Should the "Wind moves ball after putter is grounded" rule be changed?

[Zeph]

Again, it doesn't matter for me, I'm primarily thinking of the people playing for millions of dollars. Also, I don't see the point with the rule as it stands today.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Zeph

Again, it doesn't matter for me, I'm primarily thinking of the people playing for millions of dollars. Also, I don't see the point with the rule as it stands today.

Already answered: it makes the rules clear and removes the possibility (I would say likelihood) about what caused the ball to move.

It may suck from time to time but it's a "good" rule overall and removes a grey area that would otherwise exist.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Kieran123

This is the stupidest rule in golf....it moves half a cm and they get penalized?

They didn't touch the ball or have any effect on it's movement.

Needs to be changed.

How do you know this?  The simple act of setting the putter behind the ball can change wind currents enough to cause the ball to move.  In that case it was the player's action which caused the movement.  The wind is just an incidental factor.  A player regularly has to hover his club when playing from a fluffy lie in rough, or from a bunker, so what is the big issue with occasionally having to do it on the putting green?

Everybody wants freebees - nobody wants to play GOLF any more.

[Zeph]

I understand rules that prohibit you from an action that can give you an advantage, but if the ball is going to be replaced in any event, I don't see the point.

[Kieran123]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

How do you know this?  The simple act of setting the putter behind the ball can change wind currents enough to cause the ball to move.  In that case it was the player's action which caused the movement.  The wind is just an incidental factor.  A player regularly has to hover his club when playing from a fluffy lie in rough, or from a bunker, so what is the big issue with occasionally having to do it on the putting green?

Everybody wants freebees - nobody wants to play GOLF any more.

The person standing next to the ball without the putter grounded can change the wind currents too, so why isn't that taken into account?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Kieran123

The person standing next to the ball without the putter grounded can change the wind currents too, so why isn't that taken into account?

Because just standing nearby can't be directly attributed to causing the movement.  Placing the putter in close proximity to the ball can be so attributed.  As a result they draw a precise line to define when the player is deemed as the cause and when he isn't.  That line is the moment when he has completed his address.  It eliminates any doubt as to how it is viewed in the rules and how it is treated as a result.

[bplewis24]

I've read this thread and listed to both sides and I'm still not sure how I feel on this.  In general, I hate a lot of golf rules that are archaic, impractical or plain stupid, but this one does have a practical purpose (it removes the subjectivity of a golfer having to make a distinction between the wind making the ball move or the club touching the ground assisting the wind in making it move, etc).

However, I find it hard to ever have a tournament decided on anything other than skill.  And yesterday it was clearly not the grounded club that caused the ball to move (the ball moved while he was in his backswing).

The only thing that irritates me about the rules of golf is when people attempt to say "that's what's so beautiful about the game."  No, players losing because of the letter of the rule and not the spirit of the rule penalizes them when they've gained no advantage in skill is not beautiful.  The integrity of the player calling a rule on himself is what's beautiful about the game, but as Faldo pointed out, it can be a double-edged sword.  Yesterday we saw the bad side of the strict enforcement of rules.  I would prefer that golfers acknowledge that even if it only happens a small % of the time, it's still the unfortunate bad side of the game, and not the beautiful side.

Brandon

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because just standing nearby can't be directly attributed to causing the movement.  Placing the putter in close proximity to the ball can be so attributed.  As a result they draw a precise line to define when the player is deemed as the cause and when he isn't.  That line is the moment when he has completed his address.  It eliminates any doubt as to how it is viewed in the rules and how it is treated as a result.

What would be the argument against changing the rule to state that if a player grounds the club but makes no attempt to hit the ball, the ball should be moved back to it's original position without penalty?

Essentially what the game is doing now is penalizing a player for grounding his club.  Is that act (grounding the club) historically discouraged in other practices or rules?  I remember reading somewhere that one of the greats (maybe Nicklaus) almost never grounded his club under any circumstances.  Is there some historical perspective that gives insight as to why this is?  Note that I'm thinking more along the lines of a perspective by early rules organizations that frowned upon grounding the club (because it was seen as lacking skill?) and thus devised rules to discourage it, rather than rules like the current one discouraging grounding of the club as a byproduct for enforcing a rule.

Brandon

[zeg]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

What would be the argument against changing the rule to state that if a player grounds the club but makes no attempt to hit the ball, the ball should be moved back to it's original position without penalty?

My objection would be that there shouldn't be an apostrophe in "it's".

But really, I have at least once caused a ball on the putting green to move by grounding a putter a few inches away, just because the ground was a bit soft and it gave enough for the ball to move an inch.  It was clearly my fault, as there was no wind, but the same could happen in windy conditions and lead to a dispute.

