Another Bunker Liner Ruling: Hoffman Gets Out Of Plugged Lie

/

Here's the situation: final round, 2017 RBC Canadian Open, Charley Hoffman hits into a greenside bunker at the 12th and has a badly buried lie:


Credit Hoffman and caddie for recognizing the renovated Glen Abbey bunkers for having newly installed bunker floor lining that prevented him from digging enough to take a stance on his bunker shot. (You can see a demo at the 1:30 mark of how it is sprayed in). And even cred it them for asking to get a ruling even after Hoffman can be heard saying multiple times he did not believe there was any kind of artificial lining causing an issue (his caddie wasn't so sure and convinced him to get a second opinion). CBS's Peter Kostis said exactly the opposite: Hoffman was calling for a ruling because he could feel the liner. Maybe he had a producer yelling in his ear during the conversation, but it was still misleading.

Official Gary Young arrived and seemed very reluctant to give Hoffman relief, but the player soon could smell an opening, ultimately convincing Young that he could not take his stance because of the concrete lining.

"That's so generous!" barked out playing partner Kevin Chappell, somewhat sarcastically. Young replied that it was consistent with other rulings related to the new age bunker liners designed to keep sand on faces and from being contaminated. Chappell then lightly pointed out Hoffman's smile upon getting relief:

 

 

One other comment from Chappell, again with a light touch, prompted a one-word response and smile from Hoffman as he went about his business: "Rules."

Given the behind-the-scenes grumbling still taking place over Branden Grace's BMW PGA relief from a buried lie while citing bunker lining as a stance preventative, it's hard to see how Hoffman's will be any better received by his peers (note the sampling of fan outrage below).

However, it should be noted that Hoffman was initially skeptical about even suggesting he deserved a drop from the lie. He went on to lose the Canadian Open in a playoff to Jhonattan Vegas.

The situation seems worse than it might appear given that the PGA Tour, which has signaled a desire to be in the news delivery business via the web and television, scrubbed videos of the drop after briefly posting them to official Facebook and Twitter accounts.

Here is the PGA Tour Facebook post of the ruling, deleted (thanks reader Jeremy S).

And the Tweet captured by reader MS:

The reaction below sums up the social media reaction, which offers another reminder that it's very hard to bend the rules and not go unnoticed in the age of social media:

What do we learn from this?

A) Bunker liners are going to be an ongoing problem. A product meant to keep sand from becoming contaminated and to keep sand on bunker faces is now being used to subvert the game's original rule: play it as it lies.

B) Players are increasingly unafraid to stretch the boundaries of the rules to gain an advantage.

C) Instead of embracing this as a learning situation, the PGA Tour scrubbed their accounts of the evidence, which will only make Hoffman's peers and their caddies wonder what needed hiding. Even though Hoffman was initially skeptical that the situation warranted a ruling, much less a drop, the lack of transparency will raise suspicions about what went down.

No Vagaries Of Match Play Here: U.S. Junior Girls Controversy

/

It's not how you'd like to see a U.S. Junior semifinal decided but if you've seen the video and know a thing about golf, Erica Shepherd didn't do a thing wrong. That hasn't stopped some from absurdly criticizing her (thanks reader Brian) and even the Rules of Golf.

Golfweek's Beth Ann Nichols sums up the scene at Boone Valley, where the final between Shepherd and friend Jennifer Chang is underway.

Here is the video from Fox with Shepherd's highlights before you eventually can see the unfortunate moment at the 2 minute mark (not embedded due to autoplay).

It's pretty clear that Moon just made a mistake in wanting to practice the putt she just missed, and that Shepherd didn't have an opportunity to concede the par putt.

Nichols writes:

The difference here, of course, is that Shepherd told rules officials she would have given Moon the putt had there been more time. Even tried to reverse it. But Moon incurred a penalty under Rule 18-2.

“I mean, we both tried to get it to where that putt was given to her but it just – it’s the Rules of Golf,” said Shepherd. “You can’t.”

Nicoson, Shepherd’s longtime instructor, called the whole situation sad.

“Erica went in the locker room to find (Moon) and give her a hug and (Moon) said, ‘I can’t believe I did it out of reaction, it’s not your fault,’ ” Nicoson wrote in a text, “but Erica feels terrible.”

