jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
Sometimes there is no exact rule or decision so the referee has to use what best fits the circumstance
John Senden - Snapped shaft airshot
- Thread starter need_my_wedge
- Start date
Sometimes there is no exact rule or decision so the referee has to use what best fits the circumstance
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Another example of the vagaries of golfs rules and another that seems grossly unfair and even his PP thought he was hard done by. I wonder if going forward they will look at this rule again like they have done with a few others when high profile incidents have been seen by millions. It certainly doesn't sell the rules to the masses and makes the game look officious and daft at times
drdel
Tour Rookie
Yup and I'd have thought since he obviously tried to abort the shot most 'reasonable' people would have said he had not played the ball so have another go without penalty
D
Deleted member 15717
Guest
It’s almost as if there should be a clause that if you club breaks during the swing before impact, then the shot can be replayed without penalty
srixon 1
Journeyman Pro
Hope it was still under warranty. 
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
No vagaries that I can see. There are plenty of Rules around the situation.
The only rules question involved was whether the player attempted to modify his swing and 'pull the stroke.
Comments at the time (article linked was posted pretty quickly...) reported that the player claimed he did. The rules officials decided that they would review and discuss with the player at the end of the round.
This was done and their view was that he didn't. Watching the incident more than once I would also have to concur.
Most importantly for me were the players own comments at that point..
"Unfortunately, when your intent is to hit a shot and you don't hit it, it's one stroke. That's the way it goes."
“I had no chance of actually stopping the shot, so unfortunately that counts as actually one stroke."
In an interview he went further to state that it all happened so quickly he couldn't do anything.
So he knows he didn't, and that's the end of any ruling.
He wasn't penalised for anything.
So the question becomes whether there's a case for revising the rule further - at which point I see a reflection of the divot issue. When is a club 'broken' sufficiently to consider that the shot must be replayed? How can you define it such that it can be applied in the same way by everyone playing, or ruling.
The existence of the rules already quoted in the thread show that a huge amount of consideration has already gone into this, and maybe there's scope for something around a shaft failure but incidence suggests it's extremely, extremely, rare (2 recorded professional incidents according to an anecdotal comment relating to this incident, with the last one many, many decades ago).
It's also relevant to note that from 1.1.19 he would have been able to re-tee at a height suited to his next stroke rather than having to chose between the ground or his previous tee height.
As to the communication and impact on non golfers etc - you only have to look at the posts to this thread to see that the underlying issue is media and sensational journalism (apparently that's their job nowadays).
Short answer - I think the ruling was correct and would expect the ruling bodies to review whether they can introduce something that would cover this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if they conclude that they can't - but. I wouldn't be surprised if they could.
The only rules question involved was whether the player attempted to modify his swing and 'pull the stroke.
Comments at the time (article linked was posted pretty quickly...) reported that the player claimed he did. The rules officials decided that they would review and discuss with the player at the end of the round.
This was done and their view was that he didn't. Watching the incident more than once I would also have to concur.
Most importantly for me were the players own comments at that point..
"Unfortunately, when your intent is to hit a shot and you don't hit it, it's one stroke. That's the way it goes."
“I had no chance of actually stopping the shot, so unfortunately that counts as actually one stroke."
In an interview he went further to state that it all happened so quickly he couldn't do anything.
So he knows he didn't, and that's the end of any ruling.
He wasn't penalised for anything.
So the question becomes whether there's a case for revising the rule further - at which point I see a reflection of the divot issue. When is a club 'broken' sufficiently to consider that the shot must be replayed? How can you define it such that it can be applied in the same way by everyone playing, or ruling.
The existence of the rules already quoted in the thread show that a huge amount of consideration has already gone into this, and maybe there's scope for something around a shaft failure but incidence suggests it's extremely, extremely, rare (2 recorded professional incidents according to an anecdotal comment relating to this incident, with the last one many, many decades ago).
It's also relevant to note that from 1.1.19 he would have been able to re-tee at a height suited to his next stroke rather than having to chose between the ground or his previous tee height.
As to the communication and impact on non golfers etc - you only have to look at the posts to this thread to see that the underlying issue is media and sensational journalism (apparently that's their job nowadays).
Short answer - I think the ruling was correct and would expect the ruling bodies to review whether they can introduce something that would cover this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if they conclude that they can't - but. I wouldn't be surprised if they could.
