Originally Posted by Golfingdad
If Tiger can make a reasonable call on himself that his ball didn't move, (His ball obviously - because of slow motion HD camera - moved, but that doesn't make his opinion unreasonable) and get called for a penalty two hours later, that is fine. But only if all other players also gets called for the penalty.
This is one of the most important points, for me.
Originally Posted by Asheville
I'm an experienced rules official, may I call it in?
Not if you aren't working that day. IMO rules officials working the event are devalued (to the extent that they should be the final decision makers on the scene) when this happens.
Originally Posted by sacm3bill
But the camera still caught it. And the player says "No, it didn't move". How would you rule? Point being, no matter how the evidence was obtained, we know the ball moved. So are you only going to go by what the player says, are you only going to go by what the evidence shows, or are you going to take it on a case-by-case basis, and make a judgement call on whether the player should have been able to see the ball move or not? (Ball movement is just one example - the same questions apply to any rules infraction.)
Players still have competitors in their group that can assist in calling a rules infraction on a fellow competitor, and this is equitable except in the rare circumstances that a player is the odd-ball out and has no playing partner.
Also, this process wouldn't/shouldn't change much procedurally simply because outside spectators aren't allowed to call in a violation. Rules officials can still use any TV camera they want to at the event to help assist with a ruling. Theoretically if the head rules official is alerted to a possible infraction (by a player, playing partner, another official), he can ask to view the camera footage to the extent that it's available. If it isn't, tough noogies.
Originally Posted by jamo
Of course not, but in golf the penalty is added strokes. You can add them in at any time you want. You can't just say at the end of a 10-9 baseball game, "well, one of the winning team's homers actually hit the wall, and he probably would have been tagged out at second to end the inning. So the other teams wins 9-6."
The same applies in golf. You can't determine how the outcome is changed simply by adding strokes post-round. What if the golfer decides to go for the par 5 18th, or attack that pin, knowing he was assessed a penalty on the spot, rather than 2 hours later?
Originally Posted by sacm3bill
I think I see your point, I just don't agree with it. :-) The difference is, we don't have clear video evidence of Zach doing anything wrong. With Tiger we do, and we're considering ignoring it.
By your argument there are no fair competitions in any sports. The 3 refs in NBA games aren't going to see every violation that every player does.
The 3 refs don't have to see anything. They still go to the video, and conference. And, really, if the argument against not allowing call-ins is "we may miss some infractions", then it's pretty clear that golf is no longer a "self-policing" sport, right? I mean, it either is self-policing (with an assist from fellow competitors), or it isn't. In that case, I don't want somebody on a couch policing the sport, I want more rules officials on the course. Put a rules official with every group, or watching every player. Isn't that more equitable than this entrapment-style* officiating we have now? Why would we think it's fair to only catch the stuff on camera as opposed to trying to catch every possible infraction there is? I don't care how much it costs, but if it's about catching all possible infractions, get more rules officials, not more viewers.
*explanation of "entrapment style" officiating:
1) I'm going to watch you and closely study if you ever unintentionally break a rule.
2) I can't talk to you (as the viewer, or as an TV analyst), and you can't talk to me, so I can't alert you that you're about to, or you did, break a rule. I just watch you do it.
3) 15 minutes, 2 hours, or 8 hours later, I alert somebody that you broke the rule, and eventually a penalty is assessed.