Jump to content
IGNORED

Finchem says PGA Tour is "studying" Call-in Rules Violations


bplewis24
Note: This thread is 3826 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!

0  

  1. 1. How do you feel about viewers and spectators calling in rules violations?

    • Agree with it, always have.
      19
    • Agree with it, disagreed before.
      1
    • Disagree with it, but agreed before.
      5
    • Disagree with it, always have.
      58


Recommended Posts

1-800-EFT-IGER

:dance:

I don't believe they should take calls from viewers.  I have no problem with the PGA Tour having systems in place to observe and monitor for possible infractions though......

  • Upvote 1

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

The only thing that seems "unfair" is if they have to slow mo and zoom way in to see a movement. If it can't be seen in real time at a normal distance how can anyone reasonably assume that the player would see the movement. That's probably where I'd "draw the line" as it were. I would hazard a guess that a large number of players have had their ball move very similar to what Tiger's did however without the advanced technology it was never seen. So yeah, if you have to use advanced technology to prove the ball moved, then probably shouldn't be a penalty, however if it's clear with normal playback that the ball moved then penalize away.

KICK THE FLIP!!

In the bag:
:srixon: Z355

:callaway: XR16 3 Wood
:tmade: Aeroburner 19* 3 hybrid
:ping: I e1 irons 4-PW
:vokey: SM5 50, 60
:wilsonstaff: Harmonized Sole Grind 56 and Windy City Putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

The only thing that seems "unfair" is if they have to slow mo and zoom way in to see a movement. If it can't be seen in real time at a normal distance how can anyone reasonably assume that the player would see the movement. That's probably where I'd "draw the line" as it were. I would hazard a guess that a large number of players have had their ball move very similar to what Tiger's did however without the advanced technology it was never seen. So yeah, if you have to use advanced technology to prove the ball moved, then probably shouldn't be a penalty, however if it's clear with normal playback that the ball moved then penalize away.

They already have a rule for that. New this year, IIRC.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

yes it is out of line. I didn't say he should not occur a penalty. the ball clearly moved when zoomed in on. just like the the person hitting the kid should be punished. I guess what I don't like is the fact all players are not under the watchfull eye of the tv viewing public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


From USA Today:

The number of people calling PGA Tour events after seeing possible rules violations has gone up since Tiger Woods took what turned out to be an illegal drop at the Masters. That doesn't mean the number of violations is increasing.

"The rate of irrelevant call-ins has gone up dramatically, too," said Tyler Dennis, the Tour's vice president of competition.

What might seem like a simple solution — have a rules official monitor the telecast to look for any violations that cause fans to call from home — is not that simple. Years ago, the Tour had one official devoted to watching the tournament on TV and found it to be a waste of time when no one called.

"We constantly talk about it," Dennis said Tuesday. "Because we're running 50-odd events a year, we want to use our resources in the best way we can. It's far better to have someone on the course than having someone watching the telecast."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/golf/2013/05/21/rules-officials-pga-tour-us-open-qualifying/2348703/

It would be nice to have some numbers...

Isn't slow play already an issue for the Tour? If players are calling in rules officials often, how does that help?

Solutions -

1. Unmarked ghost officials randomly following groups

2. Simplify Rules

3. Mandatory Rules Seminars for Players - monthly - anything to get these guys to focus.

4. Rules are Rules - nothing wrong with call-ins; it's whether the PGA Tour Rules Officials screen and pay attention to call-ins. Problem is crank calls. So I'd only give the phone number to former tour players or certain professionals.

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Golf is an odd sport in that you seem to have both rules officials and self-policing.  But when you add in the HD camera that can see things that a player could easily miss--particularly when that thing is as inconsequential as a ball moving 1/8th of an inch, it causes problems.  If Tiger saw his ball move, he could have replaced it for a 1 stroke penalty, right?  Instead he got 2?

Nobody wants to see a rule be violations going unpunished, but the rules are intended to ensure fair play and it isn't exactly fair when you have HD cameras following around some guys much more than others.  Imagine if the NFL employed additional refs to watch out for PI by one team but not the other.

Dan

:tmade: R11s 10.5*, Adila RIP Phenom 60g Stiff
:ping: G20 3W
:callaway: Diablo 3H
:ping:
i20 4-U, KBS Tour Stiff
:vokey: Vokey SM4 54.14 
:vokey: Vokey :) 58.11

:scotty_cameron: Newport 2
:sunmountain: Four 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don't believe they should take calls from viewers.  I have no problem with the PGA Tour having systems in place to observe and monitor for possible infractions though......

LOL, seriously, where do people even get the number???

