Masters possible unseen penalty

[NearHull]

Perhap, had this competition been run by the PGA, there would have been a statement clarifying the situation. And, perhaps, because it was run by the ‘can’t be seen to be imperfect’ Augusta Committee, silence is the fall back position.
Just a thought.

 

[salfordlad]

Perhap, had this competition been run by the PGA, there would have been a statement clarifying the situation. And, perhaps, because it was run by the ‘can’t be seen to be imperfect’ Augusta Committee, silence is the fall back position.
Just a thought.

I agree, but they would have needed some cogent arguments to present.

Thanks.9th hole, not 10th. Final round. I have now viewed the replay footage. I actually did see it happen live in real time but it didn't attract my attention from a Rules perspective at the time.

I agree that the indcident depicts a dubious practice.

As the player is taking his cramped stance under the tree, the caddie is behind but a yard or two off to the right.

Once in his stance, the player asks the caddie something (muffled audio in my version). The caddie then moves in directly behind the player and crouches down to check either that the player is aimed correctly, or (my initial impression) that the ball flight on that line is going to stay low enough to miss overhanging branches on the line of play. The player remains in his stance throughout this phase.

Once the player and caddie have agreed that the [whatever] is good, the caddie moves off again a yard or two to the right.

The player then makes the stroke and gets the ball out to the fairway. The player’s feet remained in the stance throughout. There was no backing away by the player.

The whole thing, - starting from when the player takes his stance, to the caddie moving in to check [something], then moving away, through to the player striking the ball - takes 22 seconds. It happens pretty quickly.

I don't think that what they are doing is anything to do with the second bullet point of 10 2b(4). (e.g.checking to see if the player’s club will hit a nearby tree during the backswing)

My assessment is that the caddie was checking either the aim or the projected ball flight on that line. As the player remained in that stance and didn't back away, that would be a breach of the first bullet point of 10.2b(4). Albeit an inadvertent or careless breach. They were so wrapped up in what they were doing that they forgot about the Rules in that moment.

The caddie must not stand in the restricted area to help the player with aiming.

I firmly support these observations and have made similar comments in a different place.

I have been interested to note the view of some other Rules-interested and aware folk (a minority view) that they believed this likely was a case of "help other than aiming". Their argument runs along the lines of asking whether the player's intent is a good play or getting information about trajectory is not helping with aiming. That makes little sense for me, their response seems more like not seeing what they don't want to see.

Perhaps this will lead to some more guidance that further differentiates 10.2b(4) help with aiming and help other than aiming. I suspect it will get plenty of discussion among the next season of USGA Rules workshops at the least. The Augusta Committee have, likely in my view, simply maintained their Dictator priveleges, circled the wagons, etc, etc.