"We don't really like how the golf world is viewing these type of things, but at the end of the day, it is the players' responsibility to know the rules."
Bob Harig reviews the politics and particulars of the Villegas DQ at Kapalua and asks the USGA's Mike Davis about reviews of the penalty of disqualification for signing an incorrect card.
Many have wondered why golf's rules seem so inflexible on this. At the time he signed his card, he believed the score he wrote down on the 15th hole at Kapalua was correct. It wasn't until the next day it was discovered he was wrong. Why not just add the 2-stoke penalty -- signed scorecard be damned -- and let him remain in the tournament?
"We have had formal requests to review that," Davis said of both the USGA and the R&A, which governs the game outside of the United States and Mexico. "We've gotten it from the PGA Tour, LPGA Tour, European Tour … and we have looked at it. One thing that has been proposed is assessing the penalty, and then adding an additional 2-stroke penalty -- so it would be a total of 4 strokes [if the penalty came to light after the card was signed]. At least the player would still be in the field.
That'd be better than what we have now. Naturally, it died in committee. A USGA committee.
"We looked at it long and hard. At the end of the day, it just didn't gain traction. There are just so many ramifications. We don't really like how the golf world is viewing these type of things, but at the end of the day, it is the players' responsibility to know the rules."
There is nothing stopping the PGA Tour from instituting a local rule that is not covered in the USGA rule book. But good luck with that.
"We could do that, but I don't know if we want to do that," Russell said. "It just doesn't work like that.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011 at 08:58 PM
Reader Comments (46)
It's a matter of timing too. If Villegas gets notified before he signs then we're just talking strokes so the intent or ignorance of the situation really doesn't factor in, if you think about it. What is a forgivable offense becomes unforgivable when a pencil mark is made on a scorecard? I just don't get it.
There are many inconsistencies that have evolved as the rules have been fiddled with over time. The first question should be "Does this rule make much difference to the fairness of playing the game?"
There are 3 rules (or 4 if rule 25 is included), 6 or 8 pages, to cover when a ball is "lost" (including in a hazard, both types, or out of bounds or up a tree, both visible and invisible or in mud or in an obstruction or in casual water) or unplayable.
There should be one rule providing for a free drop in some cases or a one shot penalty in others.
This won't happen.
It would be even more interesting to me for the Rules bodies to explain their thought processes behind rejecting that request and explain to the general public just exactly what the ramifications would be.
Therein lies the problem. Villegas himself took ownership of his blunder and has moved on. So should everybody else. If the player doesn't know the rules, then shame on him. If the Tour isn't monitoring the telecast to note potential infractions before the player signs his card, shame on the Tour. If it is called in by a viewer post haste, then shame on both the player and Tour.
At the end of the day, had his infraction been discovered before he left the scoring tent then we wouldn't be having this discussion because he would have been given the appropriate penalty and that would have been the end of it.
Incidentally, had it occurred to anyone that , had the tv viewer's invervention been more timely, CV's disqualification might have been prevented?
My point about the ramifications is that if people actually saw the reasoning from somebody who was behind the Rules decisions the they might be able to understand where they are coming from.
From the evidence on here you would have to say that 90% of folk know diddley squat about them.
Secondly, CV is the only person responsible for making sure that his card is correct. The Tour should not hire more staff to monitor TV feeds to protect players from DQs when they do not know the rules.
Finally, I am astounded by how much attention is being given to protecting players from rules DQs when the latest rules dust up involves a guy who appears to be trying to clean up the area where his ball is about to roll before it gets there. This hardly seems like the set of facts that golf fans would want to rally around to press for a rules change.
and if you don't want to do that, pay your caddie to become the rules expert.
by the way CV violated one of the basic principles of the rules - play the course as you find it.
And I am tired of the dirge about the holy sacredness of the Sainthood of Golf, where we are above all other sports, calling penalties on ourselves. There will always be good guys. There will always be weasels. That's the reality.
As far as Camilo and other calls/non-calls go, where were the other players in the group, or the caddies, to ID the penalty that may have occurred? When I play golf, I make sure that I use the rules to the best of my abilities and advantage to make sure that nothing untoward happens. I don't, however, videotape the match, go home and parse it out to see if I can ding my opponent on something that was missed at the time.
Here's a simple solution. Scorecard signed by other player in group? Recorded by tournament officials? Timeline is OVER to complain and look for fouls. Also, no armchair officiating. It's ludicrous to me. Normal, ol' PTL here tries to keep an even keel, but this has got me all riled up.