The episode is a good reminder that players who don't normally play match play need to remember some of the fundamentals, such as assuming no putt is good until conceded.

Hopefully, however, Shepherd and match play are not unfairly targeted for a simple innocent mistake.

On another note, lefties will want to watch Shepherd's swing. Impressive and powerful!

Rahm Wins Irish Open, Lexi Rule Surfaces Too

/

After a temperamental U.S. Open, Jon Rahm once again showed he can put rough weeks behind him by dominating the Dubai Duty Free Irish Open.

This quote from Alistair Tait's Golfweek account suggests someone is very confident heading into The Open, and his updated odds reflect similar confidence from punters.

“That makes two for two, shooting 65 in the final round,” Rahm said. “Obviously, it’s a very different tournament here for me. I’ve been saying I haven’t played my best golf, and today, for 15 holes, I played the best golf I can ever play on the golf course with the weather that we had. Obviously, the bonus of holing out on four was great, but man, this is a nice feeling.”

The round was highlighted by a hole-out at the fourth.

As for the ball mark issue and changes in the rules, here is Tait's account with this from rules official Andy McFee on why the rules are more forgiving:

“One of the points in the new decision is that the outcome depends a lot on what the player says and his explanation of the events,” McFee said. “Jon said: ‘I knew I marked it to the side and then I was trying to make an effort to put it back to the side.’ He’s definitely made the effort.

“We’re talking about the difference between the ball being lifted at 10 o’clock on the ball marker and put back at 11 o’clock which is not a problem.

“The new decision the R&A and USGA crafted, with the full knowledge from the PGA Tour and ourselves, is all about trying to eliminate these fine margins and get to a position where if a player has made a reasonable judgement then the game will accept it if it’s slightly wrong.

This screen grab shows his ball was closer to the hole and not in the same location:

In other news, the Irish Open will again play at a links next year, heading to the newer of two courses at Ballyliffin. Liam Kelly reports.

Poll: Should The Governing Bodies Drop The Anchoring Ban?

/

Bernhard Langer's recent brush with anchoring at the U.S. Senior Open prompted a pre-round visit with rules officials from the USGA. There was also overwhelming outrage on social media and coverage from Fox Sports addressing concerns of a possible rules violation. The issue summed up here by Brandel Chamblee, who coverage this week may have prompted the latest response:


At the very least, Langer is taking things right up to the edge of the anchoring ban. At the worst, he's openly resisting the rule knowing that the genteel world of golf would never actually prosecute a player of his caliber.

This all prompted an unusual Friday news dump with statements from Langer, fellow Champions Tour long putter user Scott McCarron and the USGA. Here is what was said:

The "integrity" language here from the USGA would suggest that actually enforcing the rule is now almost impossible given the introduction of intent.  With this in mind and knowing there are seniors whose golfing lives were made miserable by not being able to anchor, perhaps it's time to drop a rule that will not be enforced?

The SI/Golf.com gang contemplated massaging or changing the rule in this week's discussion that included caddie John Wood.

Given the potential rules changes for 2019, should the governing bodies consider abandoning a rule that started in 2016 after much debate?

The poll and your votes please:

As part of the rules revisions, should the governing bodies drop the anchoring ban?
 
pollcode.com free polls

U.S. Open: Return To Walking Officials With All Groups

/

After seeing the USGA's revision to its U.S. Open rules setup at Erin Hills, I write for Golfweek that bringing back walking officials would be the prudent thing to do.

While there were no major rules situations, I know of one player whose playing partners were not paying attention to his ball as it entered the tall stuff at hole No. 1. But since there was a bit of a grey area there and no walking referee was there as you might find at The Open, NCAA's and many other events, the player had to play as if he lost his ball.

As I note in the piece, this is also a perk for those who put in long hours working less-glamorous events. It was embarrasing seeing them sitting in the rough or in those parade-viewing chairs and in awful red hats.

But mostly the change this year seemed like an odd reaction to 2016's events and without a referee in each group, will some day prove costly for a player.

