What's Your Call on This?

[Vinsk]

Thomas claimed he didn’t intend to make a stroke. But he did. Perhaps he didn’t mean to complete the stroke. Somewhat like when Kevin Na would bail out of his drive and swing way over the ball and say he wasn’t making an intentional stroke. Your thoughts?

I think I agree with the announcer. He was distracted apparently, but he made a stroke and hit the ball. Shouldn’t have been given a re-hit.

[iacas]

Paula Creamer bailed on a stroke but still hit the ball, and she was allowed to replay it, but I think even that one was perhaps handled incorrectly (it was a long time ago, and she just topped it, she didn't actually miss). I will also say that if you intentionally miss (and a PGA Tour player missing a driver by six inches is an intentional miss), it's not a stroke.

The rules definition currently is: "The forward movement of the club made to strike the ball." It used to say the stroke had to be made "with the intention to hit the ball" and included language for when/if "a player checks his swing" or something like that.

I think the first and second rules officials tried to apply 13.1d - ball at rest accidentally moved (on a putting green), which is to replace and not count the stroke.

But it wasn't accidental. That he couldn't stop in time isn't an "accident." It's just an aborted swing that he didn't abort in time.

The stroke should have counted.

---

Officials are humans too.

[nevets88]

The way he said "My version?".

[Vinsk]

I think simplest version is ‘my stroke got messed up because a kid coughed in my backswing.’ Unfortunately that doesn’t mean you get a re-do.

[nevets88]

Is there sort of precedence in rulings like in law? Since this ruling happened, does it influence what future ruling officials do or is it more a case by case individual thing? So let's say the same exact thing happens in the next Korn Ferry tour event. Pretty much depends on who the official is?

[DaveP043]

I've been told in a couple of workshops that there are two kinds of officials.  There are those who have made an incorrect ruling, and those who WILL make an incorrect ruling.  As I read the definition of Stroke, if Pieters began the forward motion intending to hit the ball, and couldn't stop himself from hitting the ball, its a stroke.  if he decided during the backswing, its not a stroke.  A putt is an ingrained motion, back and forward, so I suppose its possible to decide during the backswing, but be unable to physically react quickly enough to halt the forward swing.  That seems unlikely to me.

[Nave]

Like above comments, once you’ve set up with the intention to hit the ball - everything that comes after that intentional setup should count. If you’re good enough to accurately hit a tiny ball hundreds of yards - then you’re good enough to stop your swing before hitting the ball. As some people say, golf is as much a mental game as it is a game of striking the ball consistently. 

Edited September 25, 2022 by Nave

[DaveP043]

10 minutes ago, Nave said:

Like above comments, once you’ve set up with the intention to hit the ball - everything that comes after that intentional setup should count

What we think "should count" doesn't really matter, the rules define what does count.  The rules define Stroke as a forward movement of the club, as @iacas quoted earlier.  Set up doesn't  matter, back swing doesn't matter, it can't be a stroke until you start the forward swing.  Even then, if you intentionally stop or intentionally miss the ball, its not a Stroke.  Based on what I know, and I haven't heard the conversation with the officials, I believe Pieters made a stroke, he was the beneficiary of an incorrect ruling.  Incorrect based on the rules, not on what I think should count.

[DrvFrShow]

So what do you do when people use this as a precedent? And it will happen.

[iacas]

On 9/25/2022 at 7:03 PM, DrvFrShow said:

So what do you do when people use this as a precedent? And it will happen.

They clarified that the ruling the official gave was wrong.

So… you cite that.

[Ruler]

On 9/25/2022 at 9:58 PM, nevets88 said:

Is there sort of precedence in rulings like in law? Since this ruling happened, does it influence what future ruling officials do or is it more a case by case individual thing? So let's say the same exact thing happens in the next Korn Ferry tour event. Pretty much depends on who the official is?

No, I sincerely hope there is no precedence in incorrect rulings, such as this one.

What I am mostly concerned is that there were TWO professional referees who were BOTH wrong. Should not happen, no way.

On 9/27/2022 at 3:44 AM, iacas said:

They clarified that the ruling the official gave was wrong.

Who is "they" ? And where that clarification can be read/seen?

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Ruler said:

Who is "they"?

Pretty sure you can figure that out. 😀

5 hours ago, Ruler said:

And where that clarification can be read/seen?

Thomas Pieters’ crazy chunked-putt saga takes new rules twist | Golf News and Tour Information | GolfDigest.com

Quote

After reviewing the incident soon after Pieters had played the hole, Mark Litton, the DP World Tour chief referee on site decided that under the definition of a stroke, Thomas’ attempt not to strike the ball failed and the fact that he made contact with the ball meant the stroke should have counted. (Litton was not present for the original ruling, according to the DP World Tour). The ball should have been played from the position where it came to rest.

[Ruler]

11 hours ago, iacas said:

Pretty sure you can figure that out. 😀

Would it have hurt if you had answered my question?

Edited September 29, 2022 by Ruler

[DaveP043]

13 minutes ago, Ruler said:

Would it have hurt if you had answered my question?

It looks like he did, and quoted the DP World Tour's chief referee so you could read the reason that the initial was incorrect.   

[iacas]

46 minutes ago, Ruler said:

Would it have hurt if you had answered my question?

As @DaveP043 noted… I did.

[Ruler]

On 9/29/2022 at 5:02 PM, iacas said:

As @DaveP043 noted… I did.

I meant my question "who are they". I bet it would have not taken too much trouble to leave that snarky remark unwritten and just give out the real information, for which I thank you.

[DaveP043]

14 minutes ago, Ruler said:

I meant my question "who are they". I bet it would have not taken too much trouble to leave that snarky remark unwritten and just give out the real information, for which I thank you.

I know @iacas may respond on his own, but I think its up to each of  us to spend a little effort to research stuff.  Here's a more recent explanation of the process, from the Director of Rules for the R&A:

Handling unusual rulings | DP World Tour

---

The R&A seeks to engage in and support activities for the benefit of the sport of golf from The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews.

 

[Double Mocha Man]

On 9/25/2022 at 7:00 AM, Vinsk said:

I think simplest version is ‘my stroke got messed up because a kid coughed in my backswing.’ Unfortunately that doesn’t mean you get a re-do.

Someone coughed during Aaron Judge's impact moment, he still hit his 61st home run.  He didn't ask for a re-do.  Point being, as a golfer, don't let little sounds bother you... play your shot.  Can't tell you how many times I've hit a good shot while my cell phone is ringing (actually piping out a song).  There's a guy I play with who hits the ball better when someone is talking in his backswing.  In fact, he talks in his backswing, too.  I have challenged him to talk in his downswing...