rulefan
Tour Winner
So what information was given to the Committee and by whom, in order to apply the penalty?
Penalty for Lowry
- Thread starter KenL
- Start date
bobmac
Major Champion
If the player didn't see it move, he would play on as normal.How do you know it was no advantage? Youve no way to say either way. Maybe it not hanging in the grass so high made it easier to hit
If TV footage shows the ball drop a few dimples, I'd say that's no advantage.
Referees discretion
D
Deleted member 35927
Guest
It was more than a few dimples. How does referees discretion when there is no ref ?
bobmac
Major Champion
The tv footage would be seen by the referee in the studio
rulie
Head Pro
I don’t think that “advantage” has any relevance.
- did the ball move?
- was the movement visible to the naked eye?
- did the player cause the ball to move?
If yes to all of these, then a breach of Rule 9.4 and a penalty.
Last edited:
Steven Rules
Well-known member
In my opinion, the Rules around this issue give the player more benefit of the doubt than they used to.
Under 9.2b(2), the player, the opponent or an outside influence is treated as having caused the ball to move only if it is known or virtually certain to be the cause. If it is not known or virtually certain that at least one of these was the cause, the ball is treated as having been moved by natural forces.
bobmac
Major Champion
So if a player putts up to the hole side and hangs on the lip, who decides what a reasonable time is to reach the ball?
rulie
Head Pro
Two things not the same are different.
If you want to talk about Rule 13.3 (Ball Overhanging Hole), start a new thread.
bobmac
Major Champion
And if the player doesn't know the ball has moved?
bobmac
Major Champion
Surely the referee has discretion?
Swango1980
Well-known member
But the referee judged that Lowry made the ball move. Where is the discretion?
rulie
Head Pro
What sort of "discretion" are you suggesting the referee or Committee has in the Lowry situation?
Their role is to apply the Rules.
Steven Rules
Well-known member
A decision should be based on all available evidence - e.g. from the player, other players, spectators, TV/video etc. Not just solely whether the player saw it or not.
If nobody saw it, and there is no video, and nobody realises the ball is in a different place, then obviously nobody would know whether the ball has moved or not, and there would be no penalty and no remedial action required.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Just who did see it?
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
The referee via tv replay
rulefan
Tour Winner
In slo-mo or normal speed.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
Normal speed
rulie
Head Pro
The Committee obviously decided that it met the naked-eye standard outlined in Clarification Moved/2. They very likely have access to many more versions of camera coverage than we see on TV.
Last edited:
salfordlad
Well-known member
The discretion is this - is there 95 per cent or higher certainty that the player moved the ball? Answer in this case? Yes.
But you would like a player breach to be waived because the player didn't see it? Honest officer, I didn't realize I was over the limits, surely that is more important than the facts?
How do you know that?
Every replay I seen was slowed down, which would suggest they seen the same.....
Similar threads
- Poll
