball for any reason.
• There is no penalty if the caddie accidentally stands on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball, rather than in trying to help in lining up.

I was about to post same for reply to Capella

As you say its harsh to me too but they went so far as to state a caddy cant do it "for any reason" at the end as a catch all i guess