Jump to content
IGNORED

snedeker's ball moved on hole 12


toroboy
Note: This thread is 3893 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

In the Canadian open Snedeker's ball moved and I haven't seen any comment.  The camera zoomed in on his ball in the debris.  At that moment someone out of frame ticked the adjacent log--I presume it was Snedeker and the ball moved----100% sure on this for we replayed it many times on HD.  Ball moved.  The next time we saw the ball Snedeker had already removed said log and other twigs from area behind ball.  What is the rule?  Player hits debris either inadvertently or not and ball moves.  Ball movement may only have been seen by camera.  Same debris is then removed prior to shot.  Hole 12. 2-shot penalty or dq since he signed the card?  This will be big and maybe you heard it here first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I didn't see this, so I probably shouldn't comment, but yes, if your ball moves while moving loose impediments through the green it's a penalty.   If the movement could only be seen because of HD, and it was not reasonable for the player to have seen the movement then it's still a penalty but no DQ for signing an incorrect card.

33-7/4.5

Competitor Unaware of Penalty Returns Wrong Score; Whether Waiving or Modifying Disqualification Penalty Justified

Q. A competitor returns his score card. It later transpires that the score for one hole is lower than actually taken due to his failure to include a penalty stroke(s) which he did not know he had incurred. The error is discovered before the competition has closed.

Would the Committee be justified, under Rule 33-7 , in waiving or modifying the penalty of disqualification prescribed in Rule 6-6d ?

A. Generally, the disqualification prescribed by Rule 6-6d must not be waived or modified.

However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d . The penalty stroke(s) associated with the breach would, however, be applied to the hole where the breach occurred.

For example, in the following scenarios, the Committee would be justified in waiving the disqualification penalty:

  • A competitor makes a short chip from the greenside rough. At the time, he and his fellow-competitors have no reason to suspect that the competitor has double-hit his ball in breach of Rule 14-4 . After the competitor has signed and returned his score card, a close-up, super-slow-motion video replay reveals that the competitor struck his ball twice during the course of the stroke. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate for the Committee to waive the disqualification penalty and apply the one-stroke penalty under Rule 14-4 to the competitor's score at the hole in question.
  • After a competitor has signed and returned his score card, it becomes known, through the use of a high-definition video replay, that the competitor unknowingly touched a few grains of sand with his club at the top of his backswing on a wall of the bunker. The touching of the sand was so light that, at the time, it was reasonable for the competitor to have been unaware that he had breached Rule 13-4 . It would be appropriate for the Committee to waive the disqualification penalty and apply the two-stroke penalty to the competitor's score at the hole in question.
  • A competitor moves his ball on the putting green with his finger in the act of removing his ball-marker. The competitor sees the ball move slightly forward but is certain that it has returned to the original spot, and he plays the ball as it lies. After the competitor signs and returns his score card, video footage is brought to the attention of the Committee that reveals that the ball did not precisely return to its original spot. When questioned by the Committee, the competitor cites the fact that the position of the logo on the ball appeared to be in exactly the same position as it was when he replaced the ball and this was the reason for him believing that the ball returned to the original spot. As it was reasonable in these circumstances for the competitor to have no doubt that the ball had returned to the original spot, and because the competitor could not himself have reasonably discovered otherwise prior to signing and returning his score card, it would be appropriate for the Committee to waive the disqualification penalty. The two-stroke penalty under Rule 20-3a for playing from a wrong place would, however, be applied to the competitor's score at the hole in question.

A Committee would not be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving or modifying the disqualification penalty prescribed in Rule 6-6d if the competitor's failure to include the penalty stroke(s) was a result of either ignorance of the Rules or of facts that the competitor could have reasonably discovered prior to signing and returning his score card.

For example, in the following scenarios, the Committee would not be justified in waiving or modifying the disqualification penalty:

  • As a competitor's ball is in motion, he moves several loose impediments in the area in which the ball will likely come to rest. Unaware that this action is a breach of Rule 23-1 , the competitor fails to include the two-stroke penalty in his score for the hole. As the competitor was aware of the facts that resulted in his breaching the Rules, he should be disqualified under Rule 6-6d for failing to include the two-stroke penalty under Rule 23-1 .
  • A competitor's ball lies in a water hazard. In making his backswing for the stroke, the competitor is aware that his club touched a branch in the hazard. Not realising at the time that the branch was detached, the competitor did not include the two-stroke penalty for a breach of Rule 13-4 in his score for the hole. As the competitor could have reasonably determined the status of the branch prior to signing and returning his score card, the competitor should be disqualified under Rule 6-6d for failing to include the two-stroke penalty under Rule 13-4 . (Revised)

Regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I saw it. Other players and caddies were searching for another ball 20 feet or so away. Looked to me like someone over there stepped on a long branch/log that shook. Not sure if the ball actually moved or not, but without the camera on it, no one could have possibly known that someone walking 20 feet away may have caused the ball to move.....and there was no way to tell who may have stepped on the long branch in question because no one was anywhere near the ball at the time....they were all looking for the other ball.