I think the examples above where you have to modify your technique to avoid moving a ball in an unstable lie are really apt.  You've got to be flexible enough with your technique to adapt to whatever Mother Nature (and the Evil and Unforgiving Gods of Golf) throw at you.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

What would be the argument against changing the rule to state that if a player grounds the club but makes no attempt to hit the ball, the ball should be moved back to it's original position without penalty?

Essentially what the game is doing now is penalizing a player for grounding his club.  Is that act (grounding the club) historically discouraged in other practices or rules?  I remember reading somewhere that one of the greats (maybe Nicklaus) almost never grounded his club under any circumstances.  Is there some historical perspective that gives insight as to why this is?  Note that I'm thinking more along the lines of a perspective by early rules organizations that frowned upon grounding the club (because it was seen as lacking skill?) and thus devised rules to discourage it, rather than rules like the current one discouraging grounding of the club as a byproduct for enforcing a rule.

Brandon

As I said in my previous post - you don't (or you shouldn't) ground the club in any other situation where it might cause the ball to move, so why should putting be exempt.  And why should it be the only time when you are exempt from blame when you cause the ball at rest to move?  If I am in the process of taking my stance, and the ball is oscillating in the wind, I guarantee you that I'm not going to ground my putter.  The way I see it, the pros can do the same thing, or take the penalty when the ball does move.  They are supposed to be more skilled than I am, so why not show it?

[Kieran123]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

As I said in my previous post - you don't (or you shouldn't) ground the club in any other situation where it might cause the ball to move, so why should putting be exempt.  And why should it be the only time when you are exempt from blame when you cause the ball at rest to move?  If I am in the process of taking my stance, and the ball is oscillating in the wind, I guarantee you that I'm not going to ground my putter.  The way I see it, the pros can do the same thing, or take the penalty when the ball does move.  They are supposed to be more skilled than I am, so why not show it?

Wind gusts are pesky things

[Kieran123]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because just standing nearby can't be directly attributed to causing the movement.  Placing the putter in close proximity to the ball can be so attributed.  As a result they draw a precise line to define when the player is deemed as the cause and when he isn't.  That line is the moment when he has completed his address.  It eliminates any doubt as to how it is viewed in the rules and how it is treated as a result.

But standing where you are can change direction of the wind swirl and force.

Let's look at teeing the ball. You can knock it off the tee by accident, but there is no penalty. You can DIRECTLY affect the ball and be completely responsible for the ball moving, but are not penalized because 'it is not in play'....yet you can address a ball on the putting surface, not have ANY affect ( use common sense here ) and be penalized by something you had no effect on because 'it is in play'.

Maybe the ball should be 'in play' as soon as you tee it up....or, we could all use common sense, and maybe officials could make decisions based on video if the player affected the ball, or would it of moved regardless if the putter was sitting behind it.

Anyway, no matter the opinion, it is the rule.

No one's opinion will change my opinion, which is probably true for everyone else :-)

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Kieran123

Let's look at teeing the ball. You can knock it off the tee by accident, but there is no penalty. You can DIRECTLY affect the ball and be completely responsible for the ball moving, but are not penalized because 'it is not in play'....yet you can address a ball on the putting surface, not have ANY affect ( use common sense here ) and be penalized by something you had no effect on because 'it is in play'.

You are also not penalized for dropping the ball you're going to play in the parking lot before you get to the first tee.  There has to be a moment when the ball is put into play, and it's defined as when you make a stroke.  That's really completely different from the case of a ball in play on the putting green.

You have the option on the putting green to mark and lift the ball to take it out of play if you want to be sure you don't incur a penalty---you can't do that anywhere else on the course, so there's already a provision in the rules to give you extra protection against this sort of penalty.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to the guy who gets hosed by this, because in some cases it really isn't his fault that the ball moved.  But that is tempered when I remember that in my round last week in the 35 mile per hour winds, I had the presence of mind not to touch the ground anywhere near the ball and avoid a penalty when a gust moved the ball a few cm.  In the "my opinion and yours isn't going to change it" category, there are plenty of cases where a player can incur a penalty that's not their fault in the sense that they didn't make some intentional or even particularly careless act, but where extra precaution would have avoided it.  For example, badly missing a putt and striking another ball on the green, duffing a ball into their caddy or equipment, etc.  So I don't think this is particularly unfair, and as I've said before (and mercifully won't say again), avoiding arguments about whether it was the wind or the ground being pressed is more important than the occasional injustice.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

The way I see it, the pros can do the same thing, or take the penalty when the ball does move.  They are supposed to be more skilled than I am, so why not show it?

