Rory in bunker

[Swinglowandslow]

Is there not a change in the rule to cover this. He was moving a stone, he thought.turns out it was a clump of sand, not a stone.
Ball was not moved.
I think the new rule lets you move any loose impediment, so long as you don't move the ball doing so.
Is not a solid clump of sand a loose impediment?
Experts please!

 

[rulefan]

What was the outcome? Was there a penalty?
Did he improve his lie? Was he accused of testing the sand?

Sand and Loose Soil are not loose impediments. Clumps of compacted soil are.

 

[IanG]

yes 2 shot penalty, didn't improve the lie. Seemed pretty straightforward (if unfortunate) to me. Not sure what the referee had to double check with the walkie talkie.

 

[Nidge]

yes 2 shot penalty, didn't improve the lie. Seemed pretty straightforward (if unfortunate) to me. Not sure what the referee had to double check with the walkie talkie.

I agree. He touched the sand so 2 stroke penalty. I was wondering why the wait to make the ruling.

 

[Italian outcast]

I'm not convinced it is that clear cut

Watching it the statement from the officials was he was not allowed to touch the sand !

But touching the sand per se is not a penalty is it ? - he was not 'testing it' as far as I could tell

Even though he was touching sand behind the ball that was with his hand not the club

So personally I'm unclear what the exact offence was

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I agree. He touched the sand so 2 stroke penalty. I was wondering why the wait to make the ruling.

Well, now that the ruling has changed from "only stones can be removed" to include loose impediments, it maybe isn't so straightforward if the player is genuinely under the impression that he isn't touching sand but removing an object.
A question as to whether intent comes into it. Maybe it is "an absolute offence".
Or, one for later consideration , (in view of rule change and such examples as this, ) for intent to be required?

 

[IanG]

Checking the wording of the rules, Italian Outcast has a good point. Rule 12.2b says

"
(1) When Touching Sand Results in Penalty. Before making a stroke at a ball in a bunker, a player must not:

• Deliberately touch sand in the bunker with a hand, club, rake or other object to test the condition of the sand to learn information for the next stroke, or
  
  
• Touch sand in the bunker with a club:
  • In the area right in front of or right behind the ball (except as allowed under Rule 7.1a in fairly searching for a ball or under Rule 12.2a in removing a loose impediment or movable obstruction),
  • In making a practice swing, or
  • In making the backswing for a stroke.

"

Rory touched the sand with his hand but not deliberately to test the condition of the sand.

I've changed my mind after seeing this and think there should have been no penalty but I'm sure the experts will educate us.

 

[Crow]

On the PGA website leaderboard Rory's card has been amended and shows a 3 for the hole now and he's finished on 9 under.

 

[drdel]

Rory just touched with a finger tip and stopped when he saw it was not a stone as he thought. IMO the referee did not in his summary of what Rory said relay the facts accurately via his intercom. A 2 stroke penalty was wrong

 

[rulefan]

Slugger White now says "McIlroy didn't improve his line of play or his intended swing.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/mcilroys-2-shot-penalty-for-touching-sand-rescinded/ar-AAFAAem

 

[garyinderry]

Not sure about this one.

Think he made an honest mistake but do believe it's a cop out to say he didnt improve his original lie.

 

[rulefan]

Not sure about this one.

Think he made an honest mistake but do believe it's a cop out to say he didnt improve his original lie.

He didn't move the lump of sand so how did he improve his lie?

 

[Imurg]

Why was he trying to remove this "stone"?
Because of he did it would improve his chances of making a good shot. Which he's allowed to do.
But if the "stone" turns out to be a clump of sand that disintegrates when he touches it, there is less sand between his club and the ball so he's changed his lie...
But Rory says the clump didn't disintegrate so he's not changed his lie therefore no penalty.
But he did touch the sand......

 

[garyinderry]

If you touch a clump of sand then a small part will rub off on your finger. Lie ever so slightly altered let's just say because it hasnt been improved by a great deal.

He shouldn't have been touching the area behind his ball unless he was 100% certain it was a stone or ask for a ref.

Ignorance doesn't excuse someone.

 

[rulefan]

But he did touch the sand......

And that is not forbidden under the rules.

 

[rulefan]

If you touch a clump of sand then a small part will rub off on your finger. Lie ever so slightly altered let's just say because it hasnt been improved by a great deal.

Not necessarily

He shouldn't have been touching the area behind his ball unless he was 100% certain it was a stone

Perhaps he was

 

[Spuddy]

If you touch a clump of sand then a small part will rub off on your finger. Lie ever so slightly altered let's just say because it hasnt been improved by a great deal.

He shouldn't have been touching the area behind his ball unless he was 100% certain it was a stone or ask for a ref.

Ignorance doesn't excuse someone.

I think for that to be the case you would need to argue that the removal of a few grains on his fingers gains him a potential advantage.

 

[drdel]

I've replayed my recording and the penalty is way out of proportion to the 'act' which IMO was not in contravention of the current rules

 

[Colin L]

If you touch a clump of sand then a small part will rub off on your finger. Lie ever so slightly altered let's just say because it hasnt been improved by a great deal.

He shouldn't have been touching the area behind his ball unless he was 100% certain it was a stone or ask for a ref.

Ignorance doesn't excuse someone.

Rule 12.2b(1) first bullet point prohibits deliberately touching the sand anywhere in the bunker with anything in order to gain information for the next stroke.
Rule 12.2b(1) second first bullet point prohibits touching the sand behind or in front of the ball with a club.

What in either of these prohibitions means that you can't/shouldn't touch something in the you think is a loose impediment in case it isn't. What exactly do you think McIlroy was ignorant of?

The only potential breach in what he did was of Rule 8.1a. The question was did he improve the conditions for his next stroke? That was a matter of judgment by those who were there. Those of us in our armchairs at home can't tell. The final decision was that he didn't and so it all ended well for the player, but it leaves some bewilderment as to the reason for the initial decision. It's a pity it had to came to a later review and reversal of the that decision but it's good in the interests of fairness that a bad ruling does get
reversed.

 

[garyinderry]

8.1a removed sand. Like it or not. If you touch sand however little.