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Kid in the world junior amateurs called this penalty on himself during the match play championship this afternoon.  Hope it was honest mistake by Sned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Snedeker has called penalties on himself in the past that cost him.  If he caused the ball to move I think he'd own up to it.  Not sure what the ruling is if another golfer causes it to move but that is likely what happened.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

tj I need to respond.  I noticed Snedeker "milling around" in the brush after he had discovered his ball.  Was the step on a long branch/log inadvertent?  What if he saw the ball next to log and needed a "shake loose" maneuver.  Other cameras and angles are needed to correlate Snedeker's movements.  Remember at that time Johnson had not hit OB yet.  I don't think HD is even needed to see this movement. Any DVR will do.  It's shocking I know, but in the heat of the moment poor decisions are made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by toroboy

tj I need to respond.  I noticed Snedeker "milling around" in the brush after he had discovered his ball.  Was the step on a long branch/log inadvertent?  What if he saw the ball next to log and needed a "shake loose" maneuver.  Other cameras and angles are needed to correlate Snedeker's movements.  Remember at that time Johnson had not hit OB yet.  I don't think HD is even needed to see this movement. Any DVR will do.  It's shocking I know, but in the heat of the moment poor decisions are made.

Lingmerth had hit out of bounds ahead of Snedeker.  They were both looking for their ball and trying to determine if they were playable at the same time.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

That is true.  But Snedeker had found his ball and was then ostensibly helping to find Lingmerth's ball.  Lingmerth's ball was 20 yards away.  Snedeker was the only one near the log---however it is possible for someone to have jumped in and hit the log.  The salient point is the next view shows all clean dirt right behind the ball and the log and brush all gone.  "Improve you lie, sir." (caddyshack)  I have OCD.  In that tense situation I would be yelling at people to stay away from that log----the ball microns away from a 6 inch diameter log.  In the close up the branch/log shook and the ball rotated.  I was surprised when the next view showed a nice clearing---the clearing made while everyone was looking at the Lingmerth situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


That is true.  But Snedeker had found his ball and was then ostensibly helping to find Lingmerth's ball.  Lingmerth's ball was 20 yards away.  Snedeker was the only one near the log---however it is possible for someone to have jumped in and hit the log.  The salient point is the next view shows all clean dirt right behind the ball and the log and brush all gone.  "Improve you lie, sir." (caddyshack)  I have OCD.  In that tense situation I would be yelling at people to stay away from that log----the ball microns away from a 6 inch diameter log.  In the close up the branch/log shook and the ball rotated.  I was surprised when the next view showed a nice clearing---the clearing made while everyone was looking at the Lingmerth situation.

You completely missed the process wherein Snedeker moved the log, a loose impediment. That entire process was on camera and there was NO problem with it.

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

All I smell here is a conspiracy theory.  If there were several people searching in the general area and the camera was not on them at that moment, there is no way to tell who moved the ball, or if it indeed did move.  You can't call a breach on what may be unwarranted suspicion.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

All I smell here is a conspiracy theory.  If there were several people searching in the general area and the camera was not on them at that moment, there is no way to tell who moved the ball, or if it indeed did move.  You can't call a breach on what may be unwarranted suspicion.

Exactly.

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

to 4 putt: yes I am way out there on this.

to David:  yes, that's exactly the point.  The ball was shaken loose of the log by the unknown "stepper".  My guess is that it was Snedeker acting like he's helping the other search---and unaware of the camera focused in on the ball at that exact moment.  The step and vibration a few minutes prior to the clearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by toroboy

to 4 putt: yes I am way out there on this.

to David:  yes, that's exactly the point.  The ball was shaken loose of the log by the unknown "stepper".  My guess is that it was Snedeker acting like he's helping the other search---and unaware of the camera focused in on the ball at that exact moment.  The step and vibration a few minutes prior to the clearing.

