The Solheim pick up controversy - what should have happened?

[srixon 1]

No. I believe onceyour partner had holed for a four that is your side's score for that hole.

I think you are getting mixed up with scramble rules.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

No. I believe onceyour partner had holed for a four that is your side's score for that hole.

In 4BBB the best score for the pair counts regardless of who holes first

 

[Deleted member 25575]

In 4BBB the best score for the pair counts regardless of who holes first

If im putting from further away for a 5 and hole it, then my partner holes a closer putt for 4, its quite obvious which score would count, and you're right Phil, it's not the 5.

 

[Kellfire]

Has anyone mentioned that it’s the best score from a pair that counts and not the first one to complete the hole? Just wondering.

 

[Backsticks]

Maybe tell that to Jack Nicklaus?

The comparison you refer to does not really apply. The context and situation were very different indeed, for a variety of reasons :
- the Ryder Cup was a minor event relatively at the time, and was more of biannual jolly that truly competitive with the profile it has today. It was essentially a one sided thrashing and struggling for relevance. That same problem solved only a few years later with the European expansion.
- GB&I were really out of their depth in it generally, and the USA had nothing to lose, being indisputably a league above their opposition no matter what outcome
- Jack Nicklaus, while it is indeed to his credit, had nothing to loose personally either by conceding the half, and halving the contest : while his greatest years were yet to come, he was already the undisputed best golfer in the world and well on the way to confirming himself as the best ever
- it was at the end of the contest : would he / should he , have given it had it been in the middle order with other matches still in progress, or previous day ?
- its consequences were precisely known : a cup tie. Would he / should he have given it were it to hand GBI a win rather than a half ?
- should it be a more regular thing in RC : lets all be friends and dont put an opposition player under toooo much pressure. Shoud whoever it was have given Craig Stadler his tiddler in 1985 for example, a pivotal turning point in that edition ?

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Has anyone mentioned that it’s the best score from a pair that counts and not the first one to complete the hole? Just wondering.

They have now ?.

Some of the rules people invent are both hilarious and worrying.

 

[clubchamp98]

One thing that I noticed several times.
A putt was left inches from the hole and players from both sides were looking at their ops to see if it was conceded.
Mostly for half.
Just knock it in there is no confusion then the holes over anyway.
Sometimes the op was halfway to the next tee ,

 

[Deleted member 30522]

The comparison you refer to does not really apply. The context and situation were very different indeed, for a variety of reasons :
- the Ryder Cup was a minor event relatively at the time, and was more of biannual jolly that truly competitive with the profile it has today. It was essentially a one sided thrashing and struggling for relevance. That same problem solved only a few years later with the European expansion.
- GB&I were really out of their depth in it generally, and the USA had nothing to lose, being indisputably a league above their opposition no matter what outcome
- Jack Nicklaus, while it is indeed to his credit, had nothing to loose personally either by conceding the half, and halving the contest : while his greatest years were yet to come, he was already the undisputed best golfer in the world and well on the way to confirming himself as the best ever
- it was at the end of the contest : would he / should he , have given it had it been in the middle order with other matches still in progress, or previous day ?
- its consequences were precisely known : a cup tie. Would he / should he have given it were it to hand GBI a win rather than a half ?
- should it be a more regular thing in RC : lets all be friends and dont put an opposition player under toooo much pressure. Shoud whoever it was have given Craig Stadler his tiddler in 1985 for example, a pivotal turning point in that edition ?

Your point was "it's a competitive sport", comparison is valid, perhaps even moreso as women's golf is well down the pecking order, and the Solheim is a much newer event than the Ryder Cup was at that time.

 

[Sports_Fanatic]

One thing that I noticed several times.
A putt was left inches from the hole and players from both sides were looking at their ops to see if it was conceded.
Mostly for half.
Just knock it in there is no confusion then the holes over anyway.
Sometimes the op was halfway to the next tee ,

I think that's because of previous controversary in 2015 with a ball picked up when not given so they are all making absolute certain.

Yes they could just tap in but often we are talking foot or more, so if for a hole or halve they would still go through their routine (you don't want to do a simple tap in and miss when it would have been given and the world is watching). To do so would be to slow things down which people complain about hence looking to check as you know it probably has been conceded you just didn't hear.

Wonder if they would consider drawing a circle round the hole 2 ft radius so that all putts inside are automatically given but feels overkill and not the good part of matchplay where opponent decides what to give.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

I think that's because of previous controversary in 2015 with a ball picked up when not given so they are all making absolute certain.

Yes they could just tap in but often we are talking foot or more, so if for a hole or halve they would still go through their routine (you don't want to do a simple tap in and miss when it would have been given and the world is watching). To do so would be to slow things down which people complain about hence looking to check as you know it probably has been conceded you just didn't hear.

Wonder if they would consider drawing a circle round the hole 2 ft radius so that all putts inside are automatically given but feels overkill and not the good part of matchplay where opponent decides what to give.

