Rules Under Fire (Again): "We have a lot of stupid rules in golf."
Matthew Rudy on the Carl Pettersson violation Sunday at the PGA which led to a two-shot penalty. Here is the PGA of America's statement.
Pettersson was not pleased after the round:
"I double checked with the official to make sure I could brush the grass as long as I didn't put any weight on the ground with the clubhead, and he said sure," said Pettersson about his shot on the first hole. "I wish he would have mentioned the leaves, too. I was just trying to hit the ball. I didn't even think twice about it."
After getting the notification from Davis, Pettersson was visibly annoyed. "I've got to take it on the chin, obviously. I broke the rule there," said Petterson. "I don't think it effected the outcome of the shot. It's just one of those things. We have a lot of stupid rules in golf."
Rex Hoggard included this from Feherty:
Golf Channel’s David Feherty, who was the walking analyst with the group on Sunday, was more pointed in his assessment of the rule.
“Why don’t professional golfers make rules for professional golfers?” Feherty asked. “We’re the only sport that allows amateurs (to make rules). It’s not working for me if a guy is trying to make a living. A major championship may have hung in the balance.
“That (rule) is designed so an amateur doesn’t drag his club back and make a channel for themselves. What do you think would happen if a pro did that out there? I think we can account for that. How are you supposed to make a backswing? Use the club like a spear?”
Still no video of it on YouTube or PGA.com's PGA Championship site. If anyone sees an online version of the violation, please post a link.
Geoff
Reader Comments (56)
Time to ban such putters or get more strict in uasge of the club used for measuring, in short penalty.
As tough a rule as it may seem, there is nothing inherently wrong with this rule. What if the loose impediment had been a branch. Should one be allowed to move it? To me, this is tantamount to improving your lie which surely must fly in the face of what it means to be in a hazard in the first place!
Pettersson has only himself to blame. Either he didn't know the rule or he needs to visit Specsavers for I can't believe he didn't see that leaf which was very close to the ball.
Moving a loose impediment in a hazard has been a penalty since the year dot.
"Totally sympathise with Pettersson - his challenge being derailed by one of Golf's many ridiculous rules is unbelievable given the local rule at the same tournament to treat bunkers as "through the green". Request the Golf media to lead a renewed movement for significant simplification to the Rules. Golfers worldwide have expressed and continue to express their views with their feet - with declining participation and lower growth than expected in emerging markets. I also understand much fewer people than necessary are willing to become referees which should make the administrators think. I considered it for a while, have read every rule and decision in the book and have concluded that several Rules provisions are not worth defending"
Read More http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/blogs/local-knowledge/2012/08/controversial-ruling-derails-pettersson.html#ixzz23PyyiWT3
It's hard to say where Feherty is coming from. I'm trying to think of a pro sport where the players make their rules. His advocacy of the pros is not surprising. I wonder what Johnny Miller's reaction would have been.
Feherty's not suggesting you "ignore" the rule book. Rather, he's suggesting you use a modicum of common sense and honor the spirit / intent of the rule. The thing that is so off-putting about situations like this is the blind allegiance to the "letter" of the rule with zero acknowledgement of the underlying reason for the rule.
The same "blind allegiance" led to players getting penalized for wind-blown golf balls on putting greens for years. That is, until some "tool" finally used common sense to understand the intent behind the rule. This game needs more "tools" fighting for the spirit of he rule book, rather than "non-tools" who willfully ignore common sense.
People who say rules are stupid are stupid. They're rules. Abide or take up bowling, dude.
No big deal...Laddie did it all the time.
As to the thought of BradO--I wondered the same thing, and Ted Mitchell posted that that was visited and deemed a nay. Peetteerrssoonn should have played with a conservative approach rather than the actual allowed one (brushing the grass) which he had verified bfore his stroke. This was really a fools tool, to get permission, and then be told--''Oh, unless by brushing the grass, some unforeseen element pops up though the club actually NEVER touched it.
Carl gave himself the finger, as the PGA, for the second time in a short time had rules officials fall off the cart. And the comment by Pete Dye about ''fair'', displayed in Geoff's header brings me to the conclusion that Dye does not deserve a place on the list of great course designers, and instead he should be on a list of Dante's avoidances.
The player and the official both deserve some credit in this, but justice, fairness (and the American Way!?!) were not served.
I feel a revolution is afoot.
Those who defend the rules are to be commended, but those who see the rules as a dynamic body of work , to be changed as life demands are to be praised equally. HD cameras were not around when these rules were written.