Canary_Yellow
Journeyman Pro
I don’t understand why the rule shouldn’t simply be if your club breaks at any point during the swing the shot is replayed.
What is the concern that prevents that being the rule?
What is the concern that prevents that being the rule?
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
The only thing I could think off is the reason it breaks, if it’s caused by the player or mechanical failure.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
He originally said he tried to abort the shot!
So his word is not as good as tigers!
How can you tell from a video that he didn’t.
No common sense .
How come if your ball breaks in two you replay the shot but not your club?
So his word is not as good as tigers!
How can you tell from a video that he didn’t.
No common sense .
How come if your ball breaks in two you replay the shot but not your club?
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
I think Duncan's summary works for me.
Obviously, if a shaft snaps then a club is broken but if, say, a weight falls off - does that class as broken too?
Likening it to the divot rule - what's a divot and what isn't - is a good way of looking at it.
Obviously, if a shaft snaps then a club is broken but if, say, a weight falls off - does that class as broken too?
Likening it to the divot rule - what's a divot and what isn't - is a good way of looking at it.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
What if someone dents your bumper on your car it’s still drivable, but if you lose a wheel it’s not.
All I’ve ever heard is the shaft is the engine and most important part of the club, so if it breaks it’s broken!
If the guy said he “tried to abort “ that should be good enough.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
Pp
The Rules of Golf don't translate to the rules of the road so I'm not sure where you're going with that....
Nobody is arguing that Senden's club hasn't broken.
The implementation of a rule to cover the situation would be difficult as defining broken adequately is so hard.
As I said, if a weight falls off your M3 - is it broken?
If a ferrule falls off - is it broken? Some will argue that it is..
And I believe it was initially reported that Senden had said he'd tried to abort the shot but I'm not sure he actually did.
The Rules of Golf don't translate to the rules of the road so I'm not sure where you're going with that....
Nobody is arguing that Senden's club hasn't broken.
The implementation of a rule to cover the situation would be difficult as defining broken adequately is so hard.
As I said, if a weight falls off your M3 - is it broken?
If a ferrule falls off - is it broken? Some will argue that it is..
And I believe it was initially reported that Senden had said he'd tried to abort the shot but I'm not sure he actually did.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
What I am saying is if a weight falls off it’s like a dented fender still usable , but breaking your shaft is the wheels coming off.
We’re just guessing then but I assumed he said he tried to abort but ref didn’t believe his word.
Sweep
Journeyman Pro
For me you have to take the player’s word. There is no argument that the club was broken. No evidence that the player broke the club on purpose. If he says he tried to abort then that should be good enough.
I don’t think we can expect a rule for every eventuality that may or may not happen during a round. Common sense has to come into it somewhere.
I don’t think we can expect a rule for every eventuality that may or may not happen during a round. Common sense has to come into it somewhere.
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
Yep, and as you can see from the players interview and quotes he didn't say he tried to abort the stroke and accepted the situation.
drdel
Tour Rookie
I always thought that the basic tenet of a 'rule' was based on the aim to prevent anyone gaining an unfair advantage.
When a shaft breaks the speed at which stuff then happens during a swing means the consequences will be uncontrolled and random. Therefore I believe its an 'accident' and the penalty was not warranted.
When a shaft breaks the speed at which stuff then happens during a swing means the consequences will be uncontrolled and random. Therefore I believe its an 'accident' and the penalty was not warranted.
rulefan
Tour Winner
The rules don't countenance that though.
Sweep
Journeyman Pro
One thing noticeable about the more controversial rulings is that the player concerned always seems to go to great pains to impress upon the audience that they accept the ruling and that they present no argument or even feel the slightest bit miffed.
In this case both his playing partners seemed incredulous over the ruling but the player himself calmly accepted his fate. The impression I get is that questioning a ruling against yourself, certainly in public at least, is a big no no and tour players don’t want their reputation affected negatively.
In this case both his playing partners seemed incredulous over the ruling but the player himself calmly accepted his fate. The impression I get is that questioning a ruling against yourself, certainly in public at least, is a big no no and tour players don’t want their reputation affected negatively.
jusme
Challenge Tour Pro
Duncan - can't find this - could you explain further. I thought he would have to play it from where it lies, be that on the tee peg or otherwise
drdel
Tour Rookie
If you ever have the option of re-Teeing there is no rule/specification on the Tee you must use