Hank Haney Asks If Bernhard Langer Is In Violation Of The Anchoring Ban

/

Hank Haney thinks so and based on the definition of Rule 14-1b (PDF link) that says an “anchor point” "exists when the player intentionally holds a forearm in contact with any part of his body to establish a gripping hand as a stable point around which the other hand may swing the club."

Bernhard Langer would appear to be in violation in this clip:

What say you?

South Africans Give And Take: Els Penalizes Self, Grace Takes Bold (Referee Sanctioned) Drop

/

It's never dull with Ernie Els at Wentworth, who turned a 69 into a BMW PGA first round 71 by penalizing himself for not replacing a possible plugged lie properly.

Will Gray for GolfChannel.com on Els' guilty conscience.

"Under the rules you try and put it back the way you think it should be, but I still felt uncomfortable with it, so we took a two-shot penalty," Els said. "I know deep down the ball wasn't quite where it should be and I wouldn't be able to live with myself."

The incident getting more attention involved Els countryman Branden Grace, who took relief from bunker wall material when he had a buried lie. Alistair Tait reports for Golfweek on the drop approved by American official Mark Hill and criticized by commentators and players

Paul McGinley criticized Grace’s action during television commentary and afterwards. “It was ridiculous,” McGinley said. “If you twist your feet enough you’re bound to eventually reach the bunker lining. That means anytime a player wants relief from a poor lie he can simply twist his feet until he reaches the bunker lining. That can’t be right.”

Danny Willett took to twitter to complain. He tweeted: “@EuropeanTour please explain that drop?! Burying feet enough in to get to the base of the bunker???”

Fellow Englishman Daniel Brooks also had reservations about the ruling. “Wow strangest drop I’ve ever seen there,” he tweeted.

Bunkered has a few of the player tweets and a mini-round-up here.

While no video of the moment is online, Grace gives a decent explanation in this Sky post round interview.

Golf Is Finally Blaming Technology...For Something

/

As Rex Hoggard at GolfChannel.com notes, a sport trying to modernize is suddenly acknowledging that technology might have taken things too far. But not with 340 yard drives that force the scale of the game to become bloated.

No, it's with replay and HD TV. As Hoggard notes, every other sport (for better or worse) is determined to get calls right using technology, but with this week's Lexi Decision, golf is headed backwards:

The rule makers are blazing new paths in what has been billed as a “modernization” of the Rules of Golf, but this new decision – which is entitled “limitations on use of video evidence” – feels like a step in the wrong direction.

No one is pleased with the the Thompson situation – neither the outcome nor that it took some 20 hours to unfold – and the desire to avoid similar incidents in the future is understandable, but sports have rules that must be applied no matter how much technology is needed to assure the proper outcome.

Yes, the "naked eye" test rolled out by the USGA and R&A appears to be the right thing to do. However, I'm pretty sure players whose "reasonable judgement" is relied upon over video evidence could leave them subject to integrity questions. Social media could gang up and tarnish reputations if the footage shows player judgement was possibly mistaken.

John Feinstein and I kicked around the issues on Golf Central this week:

Lexi Finally Explains "The Mark" & It All Sounds Pretty Innocent

/

Reading Randall Mell's GolfChannel.com account and hearing Lexi Thompson speak, she would have made a strong case for herself if the "reasonable judgement" and "naked eye" Decisions had allowed her to. Now that the Rules of Golf do so, it's hard to see how Thompson is penalized under the revised rules given her explanation of what happened in the 2017 ANA Inspiration.

From Mell's story:

Thompson said she marked the 15-inch putt because her father told her not to rush short putts in majors. She also said she twisted the ball slightly before returning it to its mark, because she uses a dot on the ball as a focal point for making her stroke.

Thompson was asked a second time to explain how video came to show her returning her ball to a different spot on her mark, a violation that many of  her fellow players agree warranted the first two-shot penalty.
“I have seen the video, and I can see where they’re coming from with it,” Thompson said. “It might have been, I guess, me rotating the ball, but like I said, I’ve always played by the Rules of Golf. Growing up with two older brothers, they were always on me for playing by the Rules of Golf.

“There’s no need for me to improve anything. Those greens were absolutely perfect, and the whole week there was nothing in my line to be moving it from anything. So, I have no reason behind it. I did not mean it at all.”