I take Ted's comment that this leaf was actually observed, and this was not a camera induced penalty to be true. Ted is a fair, honest man for my money.
But this does not pass the smell test.
The rule itself is not stupid, when you consider the intent. The rule is in the Section regarding playing the ball as it lies and not improving your lie (eg you can't clear a bunch of twigs surrounding your ball in a hazard). Does any rational person believe Petterson violated the intent of his rule? Or Brian Davis for that matter?
Petterson was penalized for nicking a leaf, which offered no improvement to his lie or make his swing easier. Yet, what's funny is that if there had been wispy tall grass growing behind the ball, he could have legally cleared it away with a brisk backswing. Or, using Davus as an example, he was assessed the same 2 stroke penalty for a nick in the backswing as he would have been if he'd used his club as a scythe during a practice swing to clear the area.
Failing to comprehend the spirit and intent of the rule is what people are calling "stupid," not the rule itself.
I agree that any breach that requires super slo-mo to spot it can't be classed as a breach-referees aren't fitted with such!
Believe it or not the governing bodies are looking at intent in the rules-hence the change to wind blowing a ball and hitting yourself with a ball being reduced to 1 shot,etc.
My issue is where do you draw the line?Is it ok to move a leaf but not a twig?-how about a small twig versus a big twig?Judging each incident on it's supposed merits will create more inconsistencies than you could ever imagine
08.13.2012 | Unregistered Commenter fwiw
-------------------------------------------------------------------
@fwiw
This is exactly why the rules of golf are a mess. There are rules for the rules. most rules ignore common sense. There needs to be a complete remake of the rule book. Who in their right mind believes that if your tee shot down the middle of the fairway landing in a divot should be played from the divot only because you had a late tee time and were the second to land in that spot of fairway. this is one of the tons of rules that doesn't use common sense.
I think it says a lot about the rules of golf when players who have played gold their entire lives still don't know the nuances of the rulebook. Why is it that guys who make their living playing golf for over 20 years still need a official to tell them how to play a certain drop. i think it says more about the rules than the players. Simplify the game and insert some common sense into the game.
That was a great post! Enough said...Amen!
Any notion that these guys know the rules but they are too hard to absorb reflects on the guys as much as the rules.
Regardless whether the rule is sane, it was the rule and he pushed the envelope. For that alone I support the PGA.
Whenever we call for rules changes, remember that they were adopted for a reason. Likely some long ago enterprising player likely pushed the envelope by using his takeaway to clear debris for a better shot.
Carl - love ya buddy - but play with some caution next time.
Anyone who claims otherwise can simply name another major televised professional sport that uses the same rules as it's amateur brethren....seriously, name ONE sport that's taken seriously in the eyes of TV execs.
Short of curling and perhaps bowling (but I'm talking MAJOR pro sports here) I can't think of any....it's more than time for the rulemaking Luddites to step aside and let golf move into the 21st century.
CP brushing a leaf had NO impact/effect the lie of the ball...but yet he still was penalized.
Wonder what the ruling would be if that single offending leaf would have been partially imbedded and/or semi attached to the ground due to gallery or player compaction...exactly how much "touchiness" is one allowed under those circumstances...or what if the wind was partly responsible for the leaf becoming dislodged? What if there's longish wispy grass in a "dry hazard" that cracks and breaks just by walking normally to ID your ball let alone desperately trying to hover the club over the ball without pressing down on anything?
Methinks the Pros could easily get by with 14 or 15 rules total...and I'm betting it would speed up play...win-win-win stituation.
Would you have all courses billiard table flat too cos it can't possibly be fair to have to play a fairway shot from a slope can it?
Or are you only able to play a shot from a perfect level lie?
Moving the leaf may not have created an advantage, but I suggest being so aggressive with his address certainly did - otherwise he would not have done it.
first your analogies aren't even close. nice try. you're probably the same guy comparing anchoring a putter to using square grooves on a wedge.
anyhow, your ignorance got my attention, so i assume mission accomplished, right?
Petterson was in the hazzard, but he was playing like he was in the rough.... bad judgement. An easy way around the problem of how to conduct oneself in the hazzard is to not play out of the hazzard, but to take a drop out of the hazzard and add a penalty stroke. Once you start fiddling around with a shot from a hazzard you bring in the possibility of incurring additional penalty strokes heaped on top of the intentionally hazzardous shot out of the hazzard.
Changing the rules to incorportate "intent" is the-leavings-of-bulls.
Maybe we should just not have hazzards on golf courses?