I have a problem placing 100% of the burden on a golfer to protect themselves against misfortune and happenstance.  I'd much rather burden the outside agency.  I have no problem when it involves a hazard or things under their control.

Brandon

[Kieran123]

Originally Posted by zeg

You are also not penalized for dropping the ball you're going to play in the parking lot before you get to the first tee.  There has to be a moment when the ball is put into play, and it's defined as when you make a stroke.  That's really completely different from the case of a ball in play on the putting green.

You have the option on the putting green to mark and lift the ball to take it out of play if you want to be sure you don't incur a penalty---you can't do that anywhere else on the course, so there's already a provision in the rules to give you extra protection against this sort of penalty.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to the guy who gets hosed by this, because in some cases it really isn't his fault that the ball moved.  But that is tempered when I remember that in my round last week in the 35 mile per hour winds, I had the presence of mind not to touch the ground anywhere near the ball and avoid a penalty when a gust moved the ball a few cm.  In the "my opinion and yours isn't going to change it" category, there are plenty of cases where a player can incur a penalty that's not their fault in the sense that they didn't make some intentional or even particularly careless act, but where extra precaution would have avoided it.  For example, badly missing a putt and striking another ball on the green, duffing a ball into their caddy or equipment, etc.  So I don't think this is particularly unfair, and as I've said before (and mercifully won't say again), avoiding arguments about whether it was the wind or the ground being pressed is more important than the occasional injustice.

Comparing the parking lot and the tee box is kinda null though.

Anyway, that's kinda off topic.

I have a question though. What if you putt the ball and it misses the hole, then the wind gusts and the ball then falls?

In a sense, i guess the wind can help as much as it can hurt.

And what about if you are addressing the ball on the green and the wind blows a stick of something that knocks the ball? Penalty?

[iacas]

I think that I'm changing my opinion of this. Here's one way to think:

I think that the player's integrity should be considered. I think that the player should be able to replace his ball without penalty if he is absolutely certain that he did not cause the ball to move, by pressing down or changing wind patterns.

If someone lies, what have they really gained? Nothing, really - they have to replace their ball and they'll know all of their competitors are going to watch them like hawks for the rest of the round.

Either way, put the ball back where it was and continue.

The problem with that is what about a situation where the ball begins rolling on its own. The wind pushes it a quarter inch, it begins taking a slope, and it rolls on its own closer to or nearer from the hole. It complicates this rule, as "address" provided a clear distinct moment in time which separated "play it from its new spot" to "penalty." What would you do with this rule if you required the ball to be replaced? What if the wind didn't just blow it an inch, but 20 yards?

Perhaps it's simplest just to keep it the way it is?

http://www.golfweek.com/news/2011/may/02/ball-movement-rule-come-under-review/

Quote:

According to Thomas O’Toole, vice president and chairman of the U.S. Golf Association’s Championship Committee, Rule 18-2b has been under consideration to be changed in conjunction with the R&A; and likely will be modified in the rules cycle for 2012.

The change would allow for a ball that moved to be replaced without penalty if the movement were found to be from an outside influence (i.e., gravity or wind) not caused by the player.

So I'm not sure I completely about the specifics... is the point of demarcation between "replace" and "play it as it lies" still when the player addresses the ball?

[Kieran123]

Originally Posted by iacas

I think that I'm changing my opinion of this. Here's one way to think:

I think that the player's integrity should be considered. I think that the player should be able to replace his ball without penalty if he is absolutely certain that he did not cause the ball to move, by pressing down or changing wind patterns.

If someone lies, what have they really gained? Nothing, really - they have to replace their ball and they'll know all of their competitors are going to watch them like hawks for the rest of the round.

Either way, put the ball back where it was and continue.

The problem with that is what about a situation where the ball begins rolling on its own. The wind pushes it a quarter inch, it begins taking a slope, and it rolls on its own closer to or nearer from the hole. It complicates this rule, as "address" provided a clear distinct moment in time which separated "play it from its new spot" to "penalty." What would you do with this rule if you required the ball to be replaced? What if the wind didn't just blow it an inch, but 20 yards?

Perhaps it's simplest just to keep it the way it is?

http://www.golfweek.com/news/2011/may/02/ball-movement-rule-come-under-review/

So I'm not sure I completely about the specifics... is the point of demarcation between "replace" and "play it as it lies" still when the player addresses the ball?

Exactly, how can a player be blamed for the ball moving 20 yards by having their putter grounded? But they can be blamed for it moving half an inch?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Kieran123

Exactly, how can a player be blamed for the ball moving 20 yards by having their putter grounded? But they can be blamed for it moving half an inch?

Uh, that's not really what I said. The current Rules would say "because he grounded his putter" in one instance and didn't in the other.