I"d go off to the driving range now, but it's covered in ice, darn it! :)
Happy hitting, all.
I actually understand where the USGA is coming from in not changing this rule, but I also know that the rules of golf, especially this DQ component, were not written with the ramifications of TV and social media (ease of communication) in mind. And is there any actual knowledge as to whether current pros know more or less about the rules than generations before. Or are there just more hours on TV to catch instances like this. Maybe some of the readers hear can share their opinions on that.
don't mark a ball close to the hole so it can be used as a backstop.
And the other player/caddie most likely didn't know the rule either.
Rules as they currently stand say we know when he has returned his card. Simple and it works at every level of the game. works as well at a PGA Tour event as it does at a US Open local qualifier as it does in the ladies 9 holer.
If a guy returns a wrong card, he is out. we dont find out halfwat through the next round that "oh, villegas is now 5 under instead of 7" when we look at a scoreboard.
Players should know the rules, but they don't. And 99% of the rest of us don't either. Let's not sit up on our high horses on that one. That's why there are penalties. There's a penalty for doing what Villegas did, but then there's another, harsher one for messing up the paperwork? There is a big window in time when clerical mistakes can be corrected (ie before the end of the tournament). He could have a couple of strokes added and the leaderboard would be updated, as if by magic. Not allowing that seems crazy to me.
For those who don't want to penalize the player after the card is returned, how do you think Villegas would feel if he went on to win the tournament with a video of him going unpunished for violating a rule was out there on the internet? How many people would be screaming that he got away with something? Why wouldn't a player choose to try to ignore a penalty if he knew he could avoid the penalty if it wasn't seen before he turned in his card? Certainly most wouldn't, but some may try.
Pete for a Luddite, you sure do want to change things a lot.
As rigid as the Council of Cardinals are, who shape doctrine, the USGA "white shoes" with their decision making once again have decided that common sense will not rule the day.
I would have loved to be a fly on the wall at the conference table when they finally decided that the Stymie needed to be stricken from the rules. That must have been a hoot.
Sorry, you read that entire article and come away saying that "common sense will not rule the day" for the USGA? If that is the case, what about the PGA itself? What are THEY lacking? Didn't you read how Mike Davis stated that it is within these very same Rules of Golf that the PGA Tour can adopt a LOCAL RULE for its tournaments? If they have such a handle on "common sense" why haven't they ever declared a "local rule" saying that call-in rules questions will not be allowed consideration? Or rules infractions discovered after the last card is signed and accepted will not be considered?
No, the ones who keep complaining about archaic rules, by their very act of complaining, show that they have even less of a knowledge and understanding for the rules of golf than what has been already appreciated...
Double E, Mark Roe and Jesper Parnevik had a paperwork error a few years ago at the Open. CV miscounted his score, and signed for it. There is a difference.
Perfect description, and there's no doubt that this is exactly what he was doing.
When it happened I think he was reacting without thinking. But what happened afterward? What was he thinking?
I am hard pressed to believe that after all the housekeeping Camillo didn't think to himself, "hmmm, wonder if I just fucked up there, probably shouldn't have done that".
Is it plausible to think that not even the tiniest shred of doubt ever crossed Camillo's mind before he signed his card?
Unfortunately, the DQ rule needs to stay. While this was certainly a little bit of a screwy situation, you're opening an incredibly big can of worms if you get rid of it.
Obviously if we felt like Villegas intentionally didn't count a penalty he should be gone, and in my opinion suspended and ostracized by his peers, but that doesn't seem to be the claim of anyone on either side of the debate. If the guy had tweeted the thing sooner, he would have just been penalized strokes. What if he had tweeted about it after the trophy was awarded? Then NOTHING would have happened even if CV had won the thing. To me, that seems like a much bigger injustice than fixing a score in the next round, but I realize at some point there has to be a cut-off.
And to those that think that we can't change this rule because it lends an incentive to cheat, that flies in the face of the whole golf being a game of honor and we call penalties on ourselves thing. There are literally hundreds of ways players can cheat week in and week out. At some point we have to trust their honor. It's very rare to hear an incident where willful cheating has taken place, but it's quite common to hear incidents where people are harshly penalized for mistakes that were not intentional. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I'm still waiting to hear about a player who signed his card incorrectly on purpose and got his just desserts for it.
