A few days ago, Kenny Schuelein came to the pro-shop to congratulate me for the additional responsibilities that I took over of. Like several other members, he encouraged me and offered his support, but, unlike others, he was the only who mentioned this blog, saying, "I hope you continue to have time to write the blog, I really enjoy it". Well, yes, without getting into details, I believe that there will be plenty of time to do what I usually do, including this blog. So as always, this post is for everyone, but dedicated to Kenny, who, with his comment, reminded me that before we started our Facebook page, where I do daily short posts, this was and should continue to be, the primary way of mass communication with our members because of many reasons, two of which are: the stories are much more complete, and, if looking for something in particular, it will be easy to search with the "search box", not to mention that it is a permanent post.
Today, I want to speak about the Rules of Golf, as written and revised every four years, by the United Sates Golf Association and the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, the two bodies who write the Rules of Golf, and the two bodies who also organize the biggest open championships in the world, the U.S. Open Championship and the Open Championship, more commonly known as the "British Open", which is coming up in two weeks. Specifically, I want to speak about the changes in Rule 6 and Rule 18, changes that have come into play in two majors in the last few years, I believe in a negative way. Rule 6 ("The Tiger Rule") has been modified twice.
First I want to talk about the "Tiger Rule" (Rule 6-6b), which is contradictory of Rule 6-1, which, in its first sentence stipulates a statement that cannot be misinterpreted: "The player and his caddie ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR KNOWING THE RULES" (caps are mine to show the point I'll make below").
In 2012, Rule 6-6b was modified from a player being disqualified for returning a lower score than made in any particular hole, FOR ANY REASON, from disqualification, to "possible disqualification" by adding that "if the player did not know he had incurred a particular penalty, he would not be disqualified, but he would be assessed the penalty for the particular rule he was in breach of that he "didn't know" (contradicting that the player and caddie ARE responsible for knowing the rules). In 2013, as you recall, Tiger not only didn't apply Rule 26 (Water Hazard), but his caddie did not seem to know either, or the official following his group. Later, he admitted to breaking the Water Hazard Rule (26) without even knowing he was admitting to a breach ("I dropped to the side, where I had a more level lie", but he needed to drop on a specific line). Later, instead of being disqualified as he should have been for returning a hole lower than actually shot, he was assessed a two stroke penalty for the rules breach. Now in 2016, the penalty would have been 4 strokes: two strokes for the rules breach and two more for for returning the scorecard with an error. This latest change is good for the most part, but again, it goes to interpretation: did the player really did not know he broke a rule when he IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KNOWING THE RULES?
And now, my real pet peeve, Rule 18, "Ball at Rest Moved". Before 2016, if you touched the ground within a club length of the ball, you were deemed to have moved the ball, and the penalty was one stroke. No questions asked. Now, it comes to interpretation, one referee might say, "no penalty", and another referee might say, "one stroke penalty". Most embarrassing, this came into light during the King of Tournaments of the USGA, the United States Open Championship. Bob Lowry, leader of the tournament, called an official when his ball moved on the green, and he was penalized one stroke, a little later, Dustin Johnson, the eventual champion, has a similar thing happen to him, the official following his group say, "no penalty". That was embarrassing enough for the USGA. On national television, the American player is not assessed a penalty, while the foreign player is.
Had it stayed as such, at least it would have been a matter of defending each referee's judgment. But no, they had to embarrass themselves further, by announcing that the referee in Dustin's group may have made a mistake in judgement, so, "after play would be completed, they would revise the video and see if indeed the official was correct". They were playing what we now know well, "politically correct games".... "we cannot have the same thing happen and have two different decisions!" Yes you can, BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY YOU WROTE THE RULE YOU DUMMIES! Had you left it alone, they would have both been assessed a penalty stroke and that would have been the end of it, but you opened Pandora's Box by leaving the rule to interpretation.
I'll finish with this: the beauty of the game of golf, is that the rules (now except those two), were "black and white". Now, someone will "interpret" a fact, one way or another way, and that my friends, might the beginning of the end of golf as we know it: a game that is respected because its rules are (were) factual.
Kenny... YOU ARE IN OKLAHOMA, DON'T BE SO SERIOUS, AND, WHATEVER YOU DO, PLEASE DON'T GROUND YOUR CLUB ON THE GREEN!
No comments:
Post a Comment