plugged in the face of the bunker ...

garyinderry said:
OK then the rule needs changing. You are in a hazard. On an up slope buried into the face at that. A player has no devine right to dig his feet in as much as he wants to ensure he has a decent footing. He should find the stance difficult.

If u dig so much that you find the bottom, stop digging.


Whole thing just doesn't sit right with me. Up there with phils sprinkler in the bush.
Click to expand...

As was explained by Andy subsequently, on camera, the problem was not the rules but the course. The tournament committee had all the rules they needed to cover this off but no awareness of the potential ie if they had known that there was a possibility that the netting might have become an issue they could have declared it integral (in exactly the same way that they could have decided that sprinklers amongst the plants could have been in Phil's).
 
The rules are the same for everyone. If you are smart enough to use them to your advantage then do so! It's not cheating as the referee would've pulled him up about it!

Grace obviously knows his sh!t ☺
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Wow - people glad someone messes a hole up and calling him a disgrace because he has asked for a ruling from the on course ref and the ref has given him a drop within the rules !

He has acted within the rules , if he wasn't entitled to relief then the ref wouldn't have given him it - he was still in the hazard
Click to expand...

Completely agree, if it was within the rules then fair play, and if it wasn't allowed he would have been told he couldn't have a drop
 
As paul mcginley said on the video. Any player can keep digging down until you reach the netting and claim a free drop.

He thinks it was a joke and never seen anyone do it before.
Radar was equally outraged.

There's using the rules then there is finding loop holes. This is the latter for me.

The rule should be changed. As i said earlier. If you want to dig your feet in and find the netting. Re rake it and stand on top of the sand.
 
garyinderry said:
As paul mcginley said on the video. Any player can keep digging down until you reach the netting and claim a free drop.

He thinks it was a joke and never seen anyone do it before.
Radar was equally outraged.

There's using the rules then there is finding loop holes. This is the latter for me.

The rule should be changed. As i said earlier. If you want to dig your feet in and find the netting. Re rake it and stand on top of the sand.
Click to expand...

Radar also recently thought you could play off a wrong green (with a wedge mind) without penalty!

I like him but he's not always right
 
Difference in class shown between two South Africans this week

Els calls a penalty on himself, costing two shots

Grace pushes the absolute boundaries of the rule to gain a massive advantage over the field.


sorry call it what you want, to me it was a shambles
 
To me, it's no different from a certain boulder that was deemed to be a moveable object or deciding there is interference because the player wants to play left handed, only to change their mind after they've taken relief and then play right handed or Phil's sprinkler... etc.
 
garyinderry said:
As paul mcginley said on the video. Any player can keep digging down until you reach the netting and claim a free drop.

He thinks it was a joke and never seen anyone do it before.
Radar was equally outraged.

There's using the rules then there is finding loop holes. This is the latter for me.

The rule should be changed. As i said earlier. If you want to dig your feet in and find the netting. Re rake it and stand on top of the sand.
Click to expand...

Decision 13-4/0.5

Q. What is meant by “test the condition of the hazard” in Rule 13-4a?

A. ....

Examples of actions that would not constitute testing the condition of the hazard include the following:

digging in with the feet for a stance, including for a practice swing, anywhere in the hazard or in a similar hazard;
....

Examples of actions that would constitute testing the condition of the hazard in breach of Rule 13-4a include the following:

digging in with the feet in excess of what would be done for a stance for a stroke or a practice swing;
....
.....

So, Paul McGinley's mythical player may keep digging until he reaches the netting, but that might constitute testing the condition of the hazard according to this Decision and would be liable to a two stroke penalty.

It would come down to a referee's judgment call as to whether the amount of digging was beyond what was reasonable. It would seem that in this case it was not.
 
As much as I respect him McGinley was embarrassing for keeping on going on about this. He then proceeded to really get on my nerves when talking about "getting top spin" on a bunker shot.

For reference, that is impossible, there is only less backspin. The only way to get top spin would be to top it at which point its not coming out of the bunker. They all go on about it as well
 
Smart golf on his part..................he obviously knows the rules...and has applied them here...in his favour. Don't see a problem when comparing it to the R&A rule book. I don't agree with it, but hey...good luck to the fella. It is up to the R&A to change the rule on this bit...he was just doing his professional best.

(Think I might use this one this weekend.....quite a few matts are showing in our bunkers...........)

M
 
Well, after having had the same stance today in one of our bunkers I'd have used this to my advantage if I could have seen the netting. Nearly all of my foot disappeared under the sand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KenL
GUR bunker, ball embedded on face, local rule in place.
2 3
Replies
44
Views
1K
rulefan
R
Tashyboy
Free drop from a bunker
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Steven Rules
S
B
Animal hole in bunker face.
2
Replies
22
Views
5K
Colin L
Colin L
M
Plugged in a bunker face
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
salfordlad
S
B
Ball moves after placing in bunker
Replies
4
Views
955
Colin L
Colin L
Top