Patrick Read’s caddie

chrisd

Major Champion
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
24,788
Location
Kent
Visit site
That is superb and the sort of response I was hoping for when signing up.
Like one of the more reasonable respondents had suggested I assume that if the reason for the bizarre lying on the perpendicular flag is known and proves too popular their may be a new Interpretation.

My thought was that because it must be so bizarre and furthermore incredibly uncomfortable it must be to improve the chances of reading the putt and therefore the intent was to deliberately use an outside object to amplify your natural senses.

The procedure is quite bizarre. There are literally hundreds of picture examples. Search Kessler Karain on Getty images. Some show Kessler hovering one hand above the horizontal flag and the other on it. There are even some of him lying off the green with the flag underneath him. Hopefully your post will encourage a rocket scientist to sign up to explain all. Welcome to the site and thank you for taking time to join and clarify the rule situation so succinctly.

So Colin L and the new member Salfordlad, as well as a number of other posters with rules experience, have posted that they see no breach of rules by Reed or his caddy, I wonder do you now accept that there is no breach?
 

Philbyk1

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
73
Visit site
Possible explanation:

His caddy is permitted to remove the flag, and so he does. The flag is now in his possession.

As part of their routine, his caddy gets low to the ground to try and determine the line. He still has flag in his possession. What does he do? He sets it on the ground, because it makes no sense to carry it in the position he is in. The fact he sets it perpendicular to hole is simply habit, perhaps because it is the easiest position for him to place it and pick it up again.

If he set it parallel to line of shot, perhaps you could be equally critical by saying he is evaluating slope towards hole, maybe even helping to indicate line. So there is a chance he may place the flag perpendicular to hole to ensure that accusation cannot be made.
I think you need to see him do it. It is very precise and he even adjust the flag on occasions to ensure it is perpendicular.
 

Philbyk1

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
73
Visit site
Possible explanation:

His caddy is permitted to remove the flag, and so he does. The flag is now in his possession.

As part of their routine, his caddy gets low to the ground to try and determine the line. He still has flag in his possession. What does he do? He sets it on the ground, because it makes no sense to carry it in the position he is in. The fact he sets it perpendicular to hole is simply habit, perhaps because it is the easiest position for him to place it and pick it up again.

If he set it parallel to line of shot, perhaps you could be equally critical by saying he is evaluating slope towards hole, maybe even helping to indicate line. So there is a chance he may place the flag perpendicular to hole to ensure that accusation cannot be made.
I think you need to see him do it. It is very precise and he even adjust the flag on occasions to ensure it is perpendicular.
 
D

Deleted Member 1156

Guest
I think you need to see him do it. It is very precise and he even adjust the flag on occasions to ensure it is perpendicular.
My interpretation is that you have a very vivid imagination and have an ability to read things into situations that don't actually exist.
Why can't you accept that top level pros come under massive scrutiny from tournament referees, TV cameras and fellow competitors and if Reed was breaking any rules they would be all over him like a rash?
Is this the sort of measured response you were hoping for?
 

Philbyk1

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
73
Visit site
Well, I hope you make better use of Salfordlad's response than you have made of mine. So far, you seem to be much better at making a noise than actually listening.

Just to pick up on a point I made which you seem to be overlooking. Apart from anything else, the caddies' use of equipment would have to give the player a potential advantage to be a breach. R4.3 explicitly permits the use of equipment to help you in your play. Being so helped is a breach only if the particular use of the equipment is not allowed and that it "creates a potential advantage". I'm not going to do the thinking for you - but consider that an advantage is something you get over other people to their disadvantage, not just something that is helpful to you.
Colin please see my response to your very clear guidance which I think you at the time and still do. Don’t worry they will still consider you to be king of the rules book!
Both you and Salford are clearly far more experienced in the development of golf rules and I am. It seems to me they that they are developed with clear guidance once someone pushes the envelope. Take the development of the water bottle spirit level. This interpretation at the time presumably came about because someone rather ingenuously thought of it. Your point on advantage is still a little lost on me as I can with the water bottle could have had a defence that everyone has a water bottle. Equally everyone has a smart phone that can assist. The R&A step in with interpretation when they see the spirit of the law being stretched. This particular thread point may not get that far as clearly from the responses people don’t think it provides much of an advantage and will therefore not get much traction. My commonsense view was that if it provides an advantage to him it is against the spirit of the rules. Clearly commonsense and Golf rules are not synonymous with each other.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
5,269
Location
Edinburgh
Visit site
Colin please see my response to your very clear guidance which I think you at the time and still do. Don’t worry they will still consider you to be king of the rules book!
Both you and Salford are clearly far more experienced in the development of golf rules and I am. It seems to me they that they are developed with clear guidance once someone pushes the envelope. Take the development of the water bottle spirit level. This interpretation at the time presumably came about because someone rather ingenuously thought of it. Your point on advantage is still a little lost on me as I can with the water bottle could have had a defence that everyone has a water bottle. Equally everyone has a smart phone that can assist. The R&A step in with interpretation when they see the spirit of the law being stretched. This particular thread point may not get that far as clearly from the responses people don’t think it provides much of an advantage and will therefore not get much traction. My commonsense view was that if it provides an advantage to him it is against the spirit of the rules. Clearly commonsense and Golf rules are not synonymous with each other.