And only after slowing down and zooming in does anyone think she "did" something, which is why we have the new decision.

The press conference video from GolfChannel.com:

Stacy Lewis On New Video Rules Decision: “It didn’t really clarify anything.”

/

Ron Sirak writing for ESPN wonders why the LPGA just doesn't invoke local rules to address call-in rulings and scorecard issues. And after reading the comments from players interviewed by Randall Mell, it's obvious the players might start pushing that option.

While I was left a very confused about where Stacey Lewis stands on the Lexi situation based on her comments to Mell, she was clear in her view that Tuesday's emergency Decision adds confusion from the player's perspective.

Catriona Matthew agreed. From Mell's GolfChannel.com report:

“I think it muddies the water even more,” Matthew said. “That puts the rules officials in a much harder position. What do they call a judgment call?”

If Matthew had her way, viewers wouldn’t be able to call in violations, which would have spared Thompson the penalties.

“I don’t think you should be able to phone in after the fact,” Matthew said.

Lexi Decision: Player Judgement May Supersede High Def Replays; Golf Gets Another Task Force!

/

Well, you didn't quite get your wish(es). But golf has a new task force working group. Hooray for Hollywood!

So let's review. In the wake of Chapter 32 of Television-Fueled Rules Controversies, we all pretty much agree that golf does not need at home-officiating or scorecard penalties assessed at a later time (but never after the final round).

Your votes:

For the 46 who voted for reasonable judgement, ding ding, you win!

However, in theory, maybe, quite possibly, I think, should the player's word supersede that of the video evidence going forward, then this should eliminate retroactive penalties for signing an incorrect scorecard. Sorry Dustin, Anna and Lexi, you were ahead of your time. You're still penalized.

At-home officials appear to be neutralized by today's Decision, but not eliminated from wreaking havoc. However, with social media's ability to team up against a player using video evidence, a case could be made that we will still have player demonized by video evidence. So good luck, Lance, Tommy, Tom R, Loomy, Brandt and the other producers who have to sort out what to show and what not to show.

Here's the press release:

New Rules of Golf Decision Limits Use of Video Review
USGA and The R&A Prioritize Working Group to Assess Role of Video 
in Applying Golf’s Rules

FAR HILLS, N.J., USA AND ST. ANDREWS, SCOTLAND (April 25, 2017) -  The USGA and The R&A have issued a new Decision on the Rules of Golf to limit the use of video evidence in the game, effective immediately.

A Decision as we are trying to get rid of Decisions. Kinky!

The two organizations have also established a working group of LPGA, PGA Tour, PGA European Tour, Ladies European Tour and PGA of America representatives to immediately begin a comprehensive review of broader video issues, including viewer call-ins, which arise in televised competitions.

More meetings!

New Decision 34-3/10 implements two standards for Rules committees to limit the use of video: 1) when video reveals evidence that could not reasonably be seen with the “naked eye,” and 2) when players use their “reasonable judgment” to determine a specific location when applying the Rules. The full language of the Decision can be found here.

Happy reading. Hope you have a law degree.

Instead, the USGA's Thomas Pagel explained it better to Golf World's Jaime Diaz:

“We are trying to make sure that players that are on television are not held to a higher standard than others playing the game,” said Thomas Pagel, the USGA’s senior director of rules.

“Television evidence can reveal facts that as a human being you could not reasonably have known in the playing of the game. A player could do everything he or she could to get it right, but video evidence could still show that they got it a little wrong. And the only reason we can know they got it a little wrong is because we’ve been able to slow down, pause, rewind, replay, all the things that the player on the golf course doesn’t have the advantage of doing.”

This will appease those of us who see the Lexi Thompson situation fitting here, but will not satisfy those who believe she was up to something nefarious (concluded after watching the zoomed in, slowed down replay many times...the next day).

Though as Beth Ann Nichols notes here for Golfweek, it's also not clear if Lexi's situation would have ended differently given today's news, but it seems fairly obvious that the Johnson and Nordqvist boondoggles would be avoided going forward.)

