or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › New Decision - Ball Movement on Camera
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Decision - Ball Movement on Camera

post #1 of 104
Thread Starter 

http://golfweek.com/news/2013/nov/19/usga-r-a-rule-golf-change-penalty-camera-ball-move/

 

Quote:

Players will not be penalized under the Rules of Golf if their ball moves and it wasn’t obvious to the naked eye, the USGA and R&A have decided.

The governing bodies have introduced a new decision, 18/4, so that players are not penalized under Rule 18-2 (“Ball at Rest Moved: By Player, Partner, Caddie or Equipment”) if a ball changes location and the movement could not have been seen without the use of enhanced technological evidence.

In a joint statement, the USGA and R&A said: “New Decision 18/4 provides that, where enhanced technological evidence (e.g. HDTV, digital recording or online visual media, etc.) shows that a ball has left its position and come to rest in another location, the ball will not be deemed to have moved if that movement was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time.”

post #2 of 104

I like it.  I think it's the fairest way to go, and it puts the weight of honesty back on the player.

 

I think I know what its popular name will be.  It will be called the "Tiger Woods Rule", even though he isn't the only player who has been affected by it.  The next thing that will be said is that it never would have been changed if it hadn't happened to him.  

 

However it came about, it's a good decision.

post #3 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post
 

I like it.  I think it's the fairest way to go, and it puts the weight of honesty back on the player.

 

I think I know what its popular name will be.  It will be called the "Tiger Woods Rule", even though he isn't the only player who has been affected by it.  The next thing that will be said is that it never would have been changed if it hadn't happened to him.

 

However it came about, it's a good decision.

 

Wholeheartedly agree.

 

I also like the change to 27-2a/1.5.   I'd bet that that's one rule that's violated out of ignorance all the time.  I understand the reasoning, but there are times when you don't even suspect that a ball might be lost until you've moved forward a bit, and/or received some input from another player.

post #4 of 104
Thread Starter 
post #5 of 104

From the USGA:

 

Quote:

Among the changes for 2014-2015, four decisions are particularly noteworthy:

  • New Decision 14-3/18 confirms that players can access reports on weather conditions on a smartphone during a round without breaching the Rules. Importantly, this new Decision also clarifies that players are permitted to access information on the threat of an impending storm in order to protect their own safety.
  • New Decision 18/4 provides that, where enhanced technological evidence (e.g. HDTV, digital recording or online visual media, etc.) shows that a ball has left its position and come to rest in another location, the ball will not be deemed to have moved if that movement was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time. 
  • Revised Decision 25-2/0.5 helps to clarify when a golf ball is considered to be embedded in the ground through the use of illustrations.  
  • Revised Decision 27-2a/1.5 allows a player to go forward up to approximately 50 yards without forfeiting his or her right to go back and play a provisional ball.

 

post #6 of 104

I see some potential discussions here;

  • Decision 14-3/18 - does that include information on wind and direction?  At what point do they just allow smart phones to be used for GPS?
  • Decision 18/4 - does this decision address the issue with Tiger in Chicago or is it more directed at the problem Harrington had when the ball moved forward then back (but not fully) on the green and he was DQ'd?
post #7 of 104

 

I think this is a necessary evil because of the constant improvement in technology.  We are getting to the point where any movement of the ball, no matter how undiscernable to the naked eye, will be able to be detected through hi-res images and measuring technology.  I've made this point before and it is refreshing to see the powers that be take a common sense approach to what was an sticky issue.

post #8 of 104
Thread Starter 
post #9 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

I see some potential discussions here;

  • Decision 14-3/18 - does that include information on wind and direction?  At what point do they just allow smart phones to be used for GPS?
  • Decision 18/4 - does this decision address the issue with Tiger in Chicago or is it more directed at the problem Harrington had when the ball moved forward then back (but not fully) on the green and he was DQ'd?

 

14-3/18 Weather apps do not measure or gauge anything. They simply report information. The prohibition is on measuring ot gauging.

 

18/4 Will address any movement that was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time.

post #10 of 104
Thread Starter 

The one that makes sense to me is that compasses are no longer prohibited.

post #11 of 104

Quote:

 

Originally Posted by MEfree View Post
 

...

With that said, I think rules need to adapt to modern technology.  

 

i.e. Suppose, 10 years from now, high tech cameras existed that showed that 50% or more of golf balls moved every so slightly before being struck- the movement is not visible to the naked eye, but could be proved with the new high tech cameras.   

 

If this was the case, then I think the ball moving rule would need to be amended- sure, it is more black and white to have a bright line rule that says any movement= penalty and no movement= no penalty, but if the majority (or even a significant minority) of balls are shown to move ever so slightly, then the rule would need to be re-written to account for this.  Even now, some might argue that we should not penalize unintentional movement that is less than a ball and does not result in an improved lie.  