Colin P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Golf is an odd sport in that you seem to have both rules officials and self-policing.  But when you add in the HD camera that can see things that a player could easily miss--particularly when that thing is as inconsequential as a ball moving 1/8th of an inch, it causes problems.  If Tiger saw his ball move, he could have replaced it for a 1 stroke penalty, right?  Instead he got 2?

Nobody wants to see a rule be violations going unpunished, but the rules are intended to ensure fair play and it isn't exactly fair when you have HD cameras following around some guys much more than others.  Imagine if the NFL employed additional refs to watch out for PI by one team but not the other.

Actually the rules are intended to ensure correct play.  Fairness is never even mentioned as a function of the rules of golf.

Rick

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

It is ignoring the truth. You know something to be true, and you're discarding it simply because it happened to be recorded by a camera and not reported "live" by one or more of a special group of people.

The jury comment was not out of line. Someone runs over a kid. There's no evidence (or it's all circumstantial) that it's them, except that they're caught on tape because this intersection happened to have an ATM at it recording the scene. By your logic, every intersection doesn't have a video camera, so it's unfair to punish the person just because they happened to get caught on tape.

You may play by the rules, but you're letting others escape playing by the rules simply because of how their infractions are noticed.

Of course he doesn;t even KNOW if he is REALLY playing by the rules since he does not have an HD camera following hi every moe which is then scrutinized by thousands.

They already have a rule for that. New this year, IIRC.

The new rule (decision?) prevents disqualification but it does not stop the imposition of  the penalty strokes for a violation not seen by the player but revealed through HD video.  Which is fine with me.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Of course he doesn;t even KNOW if he is REALLY playing by the rules since he does not have an HD camera following hi every moe which is then scrutinized by thousands.

The new rule (decision?) prevents disqualification but it does not stop the imposition of  the penalty strokes for a violation not seen by the player but revealed through HD video.  Which is fine with me.

If he did call a rules official and was given the ok to hit, could they still impose a penalty after? If so that doesn't seem right. Once a ruling is made it should be final.

KICK THE FLIP!!

In the bag:
:srixon: Z355

:callaway: XR16 3 Wood
:tmade: Aeroburner 19* 3 hybrid
:ping: I e1 irons 4-PW
:vokey: SM5 50, 60
:wilsonstaff: Harmonized Sole Grind 56 and Windy City Putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I voted "always have agreed with it", but I could be swayed.

A question for those who are against: Consider a case like Tiger's this weekend, only instead of the ball moving a tiny bit, it moved a couple inches. I.e., in such a way that there can be no doubt that either the player is lying about it having moved, or honestly was not watching the ball when it did. But the camera still caught it. And the player says "No, it didn't move". How would you rule? Point being, no matter how the evidence was obtained, we know the ball moved. So are you only going to go by what the player says, are you only going to go by what the evidence shows, or are you going to take it on a case-by-case basis, and make a judgement call on whether the player should have been able to see the ball move or not?  (Ball movement is just one example - the same questions apply to any rules infraction.)

Seems to me there are serious issues with only going by what the player *believes* happened, and just as serious issues with having to make a judgement call that depends on how much the ball moved, should the player have seen it, etc.

That has always been the way it is, and that is what we should live with. I have always been against people calling in. While they are right in a lot of cases, the scrutiny isn't equitable. Let the player call it himself, and guys in the group or officials can question it. The guys who willfully take advantage will get caught and weeded out.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtleback

Of course he doesn;t even KNOW if he is REALLY playing by the rules since he does not have an HD camera following hi every moe which is then scrutinized by thousands.

The new rule (decision?) prevents disqualification but it does not stop the imposition of  the penalty strokes for a violation not seen by the player but revealed through HD video.  Which is fine with me.

If he did call a rules official and was given the ok to hit, could they still impose a penalty after? If so that doesn't seem right. Once a ruling is made it should be final.

The RO is supposed to use all of the evidence at his disposal to make his ruling.  That includes calling back to the committee and having them check the video evidence, if any.  It doesn't even have to stop play, as the player could invoke rule 3-3 and finish the hole with 2 balls and continue play while waiting for the committee decision.

Rick

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

This is a difficult situation to make a blanket statement and have it cover all of the concerns most of us have.  Do I like the viewer call ins?  Not really.  Can I pass on letting a clear violation go unpenalized just because nobody but the viewing audience saw it?  Nope, can't find any good justification for that either.  I'd rather see better oversight at the event, a crew with no other function than to watch the video feed and make timely calls when there is a question.  The Tour can afford to put a few more bodies on such a job to rotate on fairly short shifts so that boredom doesn't set in.  It's unfortunate that our game seems to have come to this on the professional level, but I think it's time for a bit more proactive involvement by the officiating crews.