Back to the press release:

The first standard states, “the use of video technology can make it possible to identify things that could not be seen with the naked eye.” An example includes a player who unknowingly touches a few grains of sand in taking a backswing with a club in a bunker when making a stroke.

Anna!

If the committee concludes that such facts could not reasonably have been seen with the naked eye and the player was not otherwise aware of the potential breach, the player will be deemed not to have breached the Rules, even when video technology shows otherwise. This is an extension of the provision on ball-at-rest-moved cases, which was introduced in 2014.

The second standard applies when a player determines a spot, point, position, line, area, distance or other location in applying the Rules, and recognizes that a player should not be held to the degree of precision that can sometimes be provided by video technology. Examples include determining the nearest point of relief or replacing a lifted ball.

So long as the player does what can reasonably be expected under the circumstances to make an accurate determination, the player’s reasonable judgment will be accepted, even if later shown to be inaccurate by the use of video evidence.

Both of these standards have been extensively discussed as part of the Rules modernization initiative.  The USGA and The R&A have decided to enact this Decision immediately because of the many difficult issues arising from video review in televised golf.

Fascinating that Lexi's situation forced action, not the two 2016 incidents at USGA events which now might turn out differently under today's Decision.

The standards in the Decision do not change any of the current requirements in the Rules, as the player must still act with care, report all known breaches of the Rules and try to do what is reasonably expected in making an accurate determination when applying the Rules.

Right, right, right, now let's get to the golf!

Video-related topics that require a deeper evaluation by the working group include the use of information from sources other than participants such as phone calls, email or social media, and the application of penalties after a score card has been returned.

But first, we have to decide if we are meeting at Sea Island, Pinehurst, Pebble or Bandon to hash this call-in stuff? Maybe Sand Valley? It's on the way to Erin Hills! Sort of.

Here are the harrumphs...including this endorsement from the LPGA Tour.

USGA Executive Director/CEO Mike Davis said, “This important first step provides officials with tools that can have a direct and positive impact on the game. We recognize there is more work to be done. Advancements in video technology are enhancing the viewing experience for fans, but can also significantly affect the competition. We need to balance those advances with what is fair for all players when applying the Rules.”

Martin Slumbers, Chief Executive of The R&A, said, “We have been considering the impact of video review on the game and feel it is important to introduce a Decision to give greater clarity in this area. Golf has always been a game of integrity and we want to ensure that the emphasis remains as much as possible on the reasonable judgment of the player rather than on what video technology can show.”

The USGA and The R&A will consider additional modifications recommended by the working group for implementation in advance of Jan. 1, 2019, when the new code resulting from the collaborative work to modernize golf’s Rules takes effect.

The proposed Rules are now definitely taking effect January 1, 2019?

Maybe with the speed of this helpful Decision perhaps it's time to discuss moving the implementation date up?

Decisions, decisions.

Mell: Lexi Thompson Has Many Questions To Answer

/

I doubt anyone wants this Wednesday's Lexi Thompson press conference at the Volunteers of America Texas Shootout to turn into the Grand Inquisition, but given Tuesday's expected USGA/R&A announcement inspired by her ANA Inspiration penalty, it sounds like Lexi will get a lot of questions.

By staying quiet since the penalty and not giving her side of the story after the round or since, she's set herself up for a tough press conference, writes Randall Mell at GolfChannel.com.

So, there will be players and fans alike looking for transparency when Thompson meets with media on Wednesday.

After seeing replays, does she agree she committed an infraction?

Or does she think there may be some optical illusion created in the nature of the camerawork?

And why did she come in from the side of the ball to mark it?

Poll: What Emergency Lexi Clause Should We Get Tuesday?

/

Reports from Golfweek's Alistair Tait and Golf World's Ryan Herrington say something is coming, but what exactly is to be determined.

The R&A and USGA have been working overtime to introduce immediate stopgap measures following Lexi Thompson falling victim to a viewer call in, day-after review and post-card signing penalty.

From Tait's Golfweek item reviewing the possibilities:

R&A officials refused to comment on the upcoming announcement at a media day at Royal Birkdale ahead of this year’s Open Championship. However, Golfweek understands the governing bodies will implement a decision Tuesday with immediate effect to make sure no player goes through the same experience as Thompson.