You join the site for no other reason than to try and create some controversy?   Something smells.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

join yes. start something no.  It went down like this.  I saw the limb move and I thought I saw the ball slightly move, and I thought why is anyone even near the limb adjacent to the ball.  Just before this I asked my brother " why is Snedeker wandering his ball is right there. " I felt great satisfaction in proving to my brother that the ball moved---after 3 rewinds.  My brother is the golfer who suspected nefarious activity.  A lot to be gained by stepping on the log to see if it is a movable impediment.  Anyway I joined because I just couldn't find any discussion on the web about it even moving--the whole speculation about cheating came later.  And yes I do smell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by toroboy

In the Canadian open Snedeker's ball moved and I haven't seen any comment.  The camera zoomed in on his ball in the debris.  At that moment someone out of frame ticked the adjacent log--I presume it was Snedeker and the ball moved----100% sure on this for we replayed it many times on HD.  Ball moved.  The next time we saw the ball Snedeker had already removed said log and other twigs from area behind ball.  What is the rule?  Player hits debris either inadvertently or not and ball moves.  Ball movement may only have been seen by camera.  Same debris is then removed prior to shot.  Hole 12. 2-shot penalty or dq since he signed the card?  This will be big and maybe you heard it here first.

Did you call it in?  Or just post it here?  The Rules Officials are not reading this website during the tournaments.

Bag: Titleist
Driver: TM RBZ 9.5
Fairway metals: TM RBZ 3 wood
Hybrids: TM RBZ 3, 4 and 5
Irons: TM Burner 1.0 6 thru LW stiff steel shafts
Putter: Ping B60
Ball: TM Tour Preferred X or ProV1x
Check out littlejohngolfleague.com  A Greater Houston TX traveling golf league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't know how to call it in.  I was sure others had seen it move.  I am taping the replay and will definitely investigate Snedeker's movements.  I think the network will have the answer on unused angles---answers as to the whereabouts of Snedeker when the log vibrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't know how to call it in.  I was sure others had seen it move.  I am taping the replay and will definitely investigate Snedeker's movements.  I think the network will have the answer on unused angles---answers as to the whereabouts of Snedeker when the log vibrated.

Others did see it. And other than you, I haven't heard anyone that saw any breach that could be attributed to Snedeker or his caddie. BTW....there was a rules official right there the entire time.

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3893 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Makes sense.  Like I said, I wouldn't have been upset at their original offer either, and based on the fine print it seems like they've held up their end of the deal.  
    • If you've only had to adjust retroactively one time in 8 years and have around 5 people each year without handicaps, that's like 40-50 people total so it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job. I think your questions give enough to go off of. This might be a good way to get new people to actually post a few scores during the 6 weeks leading into the first event. Something like "New members will be eligible for tournament money once they have at least 3 posted rounds in GHIN" or something like that. If they can get 3 rounds in prior to their first event, then they're eligible. If not, they'll soon become eligible after an event or two assuming they play a little bit outside of events.
    • This is a loooooong winded narrative so if you don't like long stories, move on. 😉 Our senior club typically gets about 25 new members each year. We lose about 25 members each year for various reasons (moved to FL/AZ, disabled, dead, too expensive). Of the new members, usually 20 have an active GHIN handicap. About 5 each year do not have a GHIN handicap. When they join our club, we give each member a state association membership that includes GHIN handicapping services. We play a series of handicapped tournaments over the summer. When we sign up a new member who does not have a GHIN handicap, we attempt to give them an estimated index until they have sufficient scores posted to have an actual GHIN index.  Our first event typically is around May 15 so, in theory, a new member has about 6 weeks to post a few scores. Posting season in the Mitten starts April 1. Inevitably, several of the unhandicapped individuals seem  to either not play until the first tournament or can't figure out how to enter scores (hey, they are seniors). That situation then leads to my contacting the new member and asking a series of questions: a. Did you ever have a GHIN handicap? If yes, which State and do you recall what it was? b. Do you have an alternate handicap through a non-GHIN handicap service or a league? c. What do you think your average score was last year (for 9 or 18) d. What was your best score last year? Where did you play and which tee was used? e. What do you consider a very good score for yourself? Based on their responses I attempt to give them an index that makes them competitive in the first couple events BUT does not allow them to win their flight in the first couple events. We don't want the new members to finish last and at the same time, we don't want someone with a "20" playing handicap to win the third flight with a net 57. In the event some new member did shoot a net 57, we also advise everyone that we can and will adjust handicaps retroactively when it is clear to us that a member's handicap does not accurately reflect their potential. We don't like to adjust things retroactively and in the 8 years I have chaired the Handicap Committee, we have only done it once. So here are the questions to the mob: Any ideas how to do this better? Any questions one might ask an unhandicapped individual to better estimate their index/handicap? Would it be reasonable to have a new player play once (or more?) without being eligible to place in the money?
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Awesome! I got that a while back with my start word! Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...