Rule changes for 2012

[rustyredcab]

The "did I cause it to move?" issue exists now. Imagine you are in tall grass on a hill. You set your feet and start to position your club but do not "address" the ball yet and the ball moves. Your club touched the tops of a clump of grass ten inches from the ball. Did you cause it to move (penalty) or did it just move while you were standing there?

This very good change simply clarifies that grounding your club does not automatically make you guilty of causing it to move.

[ghalfaire]

Originally Posted by zeg

I don't see how this particular rule is any more open to abuse than the myriad other situations where the integrity and honesty of the player is relied upon.  A rules official would presumably gather all the available evidence, interview the player and any witnesses, etc, and make a ruling.  The same thing would happen if there were a dispute over whether a player kicked his ball prior to address.

I suppose you're correct. This rule won't be abused anymore than others are now and is probably more fair than the old rule.   But sometimes it is difficult to determine just what did cause the ball to move.

[Kobey]

Problem solved.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

So long as folks realize they cannot improve their lie.  If I'm in a competition and I see a guy take a rake into the bunker and start raking anywhere near his ball before he takes his shot, I would certainly be suspicious, and would call him on it.  The intent, as I understand it, is to allow someone who didn't get out of a bunker on his first shot to rake his first area, then proceed to his new position in the bunker without penalty. Or perhaps to rake his footprints in walking to his ball, then exiting from the bunker in another place after his shot.

I don't like this new rule because improving the lie was only one aspect of the prohibition against touching the sand,  The other part was testing the surface and this seems to give players carte blanche to test the surface under the guise of raking the bunker.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by turtleback

I don't like this new rule because improving the lie was only one aspect of the prohibition against touching the sand,  The other part was testing the surface and this seems to give players carte blanche to test the surface under the guise of raking the bunker.

You mean that you can't tell what sort of sand you have just by digging in while taking your stance?  I can get a useful idea just from walking into the bunker.  Cleaning up after some idiot ahead of you while waiting to play isn't going to give you any more info that that.  Just be very careful that you don't rake the area of your lie, stance, intended swing, or line of play.

[luu5]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Just be very careful that you don't rake the area of your lie, stance, intended swing, or line of play.

This is quite interesting, at least in theory. IIRC Camillo Villegas was penalised for repairing ball mark on foregreen as it could have affected his line of play, even though the ball was nowhere near. So if you rake the bunker before your shot and the ball ends up back in the bunker this would result in similar situation. Of course, bunker is not fore green nor fairway.

[iacas]

Here's one some people missed:

14-3/17 Player Listens to Music or Broadcast During Round (New): This Decision represents a change in position by the R&A; and USGA, as to date it has not been a breach of the Rules to listen to music during a round. This new position prohibits listening to music for a “prolonged period” as doing so might help the player with his tempo or block distractions.

I find that one interesting. One of the kids on the high school golf team used to listen to music between and even during shots. Now he can't.

I do wonder what a "prolonged period" of time is, though.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by luu5

This is quite interesting, at least in theory. IIRC Camillo Villegas was penalised for repairing ball mark on foregreen as it could have affected his line of play, even though the ball was nowhere near. So if you rake the bunker before your shot and the ball ends up back in the bunker this would result in similar situation. Of course, bunker is not fore green nor fairway.

Camilo repaired the spot while the ball was in motion. Big difference.

I don't know what a "foregreen" is and he didn't "repair a ball mark". He moved divots out of the way and in general cleaned up the area his ball was likely to roll into (and again, it was in motion at the time).

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

You mean that you can't tell what sort of sand you have just by digging in while taking your stance?  I can get a useful idea just from walking into the bunker.  Cleaning up after some idiot ahead of you while waiting to play isn't going to give you any more info that that.  Just be very careful that you don't rake the area of your lie, stance, intended swing, or line of play.

If you could get full information just by walking in and taking your stance there would be no reason for the rule against testing the surface in the first place, no?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by turtleback

If you could get full information just by walking in and taking your stance there would be no reason for the rule against testing the surface in the first place, no?

Just think about it.  You are getting to the point of arguing for its own sake now.  If there was no prohibition at all then you'd have players using a probe to test the area directly around the ball.  The allowance for raking is solely for the betterment of the golf course, and anything done beyond that can still be perceived as testing the condition of the hazard.  You can't do anything so close to the ball that it might be considered as improving your lie or stance, nor can you still do anything to actually test the condition of the hazard.  You still can't ground your club in the hazard, you can't take practice swings and hit the sand.  You are taking the argument beyond the point of reason.  Although I haven't read the official wording yet, I'd bet that you still can't rake to repair any changes caused by you, either by walking in, digging in, or even to rake out the crater your ball left when it landed (isn't that tantamount to repairing a pitch mark?)  Any damage you make still has to be left until you have played your shot.  I'd also bet that there will be a quick decision which prohibits raking out "imaginary" footprints for the sole purpose of testing the sand.  They may not even consider such a decision necessary, as that act would be an obvious breach.

