Penalty for Lowry

[BrianM]

Given that it is extremely unlikely anybody else can actually see your ball buried in rough, where would you draw the line?

A player could hammer his club into the grass, while looking towards green. Ball could move significantly and they won't see it. Camera could pick up that movement.

Would we just say no penalty? Knowing that had they been looking down, they'd have to call it? Even as the player, I'd be uncomfortable with that. Knowing I got away with a penalty offence, and perhaps having some accusing me of not admitting to moving the ball.

I’m not against the penalty per se, it’s how the penalty has been given, it should be the same for every player and I don’t believe this is the case, with no disrespect to players like Mikiya Akutsu or Richard Teder, they haven’t got the cameras in their face scrutinizing their shots.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

My take
If it’s not noticeable to the naked eye, it hasn’t happened, as others have said, if it was Joe Fragger playing there would have been zero cameras on him and it would have gone unnoticed.

Armchair refs/ trial by TV has to be on Everyone to be fair, otherwise it isn’t

 

[Deleted member 35927]

My take
If it’s not noticeable to the naked eye, it hasn’t happened, as others have said, if it was Joe Fragger playing there would have been zero cameras on him and it would have gone unnoticed.

Armchair refs/ trial by TV has to be on Everyone to be fair, otherwise it isn’t

Completely unworkable, you can't just ignore stuff that you've seen

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Bei Facebook anmelden

Melde dich bei Facebook an, um dich mit deinen Freunden, deiner Familie und Personen, die du kennst, zu verbinden und Inhalte zu teilen.

www.facebook.com

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Completely unworkable, you can't just ignore stuff that you've seen

Well Lowry didn’t see it, zero advantage gained, just bad publicity for the casual golf viewer.

You have to draw the line somewhere and it should be at the level of the naked eye, unless there are cameras on every shot on every hole

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Well Lowry didn’t see it, zero advantage gained, just bad publicity for the casual golf viewer.

You have to draw the line somewhere and it should be at the level of the naked eye, unless there are cameras on every shot on every hole

So they show a blatant rule break in the Tele but the player claims he didn't see it? So all good move along , noting to see here
The trouble with the occasional contentious rules decisions is that they lead to rash statements that don't really consider what the consequences of the change will actually mean.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

So they show a blatant rule break in the Tele but the player claims he didn't see it? So all good move along , noting to see here
The trouble with the occasional contentious rules decisions is that they lead to rash statements that don't really consider what the consequences of the change will actually mean.

If it takes a TV slo mo to identify it, then , even you have to agree that it is a point of contention.

My point is that it should be a level playing field and if you are going to have “Golf VAR” then it needs to be the same for every player.

Singling out the few in the media spotlight is not right.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

If it takes a TV slo mo to identify it, then , even you have to agree that it is a point of contention.

My point is that it should be a level playing field and if you are going to have “Golf VAR” then it needs to be the same for every player.

Singling out the few in the media spotlight is not right.

We are not talking about slo mo and high Def, there is a rule in place for that.
Not using TV footage would also mean blatant stuff getting missed, its a crazy idea

 

[PhilTheFragger]

We are not talking about slo mo and high Def, there is a rule in place for that.
Not using TV footage would also mean blatant stuff getting missed, its a crazy idea

I’ve said my piece, if you disagree, that’s your problem

 

[Deleted member 35927]

I’ve said my piece, if you disagree, that’s your problem

The usga and r&a disagree.

 

[doublebogey7]

Well Lowry didn’t see it, zero advantage gained, just bad publicity for the casual golf viewer.

You have to draw the line somewhere and it should be at the level of the naked eye, unless there are cameras on every shot on every hole

That is exactly where the line is drawn, in this case the officials took the view that it could have been seen without slowmotion replays.
You seem to prefer the line being drawn at did the player actually see it, it doesn't take a wild imagination to see the unintended consequences of such a rule change.

 

[BrianM]

That is exactly where the line is drawn, in this case the officials took the view that it could have been seen without slowmotion replays.
You seem to prefer the line being drawn at did the player actually see it, it doesn't take a wild imagination to see the unintended consequences of such a rule change.

Could it be seen without slow motion replays though, the camera is zoomed right in on it, if the camera isn't zoomed in on it, what chance have you got seeing it with the naked eye.

 

[rulefan]

Could it be seen without slow motion replays though, the camera is zoomed right in on it, if the camera isn't zoomed in on it, what chance have you got seeing it with the naked eye.

Was there a slow motion replay?

 

[salfordlad]

Could it be seen without slow motion replays though, the camera is zoomed right in on it, if the camera isn't zoomed in on it, what chance have you got seeing it with the naked eye.

The officials are telling everyone, in the clearest possible terms, yes.
What you see, on You Tube or whatever, is not what the officials have access to.

 

[BrianM]

Was there a slow motion replay?

I seen it on sky sports, they slowed it right down so you can see it move.

 

[BrianM]

The officials are telling everyone, in the clearest possible terms, yes.
What you see, on You Tube or whatever, is not what the officials have access to.

The officials have made a decision which is fair enough, doesn’t mean they are right under the circumstances.

 

[rulefan]

I seen it on sky sports, they slowed it right down so you can see it move.

But did the referee use that or rely on what he saw?

 

[rulie]

But did the referee use that or rely on what he saw?

The referee with the group may not have been in the near vicinity. The referee does not follow each player's every step.

 

[bobmac]

The officials have made a decision which is fair enough, doesn’t mean they are right under the circumstances.

Couln't they give the referees discretion in some cases.
In this instance, the ball moved according to gravity, unseen by the player probably into a hole.
Infringement not seen by the player, no advantage, no penalty

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Couln't they give the referees discretion in some cases.
In this instance, the ball moved according to gravity, unseen by the player probably into a hole.
Infringement not seen by the player, no advantage, no penalty

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