Yeah, pretty much agree with this.  While I'm definitely on the side of not allowing or taking call-ins, I'm not happy with the idea of ignoring obvious rules violations either.

Except I disagree with the last sentence.  The only thing that I think the game has "come to" is better and more TV coverage.  What happened to Tiger this year (yes, I know it's not really happened TO him, so much as stuff he's done, but whatever) has always been happening, just not under a microscope.  You don't even have to go back before TV, and , heck, you don't even have to go back to before Tiger ... just take this incident and put it back 6 or 7 years to prior to HD cameras being used for golf coverage.  Then when the worm cam is zoomed into Tiger trying to move the stick, nothing is clearly visible, Tiger says "yeah, I started to move that stick, saw that the ball oscillated, then decided better of it and left it there."  "So, you are sure it only oscillated?  Is it possible that it changed positions?"  "No, not possible, it definitely only oscillated."  And that would be the end of it.  No penalty, no controversy.

The same is true in the NFL with instant replay.  First thing that comes to mind is the game winning touchdown that Calvin Johnson "dropped" a couple of years ago.  That type of thing has always happened, its just that HD and slow motion have come along, and have made everything more visible.

Tiger at the BMW this year? Not a call-in (it wasn't even shown on the broadcast).

Wait, what?!?!?!  While I was typing one of my earlier replies in this thread - last night, golf channel on in the background - they were talking about this exact story in regards to Tim Finchem.  Then they cut to a bunch of players interviews and their reactions to Tiger's penalty.  (Stricker, Dustin Johnson, Watney, Kuchar)  The implication of the story was CLEARLY that Tiger's penalty was a result of a call-in.

If you are correct, then A)  Why would Tim Finchem be saying what he's saying now, and why would it be a big story?  and B)  Why would TGC resort to shady journalism like that?

Who do they think they are ... CNN??  Fox??  MSNBC??  Come on, guys, you're better than that!!!!

1. Unmarked ghost officials randomly following groups

The only reason to have unmarked officials would be to catch people doing things that they wouldn't otherwise do in front of marked officials.  This suggests that there is a cheating problem on the PGA tour.  I disagree with that.  I don't think this is necessary.

If he did call a rules official and was given the ok to hit, could they still impose a penalty after? If so that doesn't seem right. Once a ruling is made it should be final.

I was going to say that calling in a rules official is silly because they are they to help apply and understand the rules, not help make a judgment that they didn't see.  If Tiger says his ball only oscillated, then they kinda have to take Tiger's word for it.  However, fourputt points out that I'm wrong below ...

The RO is supposed to use all of the evidence at his disposal to make his ruling.  That includes calling back to the committee and having them check the video evidence, if any.  It doesn't even have to stop play, as the player could invoke rule 3-3 and finish the hole with 2 balls and continue play while waiting for the committee decision.

That makes perfect sense.  If he called over a rules official, he could simply inform him that just in case the ball actually moved, let's be safe and invoke rule 3-3.  If the video shows an infraction, then it would only cost him 1 stroke.

Not sure how in the world he is going to set up his second ball though (the one he's supposed to "replace") because that lie will be obliterated by his first shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Yeah, I think maybe we stick with Brandon's idea that you simply just eliminate the call-ins.  That isn't "ignoring rules violations" but rather simply "not allowing the public to help us notice rules violations."  Once a violation is known to them, then, yes, I have a hard time suggesting that they ignore that violation, but perhaps, the fairer way to police everything is just to leave the public out of it.

Well okay, but then what are you actually accomplishing? You still have the bias against guys like Tiger who have more cameras covering them. It would be different from what we have today, but only in the sense that the PGA Tour can save $20 a month by dropping a phone line.

In my bag:

Driver: Titleist TSi3 | 15º 3-Wood: Ping G410 | 17º 2-Hybrid: Ping G410 | 19º 3-Iron: TaylorMade GAPR Lo |4-PW Irons: Nike VR Pro Combo | 54º SW, 60º LW: Titleist Vokey SM8 | Putter: Odyssey Toulon Las Vegas H7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Wait, what?!?!?!  While I was typing one of my earlier replies in this thread - last night, golf channel on in the background - they were talking about this exact story in regards to Tim Finchem.  Then they cut to a bunch of players interviews and their reactions to Tiger's penalty.  (Stricker, Dustin Johnson, Watney, Kuchar)  The implication of the story was CLEARLY that Tiger's penalty was a result of a call-in.

If you are correct, then A)  Why would Tim Finchem be saying what he's saying now, and why would it be a big story?  and B)  Why would TGC resort to shady journalism like that?

Who do they think they are ... CNN??  Fox??  MSNBC??  Come on, guys, you're better than that!!!!