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Although I haven't read the official wording yet, I'd bet that you still can't rake to repair any changes caused by you, either by walking in, digging in, or even to rake out the crater your ball left when it landed (isn't that tantamount to repairing a pitch mark?)  Any damage you make still has to be left until you have played your shot.

FWIW, the new rules do allow you to rake footsteps made by walking in *before* your shot is played, provided it does not breach rule 13-2 (does not improve your lie, area of intended stance or swing, or line of play):

Originally Posted by Principal Changes Introduced in the 2012 Code

Rule 13-4. Ball in Hazard; Prohibited Actions

Exception 2 to Rule 13-4 is amended to permit a player to smooth sand or soil in a hazard at any time, including before playing from that hazard, provided it is for the sole purpose of caring for the course and Rule 13-2 is not breached.

Originally Posted by 2011 rules, exception (2) to rule 13-4:

After making the stroke, if the ball is still in the hazard or has been lifted from the hazard and may be dropped or placed in the hazard, the player may smooth sand or soil in the hazard, provided nothing is done to breach Rule 13-2 with respect to his next stroke.

Originally Posted by 2012 rules, exception (2) to rule 13-4:

At any time, the player may smooth sand or soil in a hazard provided this is for the sole purpose of caring for the course and nothing is done to breach Rule 13-2 with respect to his next stroke.

I guess this new rule would apply if you were going to take a different path exiting the bunker than you did entering, else why not just rake your footprints on the way out after your shot...

[bunkerputt]

Originally Posted by iacas

I do wonder what a "prolonged period" of time is, though.

I don't know, but I'm sure a Phish jam is prohibited.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by iacas

Here's one some people missed:

I find that one interesting. One of the kids on the high school golf team used to listen to music between and even during shots. Now he can't.

I do wonder what a "prolonged period" of time is, though.

It is relatively clearly described in the Dec 14/3-17, should you wish to read it

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

It is relatively clearly described in the Dec 14/3-17, should you wish to read it

Yeah. "Prolonged period" still isn't given a real definition, but it's good to see that they say not at all when making a stroke because it can block distractions. And their examples of short enough time periods are relatively short.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by iacas

Yeah. "Prolonged period" still isn't given a real definition, but it's good to see that they say not at all when making a stroke because it can block distractions. And their examples of short enough time periods are relatively short.

Yeah.  It's pretty clear that you can no longer just plug in and tune out the world for an entire round.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by iacas

Yeah. "Prolonged period" still isn't given a real definition, but it's good to see that they say not at all when making a stroke because it can block distractions. And their examples of short enough time periods are relatively short.

How would you define 'prolonged period' accurately...? IMO the idea of this Dec is very straightforward and sheds some light on an area not previously covered sufficiently.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

How would you define 'prolonged period' accurately...? IMO the idea of this Dec is very straightforward and sheds some light on an area not previously covered sufficiently.

Seriously? "Five minutes" is a pretty accurate definition of time. As is "2:00." And if they were worried about someone listening for 5 minutes, turning it off for two seconds, and starting 5:00 again, they could say "5:00 every 30-minute period" (or 60-minutes, or 20, or whatever).

[rustyredcab]

Odd that it is a rule about listening music and broadcast and not about wearing headphones or listening to a recording that are not music. So it seems that you could wear noise-canceling headphones or ear buds and just cut all outside noise. Or is that using an artificial devise? Did they also mean to leave room for listening to recorded voices?

Those kids who have been listening to music, will they switch to silence? Will earplugs be banned as an artificial devise? What about recordings of their coaches repeating a mantra or affirmations as long as it is not advise, sung, or broadcast? "You're consistent enough. You're long enough. You're good enough. And by golly, people like you."

The entire language of "broadcast" seems so dated and the rule is not even in effect yet. Is a podcast a broadcast? Is a recording from your iCloud account a broadcast? Does it move from a broadcast to a recording if the content is streamed to your cache before you hear it -- sort of a recording of a broadcast that happened a few seconds ago?

As carefully and slowly and the rules change, this seems an odd one to me. But, I'm 52 years old. Was this a problem somewhere or with younger players?

14-3/17 Player Listens to Music or Broadcast During Round (New): This Decision represents a change in position by the R&A; and USGA, as to date it has not been a breach of the Rules to listen to music during a round. This new position prohibits listening to music for a “prolonged period” as doing so might help the player with his tempo or block distractions.