 

Edit- Going to the speeding examples, if modern technology could show every instance of when someone was 0.1 mph over the speed limit, then it would make sense to have a certain grace margin built into the law before tickets were issued.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

MEfree, we'll cross that bridge if we get to it. There's no point in discussing it now.

 

I guess some of my thoughts are just a bit before their time...

 

It will be interesting to see what they consider "reasonably discernible to the naked eye"  Whose eye?  From what distance/perspective?  What if you see the ball move, but are unsure whether it moved back to its original position (oscillated)?  What if the ball moves while the player or his caddy are not looking at it? 

 

A total of 87 changes have been made to the Decisions on the Rules of Golf that will go into effect for the 2014-15 cycle.

post #12 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

I see some potential discussions here;

  • Decision 14-3/18 - does that include information on wind and direction?  At what point do they just allow smart phones to be used for GPS?
  • Decision 18/4 - does this decision address the issue with Tiger in Chicago or is it more directed at the problem Harrington had when the ball moved forward then back (but not fully) on the green and he was DQ'd?

I just read 18/4 (thanks for the link ruleman) and it is DEAD ON re Tiger's situation.

 

Q. A player addresses his ball. He observes a slight motion of the ball but 
believes that it has only oscillated and has not left its original position. He 
therefore plays the ball as it lies. Later, the Committee becomes aware from 
television evidence that the ball had in fact left its position and come to rest 
in another place, although that change of position was such that it was not 
reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time of the incident. What is 
the ruling?

 

Here is 14-3/18

14-3/18 
Weather Information Accessed on Multi-Functional Device 
 
Q. During a stipulated round, may a player access local weather information 
(e.g. wind, temperature, humidity) through an application or internet 
browser on a multi-functional device? 
 
A. Yes. The prohibition in Rule 14-3 is only applicable to the specific act of 
gauging or measuring conditions that might affect a player’s play (e.g. through 
use of an anemometer or a thermometer). When accessing weather reports 
provided by a weather station through an application or internet browser, 
the player is not actively measuring or gauging the conditions. (New) 

post #13 of 104

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree View Post
 

I guess some of my thoughts are just a bit before their time...

 

It will be interesting to see what they consider "reasonably discernible to the naked eye"  Whose eye?  From what distance/perspective?  What if you see the ball move, but are unsure whether it moved back to its original position (oscillated)?  What if the ball moves while the player or his caddy are not looking at it? 

 

A total of 87 changes have been made to the Decisions on the Rules of Golf that will go into effect for the 2014-15 cycle.

I think most cases will be covered by answering the simple question of:  Did we need high-definition, slow motion replay to see that the "violation" occurred?  If yes, then it isn't reasonably discernible.

 

The question of "from what perspective" makes me wonder something... can caddies tell their player that they violated a rule?  I could see reasonable arguments for both answers.  

post #14 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post
 

I guess some of my thoughts are just a bit before their time...

 

Spare us the lameness of attempting to pat yourself on the back for speculating on the obvious. :-P

 

I said we'd discuss it if we got there, and that there was no point in discussing it prior to that point.

 

There wasn't. We got there. Discuss away.

post #15 of 104

What will Brandy Chamblee say?

 

I am glad they went this way.  

post #16 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post
 

I like it.  I think it's the fairest way to go, and it puts the weight of honesty back on the player.

 

I think I know what its popular name will be.  It will be called the "Tiger Woods Rule", even though he isn't the only player who has been affected by it.  The next thing that will be said is that it never would have been changed if it hadn't happened to him.

 

However it came about, it's a good decision.

 

Wholeheartedly agree.

 

I also like the change to 27-2a/1.5.   I'd bet that that's one rule that's violated out of ignorance all the time.  I understand the reasoning, but there are times when you don't even suspect that a ball might be lost until you've moved forward a bit, and/or received some input from another player.

 

The rule already allowed some flexibility.  This just extends it a bit farther from the point where the shot was hit.  It is still limited, simply because of the purpose of the provisional ball, which is to save time.  If your delay in playing the provisional ball is such that no significant time is saved, then it is no longer a provisional ball.


Edited by Fourputt - 11/19/13 at 1:45pm
post #17 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

I see some potential discussions here;

  • Decision 14-3/18 - does that include information on wind and direction?  At what point do they just allow smart phones to be used for GPS?
  • Decision 18/4 - does this decision address the issue with Tiger in Chicago or is it more directed at the problem Harrington had when the ball moved forward then back (but not fully) on the green and he was DQ'd?

 

14-3/18 Weather apps do not measure or gauge anything. They simply report information. The prohibition is on measuring ot gauging.

 

 

Yes, but weather apps report information that was obtained via measuring. It's a pretty fine line.

post #18 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacm3bill View Post
 

 

Yes, but weather apps report information that was obtained via measuring. It's a pretty fine line.

 

Your phone/equipment is not doing the measuring. No fine line to me.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rules of Golf
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › New Decision - Ball Movement on Camera