Keegan Bradley and referee

[woofers]

Keegan Bradley seemed to get involved in the referees decision making process in granting the drop to Justin Rose at the 13th hole in Sundays singles match.
Was he correct in doing this? My understanding is that when a referee is assigned to a match, the referee rules on the issue, (rule 20.1b) and only the referee or Committee may decide how to apply a rule.

Under which rule was he allowed to get involved?
Does being an “advice giver” in team competitions (rule 24.4) extend to challenging rules decisions?

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Keegan Bradley seemed to get involved in the referees decision making process in granting the drop to Justin Rose at the 13th hole in Sundays singles match.
Was he correct in doing this? My understanding is that when a referee is assigned to a match, the referee rules on the issue, (rule 20.1b) and only the referee or Committee may decide how to apply a rule.

Under which rule was he allowed to get involved?
Does being an “advice giver” in team competitions (rule 24.4) extend to challenging rules decisions?

The commentary team at the time said that Bradley was moaning about causing undue delay in the match from what i recall

But there was also something about captains and vice being allowed to be there for advice or being involved- think it was Faldo who mentioned it

 

[woofers]

The commentary team at the time said that Bradley was moaning about causing undue delay in the match from what i recall

But there was also something about captains and vice being allowed to be there for advice or being involved- think it was Faldo who mentioned it

Here’s a report. I’m interested if anyone knows the rule that specifically allows him to take the action he did, rather than what the commentary team thought or had ideas about. Maybe it’s on a ‘Ryder Cup hardcard?

After an unplayable lie was called, Rose wanted to drop his ball near the 14th tee as he found himself behind a temporary structure. Referee Jeff Kiddie initially agreed, but Bradley saw things differently, reports the Mirror US.

Bradley made a beeline for Kiddie, getting right in the referee's face to challenge the original ruling. He believed Rose's drop was closer to the hole and easier.

Following a lengthy delay, Kiddie sided with Bradley. Rose was forced to drop the ball again, which rolled down the slope towards the green, ending up lower.

Bradley, clearly chuffed with his intervention, wagged his finger triumphantly as he returned to the crowd's chants.
Rose then confidently putted for birdie, capitalising on his impressive shot. Bradley was left seething, shooting Rose a glare as the Englishman strolled past.

The US captain also seemed to be directing his anger at referee Kiddie. It was evident that Bradley was still irked by the drop Rose received in the woods, even after having contested it.

Bradley continued to voice his complaints and berate the rules officials even after Rose scored a birdie following the 10-minute delay.

 

[Steven Rules]

There are a few issues and subtleties here that warrant further discussion and explanation.

My understanding is that when a referee is assigned to a match, the referee rules on the issue, (rule 20.1b) and only the referee or Committee may decide how to apply a rule.

Not quite right. If a referee is assigned to the match, the referee is responsible for acting on any breach of the Rules that they see or are told about, and must rule on any issue that comes to their attention in time. That is not the same as saying that only the referee or Committee may decide how to apply a rule.

Under which rule was he allowed to get involved?
Does being an “advice giver” in team competitions (rule 24.4) extend to challenging rules decisions?

As far as I can see, the Ryder Cup Hard Card or Terms of Competition or Local Rules are not published, but I think it is fair to say that the team captain/advice giver has a fairly wide-ranging role, and a high degree of latitude is given with respect to their advocacy for the players. Furthermore, we probably shouldn't conflate what is covered in the Rules with what happens in the heat of the moment arising from human emotions.

After an unplayable lie was called

I acknowledge that this was simply quoting what was written in an article, but the ball wasn't deemed unplayable under Rule 19. There was interference from a Temporary Immovable Obstruction from which the player was entitled to free relief.

Rose was forced to drop the ball again, which rolled down the slope towards the green, ending up lower.

Again - an acknowledgement that this is a quote from an article. But if the ball had rolled outside the relief area (including closer to the hole than the reference point) the player would need to re-drop the ball.

 

[rulie]

There are a few issues and subtleties here that warrant further discussion and explanation.


Not quite right. If a referee is assigned to the match, the referee is responsible for acting on any breach of the Rules that they see or are told about, and must rule on any issue that comes to their attention in time. That is not the same as saying that only the referee or Committee may decide how to apply a rule.


As far as I can see, the Ryder Cup Hard Card or Terms of Competition or Local Rules are not published, but I think it is fair to say that the team captain/advice giver has a fairly wide-ranging role, and a high degree of latitude is given with respect to their advocacy for the players. Furthermore, we probably shouldn't conflate what is covered in the Rules with what happens in the heat of the moment arising from human emotions.


I acknowledge that this was simply quoting what was written in an article, but the ball wasn't deemed unplayable under Rule 19. There was interference from a Temporary Immovable Obstruction from which the player was entitled to free relief.


Again - an acknowledgement that this is a quote from an article. But if the ball had rolled outside the relief area (including closer to the hole than the reference point) the player would need to re-drop the ball.

I guess it shows, again, that most golf journalists are not always Rules savvy and don't go outside their box to seek useful guidance!

 

[nickh]

As a spectator that almost stood on JR's ball as it came to rest on the cart path between 13 green and 14 fairway, I can safely say that there is an element of revisionist history/BS in the way this has been reported in the Mirror US....

My comments in brackets below:


After an unplayable lie was called , Rose wanted to drop his ball near the 14th tee as he found himself behind a temporary a structure. Referee Jeff Kiddie initially agreed, but Bradley saw things differently, reports the Mirror US.

(Hmmm, the ball came to rest on the cart path, allowing for free relief - it so happened that that relief put JR's ball adjacenet to a TIO, and 'arguably' open to further interpretaion of the rules and possible other relief locations. However, the initial relief site was the loaction JR played his 3rd shot from)

Bradley made a beeline for Kiddie, getting right in the referee's face to challenge the original ruling. He believed Rose's drop was closer to the hole and easier.

(The original ruling would have been the first location alongside the cart path and the point where JR eventually did play from. However, whilst waiitng for a rules (and a second) rules official, JR looked at a possible alternative drop site on the 14th tee, but never actually dropped a ball there - I know this for a fact as I was stood at his original ball. It was pretty obvious he would end up playing it from the original relief location, I just think JR was taking some time to chill and take a breath)

Following a lengthy delay, Kiddie sided with Bradley. Rose was forced to drop the ball again, which rolled down the slope towards the green, ending up lower.

(This simply did not happen - he never dropped a ball at 14 tee or any ball 'again' anywhere. He took relief from the cart path where the ball originally came to rest. At this point there was still a mobile camera trailer in his direct line to the 13 green, and JR asked whether this could be moved. Bradley did take exception (for some reason..?) to this and stomped over to JR's ball chuntering and looking pretty hacked off. Long and short, KB said he would allow for it to be moved but it may take a while. JR said "fcuk it, I'll crack on from here.." - at this point the group behind were waiting on 13 to play to the green.. )

Bradley, clearly chuffed with his intervention, wagged his finger triumphantly as he returned to the crowd's chants.

(He may well have done, we couldn't see from down on the cart path)

Rose then confidently putted for birdie, capitalising on his impressive shot. Bradley was left seething, shooting Rose a glare as the Englishman strolled past.

The US captain also seemed to be directing his anger at referee Kiddie. It was evident that Bradley was still irked by the drop Rose received in the woods, even after having contested it.

(Not sure what KB could have been irked about; in the end it was a textbook interpretation of the rules in the circumstances)

Bradley continued to voice his complaints and berate the rules officials even after Rose scored a birdie following the 10-minute delay.