The governing bodies could rule that TV viewers cannot call in rules infractions. Alternatively, they could decree that no retrospective penalties can be added once a scorecard has been signed.

From Herrington's Golf World report:

The changes also might include an early implementation of a proposed Rules change where “the player’s reasonable judgement would be upheld even if later shown to be wrong by other information [such as video technology].” This proposal was part of a larger rules modernization plan that the USGA and R&A had announced in March that would potentially got into effect in 2019.

Another issue potentially to be addressed on Tuesday is whether certain penalties can be assessed after a player’s scorecard has been signed and/or a stipulated round has been finished.

I won't be of much help here, but...

--In the DVR and social media era, I'm having a hard time envisioning how we end call-ins on infractions given how easy it is to watch something on replay. Yet that has been the top "ask" from most fans who often forget that some callers are trying to save the player from signing for an incorrect score.

--Therefore the scorecard signing clause seems the most logical fix, until we have a violation that is not caught and the player's performance is forever considered tainted because the penalty was not assessed. Again, a seemingly obvious and wise move until it's not.

--Expediting one element of the 2019 proposed changes seems simple, but something tells me that adding such a strong intent clause to the current rules will create other headaches. For starters: Lexi would have claimed she did not intend to move her ball closer to the hole. Then the 42% or so who think she did violate the rules would forever see her as having gotten away with something.

So on that helpful note, your votes:

What is the most pressing post-Lexi Rules change?
 
pollcode.com free polls

Lexi Fallout: Golf's Five Families Convene At Augusta...

/

"How did things ever get so far?"

"This Lexi business is going to destroy us for years go come."

I'm paraphrasing of course, but it's fun to imagine the professional tours--which let their players play slow, mark their golf balls constantly (unless it's a backboard for a playing partners)--whining about the Rules of Golf not having addressed issues related to HD and DVR's.

But as Jaime Diaz reported in Golf World, the Corleonie's, Barzini's and Tattaglia's of golf got together to bark at each other about Lexi Thompson's penalty at the ANA Inspiration.

There were intense exchanges in which tour leaders, worried about the perception of their products, argued that rules changes were needed posthaste to stop situations that fans and even players found unfair and nonsensical. The most aggrieved party was the LPGA, and its commissioner Mike Whan, who had publicly called the Thompson ruling “embarrassing.”

“I understand Mike’s perspective,” USGA executive director Mike Davis said. “This was hard on Lexi Thompson, and hard on Mike Whan. But it was not bad for the game, because this is exactly the kind of dialogue that good change comes out of.”

Something tells me that did not give Commissioner Whan a warm, fuzzy feeling.

And this is why we still have cause for concern, just as we did in the days after the Lexi situation.

Golf’s leaders hope that the public will come to regard the rules as better reflections of common sense and fairness. But ultimately, it’s unavoidable that they will be applied on a case-by-case basis.

In Thompson’s case, even under a new standard of intent and reasonable judgment, it’s not clear that she would have not been penalized. As the video shows, Thompson missed replacing on the correct spot by about half a ball. Half a ball doesn’t seem like a lot, but especially on a short putt, it constitutes a pretty bad mark.

Closed circuit cameras caught the meeting:

 

 

Bamberger To Players On Rules Callers: Welcome The Scrutiny

/

A bold take from Michael Bamberger of SI on rules calls from the couch, a huge ongoing issue in the game.

Some players and golf observers take the view that the extra scrutiny that comes with playing golf on TV makes this whole call-in system unfair to the more prominent players. Right after Thompson got her four-shot penalty, Woods tweeted that viewers should not be officials “wearing stripes.”

But that view does not show a keen understanding of the intent of the rules. A player should want the scrutiny that comes with playing on TV because the player is not trying to get away with anything. The player should want to turn in the most accurate scorecard he or she can, with help from anybody who's watching.

I'm not sure how much of the issue comes down to the people calling these things in versus how the potential violations are interpreted by the committees.

While it's easy to pick on those phoning in tips, haven't many of our brouhahas developed because of how HD and the Decisions are used to assume the player is guilty until proven innocent (and without the opportunity to explain their intent)?