Bobmysterkaymer
Head Pro
As I mentioned yesturday his ball moved on the 18th after placing his club behind. He should have replaced it and taken a shot penalty. Either he didn't know the rules or chose to ignore it? Strange!
Peter Whiteford DQ'd!
- Thread starter Bobmysterkaymer
- Start date
richy
Journeyman Pro
Did you grass him up? 
DCB
Well-known member
The power of television 
papyt
Challenge Tour Pro
i think it is now getting beyond a joke,if the player never saw his ball move and therefore never called a penalty on himself why should someone thousands of miles away with the advantage of super slow mo cameras be allowed to make a call and get a player dq'd,and how many minor infringements go unnoticed when the cameras are not there total disgrace and takes the honesty out of our game.
Naybrains
Tour Rookie
The power of television
Ouch!! Must admit when I watched it live yesterday morning, I thought surely he's going to shout the rules official...but he never - School boy error. Expensive one too!
DCB
Well-known member
Aye, it had certainly moved. If he had sought out a rules guy at the time it would have all been dealt with properly.
That's a shame for him, woke up and couldn't see him on the scoreboard and thought oh no he's had a disaster, never expected that though.
Here's a question, as he stated he asked people incl tv camaraman who said it hadn't moved, yet Peter himself thought it had moved or he would never have asked the question, should he have called a penalty then asked for a ruling after 18? Could it have been reversed if the ball hadn't moved under investigation?
Here's a question, as he stated he asked people incl tv camaraman who said it hadn't moved, yet Peter himself thought it had moved or he would never have asked the question, should he have called a penalty then asked for a ruling after 18? Could it have been reversed if the ball hadn't moved under investigation?
Bobmysterkaymer
Head Pro
But he knew it had moved, so just ask an official...simples. It's just like not calling a provisional then finding your original ball , it only take a split second to say'provisional'
Bobmysterkaymer
Head Pro
Nd no I didn't grass him up, although I discussed iron twitter with a pal who plays off scratch to know the ruling.
MashieNiblick
Tour Winner
I think that would have been difficult. If he thought his ball had moved it would have to be replaced. If it didn't move it's played as it lies. It has to be one or the other. He should have called an official and got a ruling. If he does what the referee says then he can't be DQ'd even if it's wrong.
Ethan
Money List Winner
The Committee had no option but to DQ him. May seem harsh but really it is an open and shut case.
But he did think it may have moved, that's why he asked a camera man. The mistake he made was not getting a rules official over to confirm it either way.
And I agree with people being able to bring it to the officials irrespective of whether they are 5 yds away or 5000 miles away. Its what helps to keep this wonderful game honest. Harrington said something very similar about 18mths back when he had something similar happen.
Or do you actually prefer that minor infringements are just ignored? Hey, let's just tear up the rule book.
PhilTheFragger
Provider of Entertainment for the Golfing Gods 🙄
I havnt seen the footage, so cant comment on this particular case.
But Im unclear about this rule.
What caused the ball to move, clearly it wasnt the player, was it the wind, did the ball settle? Surely these things are an outside influence. Why should the player be penalised because the wind blew his ball as he was preparing his stroke.
seems a bit unfair to me although no doubt someone will put me on the straight and narrow
Fragger
But Im unclear about this rule.
What caused the ball to move, clearly it wasnt the player, was it the wind, did the ball settle? Surely these things are an outside influence. Why should the player be penalised because the wind blew his ball as he was preparing his stroke.
seems a bit unfair to me although no doubt someone will put me on the straight and narrow
Fragger
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
The act of grounding the club as he addressed the ball caused it to move.
Same thing happened to Marcel Siem today but he called the official who was able to verify with the TV pictures and call the penalty.
fat-tiger
Challenge Tour Pro
f.a.o our rules gurus
am i right in thinking cos he addressed it then it moved 1 shot penalty and replace the ball to orginal spot
if he hadnt of addressed it no penalty and play it from were it lies????
am i right in thinking cos he addressed it then it moved 1 shot penalty and replace the ball to orginal spot
if he hadnt of addressed it no penalty and play it from were it lies????
PhilTheFragger
Provider of Entertainment for the Golfing Gods 🙄
In that case fair enough
But hypothetically, what if the wind blew it as he was preparing to play, as he was addressing the ball?
Fragger
jammag
Challenge Tour Pro
What happened was that his ball moved an inch, but you can see when it moves his head is up looking at the green as he turns back his club doesnt sit behind the ball so steps back asks everyone around did it move, they all said no. So he goes back and plays the shot. What his mistake was that he forgot or should have asked in the tent where he hands in his scorecard to review it so he can adjust his scorecard if needs be. It could have been adjusted but soon as he signed and handed it in then thats what led him to be disqualified. Although I am mystified as to why they let him start his 4th round. Surely that could of been dealt with before he tee'd off?
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Just ridiculous, if you can have trial by TV then you have to also change the ruling process to deal with the outcome. He should have been told and simply had a 1 shot penalty applied.
It's rather like the snik-o-meter in cricket or 'hotspot' or whatever it's called. Stuff happens that can't be seen or isn't noticed and if we apply these technologies then we have to introduce new rulings to deal with their findings.
It's rather like the snik-o-meter in cricket or 'hotspot' or whatever it's called. Stuff happens that can't be seen or isn't noticed and if we apply these technologies then we have to introduce new rulings to deal with their findings.
MashieNiblick
Tour Winner
He should have replaced and incurred a 1 shot penatly. Not doing so would incur a 2 shot penalty. The problem is that he signed for his score which, because he failed to apply the penalty, was wrong. That's what always results in the Dq's in these cases. Had he corrected the score before he signed he would have avoided Dq.
I agree that there should maybe be some leeway in cases like this, but if he was in doubt he should have checked either at the time or before he signed.
I agree that there should maybe be some leeway in cases like this, but if he was in doubt he should have checked either at the time or before he signed.
Last edited:
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
He did enough, he asked all those around him including a camera man. The rule isn't wrong, just the way it's applied.