My understanding is that, while it wasn't gleaned from the telecast, it was a call-in. I believe somebody picked it up with a high-def camera on-site. Who, I don't know. Probably a professional. Lots of legal cameras at Tour events, as I have found out from marshalling. They are everywhere, very imposing and entitled.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

My understanding is that, while it wasn't gleaned from the telecast, it was a call-in. I believe somebody picked it up with a high-def camera on-site. Who, I don't know. Probably a professional. Lots of legal cameras at Tour events, as I have found out from marshalling. They are everywhere, very imposing and entitled.

My understanding was that it couldn't have been a call-in because the footage was taken by a PGATour.com employee.

In my bag:

Driver: Titleist TSi3 | 15º 3-Wood: Ping G410 | 17º 2-Hybrid: Ping G410 | 19º 3-Iron: TaylorMade GAPR Lo |4-PW Irons: Nike VR Pro Combo | 54º SW, 60º LW: Titleist Vokey SM8 | Putter: Odyssey Toulon Las Vegas H7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The only reason to have unmarked officials would be to catch people doing things that they wouldn't otherwise do in front of marked officials.  This suggests that there is a cheating problem on the PGA tour.  I disagree with that.  I don't think this is necessary.

Disagree.

It does not suggest a cheating problem. It does suggest the stakes are high - we're talking millions of dollars here in prize money and endorsements - and the idea is to let players know that the thought of bending the rules is not tolerated. It is a recognition that people are human when confronted with the temptation of mega $$$$, and they may let something slide that may seem inconsequential.

Employers send ghost customers to their place of business to evaluate the behavior of their employees. Employees learn that ghost customers will make an appearance. It motivates them to conform to company rules. It does not suggest that employees will cut corners or treat customers unkindly. It does keep them on their toes.

The Tour also tried having Officials view the telecast as it occurred, and found it a waste of time.

___

As to how the limited number of officials may affect play and rules...

“There is almost never a dull moment,” said Slugger White, the former touring pro and a veteran of 30 years as a tour official.

That might come as news to the game’s detractors. But to the eight regular PGA Tour officials charged with making it all work for the 156 players in the field at this week’s Wells Fargo Championship, the occasional hair-raising moment is expected at the Quail Hollow Club.

“When we’re trying to get 156 players this week, which means there is going to be 26 groups on 18 holes,” White said. “You’re going to wait. Play is going to be slow. Those are the facts. People say we aren’t doing our job?”

Cracked Mickey Bradley, who was riding in White’s cart: “Twenty-six groups on 18 holes? That’s an eight-pound ham in a five-pound can.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/sports/golf/05golf.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Wait, what?!?!?!  While I was typing one of my earlier replies in this thread - last night, golf channel on in the background - they were talking about this exact story in regards to Tim Finchem.  Then they cut to a bunch of players interviews and their reactions to Tiger's penalty.  (Stricker, Dustin Johnson, Watney, Kuchar)  The implication of the story was CLEARLY that Tiger's penalty was a result of a call-in.

It was the PGA Tour's own production company. They filmed it, and after the round were reviewing the footage they shot, and they called Tiger on it. Nobody called in.

TV audiences never saw that footage until after the penalty had been assessed. It was an "inside job" so to speak.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3826 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.
  • Posts

    • I did not realize that, I was thinking a more traditional golf club.  
    • Thanks for the feedback. @StuM, we are a "club without real estate" so no facilities or pro. We have a membership of around 185 players and we only play together as a group at our tournaments, which are held at public access courses. A group of us setup the tournaments, collect the money and dole out the prizes.
    • In general, granting free relief anywhere on the course isn't recommended.  Similarly, when marking GUR, the VSGA and MAPGA generally don't mark areas that are well away from the intended playing lines, no matter how poor the conditions.  If you hit it far enough offline, you don't necessarily deserve free relief.  And you don't have to damage clubs, take unplayable relief, take the stroke, and drop the ball in a better spot.
    • If it's not broken don't fix it. If you want to add grooves to it just because of looks that's your choice of course. Grooves are cut into putter faces to reduce skid, the roll faced putter is designed to do the same thing. I'm no expert but it seems counter productive to add grooves to the roll face. Maybe you can have it sand-blasted or something to clean up the face. Take a look at Tigers putter, its beat to hell but he still uses it.     
    • I get trying to limit relief to the fairway, but how many roots do you typically find in the fairway? Our local rule allows for relief from roots & rocks anywhere on the course (that is in play). My home course has quite a few 100 year old oaks that separate the fairways. Lift and move the ball no closer to the hole. None of us want to damage clubs.
×
×
  • 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...