My irritation is with the way you keep sounding off without actually engaging with what is said and coming up with a rule-referenced explanation of why there is a breach.

King of the rules book? :LOL: More like a footman.
 

Philbyk1

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
73
Visit site
My interpretation is that you have a very vivid imagination and have an ability to read things into situations that don't actually exist.
Why can't you accept that top level pros come under massive scrutiny from tournament referees, TV cameras and fellow competitors and if Reed was breaking any rules they would be all over him like a rash?
Is this the sort of measured response you were hoping for?
My irritation is with the way you keep sounding off without actually engaging with what is said and coming up with a rule-referenced explanation of why there is a breach.

King of the rules book? :LOL: More like a footman.
lets just say I became a little defensive following my initiation! I simply thought that if you use something that is not part of standard equipment to help this is illegal. I stand corrected! Thank you again.
 

Beezerk

Money List Winner
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
12,755
Location
Gateshead, Tyne & Wear
Visit site
So Colin L and the new member Salfordlad, as well as a number of other posters with rules experience, have posted that they see no breach of rules by Reed or his caddy, I wonder do you now accept that there is no breach?

Doesn't mean we cant discuss ist without the petty name calling though does it?
Maybe they should rename this section "The Black and White Section" or would that be racist ??
 

clubchamp98

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
15,944
Location
Liverpool
Visit site
Took a flagstick out with me today.
Pissing down so only me out. It did go off after three holes was quite nice then.
Tried this to see what if any help it offered reading the greens.
Now it definitely shows there is a slope if you have the flag still in , you can clearly see the angle between both flags.
But with just a ball acting as the hole I could not see anything I could see without it.
It shows you the slope to a degree , but helping to read a putt not for me.
My main question would be “ it shows the slope behind the ball but most break is when the balls slowing down at the hole and it dosnt show that.”
If anything it makes the severest slope I could find look flatter as your eyes are drawn to the stick on the ground.
Dosnt answer the legality issue sorry.
But if it dosnt say you can’t normally you can.
 

chrisd

Major Champion
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
24,788
Location
Kent
Visit site
Doesn't mean we cant discuss ist without the petty name calling though does it?
Maybe they should rename this section "The Black and White Section" or would that be racist ??

I'm not in any way saying that we shouldn't discuss it and certainly haven't done any name calling but I do wonder when it's been explained by people who actually do rules officiating that there is no rule breaking going on, at what point does the OP stop telling others to look at the evidence in an attempt to garner support for his accusations
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
10,641
Location
Lincolnshire
Visit site
Took a flagstick out with me today.
Pissing down so only me out. It did go off after three holes was quite nice then.
Tried this to see what if any help it offered reading the greens.
Now it definitely shows there is a slope if you have the flag still in , you can clearly see the angle between both flags.
But with just a ball acting as the hole I could not see anything I could see without it.
It shows you the slope to a degree , but helping to read a putt not for me.
My main question would be “ it shows the slope behind the ball but most break is when the balls slowing down at the hole and it dosnt show that.”
If anything it makes the severest slope I could find look flatter as your eyes are drawn to the stick on the ground.
Dosnt answer the legality issue sorry.
But if it dosnt say you can’t normally you can.
I applaud your effort to the cause.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
5,269
Location
Edinburgh
Visit site
Took a flagstick out with me today.
Pissing down so only me out. It did go off after three holes was quite nice then.
Tried this to see what if any help it offered reading the greens.
Now it definitely shows there is a slope if you have the flag still in , you can clearly see the angle between both flags.
But with just a ball acting as the hole I could not see anything I could see without it.
It shows you the slope to a degree , but helping to read a putt not for me.
My main question would be “ it shows the slope behind the ball but most break is when the balls slowing down at the hole and it dosnt show that.”
If anything it makes the severest slope I could find look flatter as your eyes are drawn to the stick on the ground.
Dosnt answer the legality issue sorry.
But if it dosnt say you can’t normally you can.

Well now, you won't find me trying that especially if I was on my own as I would need help to get back up again. :)
 

Beezerk

Money List Winner
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
12,755
Location
Gateshead, Tyne & Wear
Visit site
I'm not in any way saying that we shouldn't discuss it and certainly haven't done any name calling but I do wonder when it's been explained by people who actually do rules officiating that there is no rule breaking going on, at what point does the OP stop telling others to look at the evidence in an attempt to garner support for his accusations

Yeah sorry mate, I wasn't trying to say you were name calling I was just making the general point.
I get what you're saying about a few rules experts saying "no penalty" but that shouldn't just mean shut up and stop discussing it. Surely others should be free to discuss it without the risk of getting sniped at. Maybe the thread should have been in The Lounge, now that would have been fun :LOL:
 
Top