cookelad
Tour Winner
Not sure how that is working both ways.
That is the same decision as Rickie got yesterday.
Really?? It's a perfect example of the same rule working both ways
Not sure how that is working both ways.
That is the same decision as Rickie got yesterday.
Good idea in theory but given he had no idea where the ball would finish surely not viable. He would have had no idea where to take the read from. I don't like the rule in its current format and it is possible that the rain affected the ball after Fowler deemed it in play which didn't seem fair. He's not seeked to gain an advantage and has done nothing to influence the lie or position of the ballPerhaps he should have done his green checking before he starts the drop process. He would have been in place and able to place straight away once it had been placed.
So it didn't stay there. Contradicting yourself. To me it doesn't matter if it rolled back into the lake, or forward onto the green, I'm saying that I think the rule would be better if you just had to replace it with no penalty if it starts rolling at all. I don't know why that isn't the rule.Have you even seen the whole incident ?!
The ball did stay there - but because the player himself placed it very precariously to ensure his best lie it rolled back after about 30 seconds maybe longer. If the ball rolled to an advantageous place then he carries on from there - it’s just the run of the green and it’s the players responsibility and the player in this occasion accepted it just like if the ball rolled into the hole for example
I do agree with this. If there was any danger it was going to start rolling I would have just hit the thing.Yeah it's his own fault for hanging about. I'd have hit it pretty sharpish
Really?? It's a perfect example of the same rule working both ways
So it didn't stay there. Contradicting yourself. To me it doesn't matter if it rolled back into the lake, or forward onto the green, I'm saying that I think the rule would be better if you just had to replace it with no penalty if it starts rolling at all. I don't know why that isn't the rule.
Once the ball is dropped, not moving, it is in play, doesn't matter what happens after.
Not sure I agree with that. He drops in quite a specific area and then if he is placing he knows he is placing in a certain place. Walk the green, choose your landing spot etc and then go back and drop. Clearly he didn't expect it to move again so I am not going to condem him for daftness but had he reversed his method he would likely have hit the ball before it moved.Good idea in theory but given he had no idea where the ball would finish surely not viable. He would have had no idea where to take the read from. I don't like the rule in its current format and it is possible that the rain affected the ball after Fowler deemed it in play which didn't seem fair. He's not seeked to gain an advantage and has done nothing to influence the lie or position of the ball
How would you not realise?? Walking round the course with your eyes shut? What a ridiculous thing to ask.Once the ball is dropped, not moving, it is in play, doesn't matter what happens after.
So what if it rolls, you don't realise, then you hit it?
Is it a penalty then, opens a new can of worms every time you bring in a new rule
For it to be so well known the sky commentators weren’t sure what was going to happen and had to wait for the ref to say.It’s a well known rule , once the ball is dropped it’s in play and if the ball rolls into the water or the hole of the bunker then that counts - it’s not the first time that it happened and won’t be the last time
That's What the rule is, except your way would have them stand there forever.....For it to be so well known the sky commentators weren’t sure what was going to happen and had to wait for the ref to say.
It’s a daft rule as who is to say it was actually at rest it could have been moving very slowly and he didn’t notice. I think golf really has some daft rules a lot of which they are working to remove. This would be one, if you take a drop from a hazard and it ends up back in the hazard without you hitting it then drop again
So who is to say the ball was at rest? The rule is was the ball at rest what if it wasn’tThat's What the rule is, except your way would have them stand there forever.....
No they didn't. Live at the time the official advised him that it was 1 shot.The officials originally gave him a 2 shot penalty. After discussions they revised it to a 1 shot - demonstrates IMO there was definitely enough confusion for the 'rule' to be redefined.
The player was asked and agreed the ball was at rest. It's fair to say he may not be so keen to perch the ball so well in such a situation in the future - having had my perfect preferred lie subsequently role into a divot in last weeks comp it's a reminder we all get from time to time (and yes, I'm certain my ball was stationary too...)So who is to say the ball was at rest? The rule is was the ball at rest what if it wasn’t
The voice of reason...Talk about talking at cross purposes...
I think the discussion is:
Is the rule harsh?
Yes it is harsh, that a ball placed and now in play can run into the hazard and you get penalised again does seem harsh.
But, the rule was applied correctly, so it was not incorrect. But is the rule fair ?
To keep saying, “yes but the rule says xyz†misses the point.
As a man once said “the law is an assâ€
Regarding the rule working both ways:
You can drop it and it end up in a hazard or it could run 100 yds down the fairway- so yes, it can work both ways