Rule 8.1 query

[jim8flog]

Is this "recreate your lie and you'll receive no penalty" a new thing or has it been there for many years?
I always thought that as soon as you'd transgressed in this scenario then you were penalised.

2020 Rule change.
Similarly if you move an OB post or an immovable obstruction you can now replace it before you take your shot to avoid a penalty.

 

[salfordlad]

The player "purposely flattened down the grass behind the ball with his foot", that's not unintended.

But hey, 2019 was when the rules lost much credibility to me and I know rules guys don't like the phrase but "player-friendly changes" were dumbing down in many of the revisions.

It's only a matter of time before we're getting relief from divots and being allowed a mulligan.

We were told some changes were to help speed up play, how has that worked out?

Sorry, I'm getting bitter, but 2019 was when I stopped keeping up to date with the rules and it annoys me that I became so disinterested in what I previously enjoyed.

On your first sentence, it is quite rare to get so clear cut a breach, most of the presentations a referee will face will not be so clear cut - but the required referee intervention first time is the same whether intended or not - point out the problem and what can/needs to be done about it.

I have a different overall view on the 2019 changes - they were (mostly) incredibly valuable and long overdue changes IMO. What we had was a mess - 1450 Decisions, of which 1250 were active and many internally inconsistent and trampling all over the Rules. It was truly ugly from a coherent regulation perspective.

And I would personally bet there will be no relief for divots or permitted mulligans in the next 10 years also.

Pace of play is a different kettle of fish. Committees have all they need to pursue this issue now, they just need to announce and enforce such behavioural issues. So why don't they do it? Well, we can all speculate on that but the problem is not the regulatory tools, it is the will to apply the resources and intervene. Does anyone know of any Committee anywhere that ever put Tiger Woods on the clock?

 

[Swango1980]

On your first sentence, it is quite rare to get so clear cut a breach, most of the presentations a referee will face will not be so clear cut - but the required referee intervention first time is the same whether intended or not - point out the problem and what can/needs to be done about it.

I have a different overall view on the 2019 changes - they were (mostly) incredibly valuable and long overdue changes IMO. What we had was a mess - 1450 Decisions, of which 1250 were active and many internally inconsistent and trampling all over the Rules. It was truly ugly from a coherent regulation perspective.

And I would personally bet there will be no relief for divots or permitted mulligans in the next 10 years also.

Pace of play is a different kettle of fish. Committees have all they need to pursue this issue now, they just need to announce and enforce such behavioural issues. So why don't they do it? Well, we can all speculate on that but the problem is not the regulatory tools, it is the will to apply the resources and intervene. Does anyone know of any Committee anywhere that ever put Tiger Woods on the clock?

The Committee at my club put Tiger Woods on the clock. Sadly, it made no difference at all, as they were sat in Lincolnshire and he was playing half way across the world

 

[rulie]

I'm sure that, at some point, Tiger was put on the clock by the PGA Tour Rules staff. Playing with someone like Ben Crane or Glenn Day is all it takes.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

On your first sentence, it is quite rare to get so clear cut a breach, most of the presentations a referee will face will not be so clear cut - but the required referee intervention first time is the same whether intended or not - point out the problem and what can/needs to be done about it.

I have a different overall view on the 2019 changes - they were (mostly) incredibly valuable and long overdue changes IMO. What we had was a mess - 1450 Decisions, of which 1250 were active and many internally inconsistent and trampling all over the Rules. It was truly ugly from a coherent regulation perspective.

And I would personally bet there will be no relief for divots or permitted mulligans in the next 10 years also.

Pace of play is a different kettle of fish. Committees have all they need to pursue this issue now, they just need to announce and enforce such behavioural issues. So why don't they do it? Well, we can all speculate on that but the problem is not the regulatory tools, it is the will to apply the resources and intervene. Does anyone know of any Committee anywhere that ever put Tiger Woods on the clock?

One issue is undoubtably that the pace of play rules agreed for each professional tournament are far too generous. When the then ET used a shot clock in a tournament it demonstrated what was possible. Another issue is that the Rules Officials are paid for by the PGA tour - so in effect the players.

So the players set the rules re timing and their officials police them - are you surprised there aren't more penalties added.

BTW I was talking to a rules official at a LIV event and he said the timings are not as generous in their tournaments yet you still get some big gaps without many penalties being levied.