Also you can't play out of turn, so tapping in is out of turn

 

[sunshine]

The comparison you refer to does not really apply. The context and situation were very different indeed, for a variety of reasons :
- the Ryder Cup was a minor event relatively at the time, and was more of biannual jolly that truly competitive with the profile it has today. It was essentially a one sided thrashing and struggling for relevance. That same problem solved only a few years later with the European expansion.
- GB&I were really out of their depth in it generally, and the USA had nothing to lose, being indisputably a league above their opposition no matter what outcome
- Jack Nicklaus, while it is indeed to his credit, had nothing to loose personally either by conceding the half, and halving the contest : while his greatest years were yet to come, he was already the undisputed best golfer in the world and well on the way to confirming himself as the best ever
- it was at the end of the contest : would he / should he , have given it had it been in the middle order with other matches still in progress, or previous day ?
- its consequences were precisely known : a cup tie. Would he / should he have given it were it to hand GBI a win rather than a half ?
- should it be a more regular thing in RC : lets all be friends and dont put an opposition player under toooo much pressure. Shoud whoever it was have given Craig Stadler his tiddler in 1985 for example, a pivotal turning point in that edition ?

This is all drivel and seems to either negate your argument or make it irrelevant???

 

[Swango1980]

Firstly, I can understand the ref getting involved in something an opponent may not have seen. However, the American players saw where their putt ended up, and had no objection to the European picking it up. So, I don't think the ref should have got involved, unless the Americans queried it.

Secondly, the pundits (and I believe the rules officials) said that the European picked the ball up after 7 seconds, and therefore 3 seconds too quickly. However, surely the 10 seconds only starts when the American reaches the hole to observe the ball? So, in actual fact, the 10 seconds timer surely hadn't even started when the ball was picked up?

 

[sunshine]

One thing that I noticed several times.
A putt was left inches from the hole and players from both sides were looking at their ops to see if it was conceded.
Mostly for half.
Just knock it in there is no confusion then the holes over anyway.
Sometimes the op was halfway to the next tee ,

You can't just knock it in. That would be playing out of turn (unless the first player has already holed out).

 

[Orikoru]

Firstly, I can understand the ref getting involved in something an opponent may not have seen. However, the American players saw where their putt ended up, and had no objection to the European picking it up. So, I don't think the ref should have got involved, unless the Americans queried it.

Secondly, the pundits (and I believe the rules officials) said that the European picked the ball up after 7 seconds, and therefore 3 seconds too quickly. However, surely the 10 seconds only starts when the American reaches the hole to observe the ball? So, in actual fact, the 10 seconds timer surely hadn't even started when the ball was picked up?

Yeah, but she went to her knees and sat on the ground for a while, so that would be undue delay if it then dropped in like 17 seconds after she actually hit it? Would be another controversy. Anyway, the point is it was never dropping in if they waited a week let alone 10 seconds.

 

[Swango1980]

Yeah, but she went to her knees and sat on the ground for a while, so that would be undue delay if it then dropped in like 17 seconds after she actually hit it? Would be another controversy. Anyway, the point is it was never dropping in if they waited a week let alone 10 seconds.

Not sure. I've seen plenty of pro's gasp in disbelief / head in hands / fall to knees / etc after the ball ends on the lip. After this, they slowly walk towards the hole, still shaking their head, feeling sorry for themselves. They then wait 10 seconds when they get to the hole. If the ball drops, I never recall a ref saying this was not acceptable due to the dramatics of the player before getting to the hole.

 

[Orikoru]

Not sure. I've seen plenty of pro's gasp in disbelief / head in hands / fall to knees / etc after the ball ends on the lip. After this, they slowly walk towards the hole, still shaking their head, feeling sorry for themselves. They then wait 10 seconds when they get to the hole. If the ball drops, I never recall a ref saying this was not acceptable due to the dramatics of the player before getting to the hole.

Yeah, when it's actually on the edge. This one was like a centimetre away.

 

[Swango1980]

Yeah, when it's actually on the edge. This one was like a centimetre away.

I agree, I do not think there was ever a chance the ball would drop, unless a tornado swept through the area.

I was simply responding to your first point regarding undue delay. The ref obviously assumed the ball was overhanging the hole, so the fact that we believe it would never have dropped is irrelevant to the undue delay issue.

 

[Orikoru]

I agree, I do not think there was ever a chance the ball would drop, unless a tornado swept through the area.

I was simply responding to your first point regarding undue delay. The ref obviously assumed the ball was overhanging the hole, so the fact that we believe it would never have dropped is irrelevant to the undue delay issue.

Opens a grey area though, with golfers adding more and more histrionics to add more time for it to drop.

 

[Swango1980]

Opens a grey area though, with golfers adding more and more histrionics to add more time for it to drop.

Already a grey area, I've often wondered how much time officials would allow for histrionics. Ultimately, I guess that is always going to be subjective, unless players are given a time limits to get from where they hit the ball to the hole, based on an assumed walking speed.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Rule 23.2

When Both Partners Hole Out or Otherwise Complete the Hole under the Rules. The lower score is the side's score for the hole.

Though I do recall playing a pairs comp with format that had first ball of a pair in the hole being the one that counted. I remember it well as my partner holed out before me for a par on a hole that I got a shot and he didn’t - with me yet to putt for a par. Can’t recall the name of the format or why it was played that way. I think it was better ball bogey but can‘t think why ‘ball in hole first‘ scores would add to the challenge or interest/fun.

The OP question. Though part of the ball overhung the hole, the ball’s CoG was nowhere near over the hole; it had stopped moving, and no way whatsoever was the ball going to drop ever. Rule is, or should surely be, that the 10s applies if there is any possibility of the ball dropping.