Actually, no. Please re-read my post. I am in favor of NOT using social media, TV, and the like to allow for further intrusion of couch-officiating and such. Let it be decided on the course by those on the course. I've played in many club events and they aren't videotaping and broadcasting every group on every shot to allow for further breakdowns.
My take is simple and consistent with older times: decide it on the course. If it's missed by the player, his caddy, and the other players and caddies, so be it.
Villegas wasn't the only person to sign his incorrect scorecard - his playing partner also attested to its accuracy. How about penalizing the guy that attests to an incorrect scorecard as well.
Would players would be more likely to learn the damn rules if they knew their ignorance was going to get their playing partners DQ'd as well? Would playing partners pay more attention to what their competitors are doing on the golf course so as to not get caught up in someone else's rules violation?
Talk about lack of common sense.
While I disagree with the DQ in cases like this, that's a logical conclusion. If people are so worried about creating an incentive to cheat, why not penalize the guy that's officially attesting to the score? I mean, how can we be sure he's not in on it, right? Of course, in reality, that would be even more unnecessarily harsh and it's not realistic or practical for the person attesting to even bear witness to most violations. But, if we're sticking to the idea that the rules of golf were brought down from a mountain on stone tablets, then exactly what is the purpose of having someone attest to the score in the first place?
I don't actually advocate DQ'ing the attesting person - I'm just raising the issue. I wouldn't mind the PGA Tour instituting a fine for it though.
I'll tell what - how about putting a camera on every player in the field so that the Derek Lamelys are subject to the same scrutiny.
Now we have a level playing field..
yes it is difficult to write rules, which is why I had a difficult time even reducing a few ideas to express some ofd my ocvweview od ROG for casual play. And with that, there was misundertanding of my intent...to save time, and make rulws such that the casual fan would learn them and abide by them.
ColinMac:
Yes a new set of rules, from scratch.
Throw the old book away. A clean start.
When EVERY friggin rule is debated, has 'decisions' and STILL there is disgreemment, then the ROG are, simply put, a buch of crap.
Shouldn't be that way. This great game needs great simple rules.
the only thing lacking in the current ROG is different rules for different days, or time of day, or which direction you are playing.
As to 'cheating' vs DQ: ok which is it' Honor and Trust , or we know you are out to con us every chance you get.
As to CV's actual event: He knew. I am not saying the act was one of cheatng , but at some point after the fact, it was appareant that he should not have removed the clump. IMHO, that is why he gave up no argument upon the penalty.
I have been physically threatened when I refused to add up the score of the card I was keeping. Pretty sad.
If low Hdcp tourney players do not even know a smple scoring rule, then what hope is there, that they would know a dead reed from a dead reed stuck in the mud, from a dead reed whose roots are still attached.
Shoot, you can't even get the avrage walk on to MARK HIS BALL: he'd rather fight over if it is his Top Flite 3, or the guy from the other fairway's Top Flite 3.
Re-write them and publish them for our scrutiny.Good luck!
I have tried it and I cant do it.A decent rules brain could drive a tank through most of my simplified suggestions.
So prove me wrong-you will have my unreserved respect if you can manage it.
As I said before, Is it plausible to think that not even the tiniest shred of doubt ever crossed Camillo's mind before he signed his card?
Maybe just change the rules to: Play the ball as it lies...if that can't be done or anything out of the ordinary happens (you step on the ball, hit your cart, whiff, etc), you are DQ'd. So basically if it isn't the standard- hit the ball cleanly, go find it, hit it again until it is in the hole...then you have no score. That is pretty easy.
Of course it's plausible. But it can't be both ways. Either golf is a game of honor and players police themselves (with some help from the outside) and they are given the benefit of the doubt, or the game should be played with the assumption that everyone will cheat at any opportunity, just like other sports. And in that case, there's no reason to have disqualifications for signing for incorrect numbers because it's a climate of "catch me if you can", just like football, hockey, etc. So, we're really back to the first case, where he must be given the benefit of the doubt (officially, anyway - anyone is free to speculate any way they choose).
In this case, there's no way to get into CV's head to figure out if there was doubt or if he even knew he had done wrong and chose not to say anything. The best we can do is put ourselves into his mindset and try and figure out what we might do in that situation. But is that fair to CV if someone says, "well, *I* would have kept quiet in that situation"?
High school golfers suffer for that indignity. Same should go for the professional golfer.