Poll: Did Ernie Els ground his club in a hazard?

[Rulzguy]

I know this may be couple of days late but he was allowed to return to the place he hit from into the hazard the first time. That is one of the options. Of course the two club lengths, etc as well. As far as grounding the club, it appears he did from the camera angle but we don't know exactly how deep the grass was. The player is allowed to touch the grass but not allow his club to weight down the grass behind the ball. The club doesn't necessarily need to touch the ground. If the weight of the club rested into the grass causing the grass to press down, that would be considered grounding the club.

Player said he didn't but they don't always win that argument.

[colin007]

I know this may be couple of days late but he was allowed to return to the place he hit from into the hazard the first time. That is one of the options. Of course the two club lengths, etc as well. As far as grounding the club, it appears he did from the camera angle but we don't know exactly how deep the grass was. The player is allowed to touch the grass but not allow his club to weight down the grass behind the ball. The club doesn't necessarily need to touch the ground. If the weight of the club rested into the grass causing the grass to press down, that would be considered grounding the club. Player said he didn't but they don't always win that argument.

I believe grounding the club involves allowing the club to fully rest on the ground/grass, regardless of how much the grass is pushed down. I may be wrong, I have been before.

[Rulzguy]

You are right to a degree. Decision 13-4/8 discusses grounding club in hazard: "when the grass is compressed to the point it will support the weight of the club.'  also in Decision 18-2b/5 it discusses what might cause ball to move in another scenario "if the grass had been compressed to the point where it would support the weight of the club, the club is considered grounded."

It sometimes can be a judgement call which creates an issue. It is difficult to see from a distance if the weight of the club rested on the grass. In the video it does appear that the player let the weight of the club rest on the grass immediately behind the ball but can't be totally clear from the angle given. Since it is not perfectly clear, the officials must have ruled in the player's favor ( but there are some instances the rules go against the player when in doubt)

Gary

[Divot Master]

Again, I never called Ernie a cheater. Just questioning the judgment in regard to the events of this past Sunday.

Let’s back up to the US OPEN in 2000 when Ernie took a “free” lift and place because he thought a member of the media stepped on his ball. The media was at least 25 feet to the north of his position. Big Ernie had no chance of winning and there was no focus on anyone else except for The Tiger in command by 15 shots. I was paying attention though and I remember the whole thing going down. Now fast forward to this past Sunday and we’ve got ourselves a conundrum, at least for me.

Actually, the most famous questionable incident with Ernie was the 1994 Open at Oakmont CC, where he asked an official for, and received (incorrectly as it turned out) relief from a TV crane truck in his line of play.  His reasoning was that the crane was immovable, but it drove away a few minutes later after the last pairing had gone through.  He could not have known at the time, and obviously the official didn't know either, that the crane had been lowered several times previously for other players in similar situations. This was in no way evidence of Ernie cheating, only evidence of his thorough understanding of the rules, and a perhaps aggressive attempt to gain legal advantage from that knowledge.

That and the "phantom media footprint lift" you reference are about the only points of controversy (and minor ones at that) in a very long, successful, and high visibility career.

The conclusions I would draw from my observations and all this discussion are that he is probably about as well learned on the rules as any pro player, he does not have a lengthy track record of knowingly bending or violating them to gain an advantage, and he certainly did not in the situation this past weekend.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferguson

Again, I never called Ernie a cheater. Just questioning the judgment in regard to the events of this past Sunday.

Let’s back up to the US OPEN in 2000 when Ernie took a “free” lift and place because he thought a member of the media stepped on his ball. The media was at least 25 feet to the north of his position. Big Ernie had no chance of winning and there was no focus on anyone else except for The Tiger in command by 15 shots. I was paying attention though and I remember the whole thing going down. Now fast forward to this past Sunday and we’ve got ourselves a conundrum, at least for me.

Actually, the most famous questionable incident with Ernie was the 1994 Open at Oakmont CC, where he asked an official for, and received (incorrectly as it turned out) relief from a TV crane truck in his line of play.  His reasoning was that the crane was immovable, but it drove away a few minutes later after the last pairing had gone through.  He could not have known at the time, and obviously the official didn't know either, that the crane had been lowered several times previously for other players in similar situations. This was in no way evidence of Ernie cheating, only evidence of his thorough understanding of the rules, and a perhaps aggressive attempt to gain legal advantage from that knowledge.

That and the "phantom media footprint lift" you reference are about the only points of controversy (and minor ones at that) in a very long, successful, and high visibility career.

The conclusions I would draw from my observations and all this discussion are that he is probably about as well learned on the rules as any pro player, he does not have a lengthy track record of knowingly bending or violating them to gain an advantage, and he certainly did not in the situation this past weekend.

That mistake was on the official, not on Ernie though.  All Ernie did was ask for a ruling, and the official should have either known the crane was movable, or asked for assistance from another RO.

[Shorty]

I am amazed that there are posters here who think that Ernie Els may not know the rule. Geeeeezzzz.....

[joekelly]

I would venture to say that the 'honor system' took a pretty big hit last week with the doomed airplane.  When big bucks, or job security, is on the line, not all of us are 100% honest or forthcoming.

This has nothing to do with Ernie, or any other golfer, but the issue of personal responsibility seems easily eroded these days of WWW, the ubiquitous media, relentless desire for personal advancement and money = status.  I recently spent some time with a fellow golfer, off the course, and he related an incident where he joined a big group and played with another big group, these all from mainland China. The competition was Group A versus Group B but Group B, the Chinese, would not consider playing with A members in their fourball.  Who won ALL the prizes?  Every nearest the pin, every longest drive, every Stableford point result was won by Group B.

[jbishop15]

I would venture to say that the 'honor system' took a pretty big hit last week with the doomed airplane.  When big bucks, or job security, is on the line, not all of us are 100% honest or forthcoming.

This has nothing to do with Ernie, or any other golfer, but the issue of personal responsibility seems easily eroded these days of WWW, the ubiquitous media, relentless desire for personal advancement and money = status.  I recently spent some time with a fellow golfer, off the course, and he related an incident where he joined a big group and played with another big group, these all from mainland China. The competition was Group A versus Group B but Group B, the Chinese, would not consider playing with A members in their fourball.  Who won ALL the prizes?  Every nearest the pin, every longest drive, every Stableford point result was won by Group B.

Any evidence suggesting personal responsibility is on the decline is anecdotal at best.

Generations before have been pointing the finger at generations after saying that they aren't as good as the ones that came before them. That's just what we do: we say these kids are too soft, too weak, too caught up in technology, and then those kids become adults and they point at their kids and say the same thing.

Also, I don't quite follow how the plane crash lends itself to "personal responsibility". The co-pilot was a mentally ill man who had dropped so far that he didn't care about killing hundreds of people. Suicide is not something that you can control alone; I speak from experience on this.

And let's be real: people were just as much if not more obsessed with personal advancement and money. That's what the whole generation of baby boomers strove for, upward mobility. If anything, the cultural changes since the 70's have made people less inclined to seek a buck at the expense of themselves and others.

[johnno]

Video inconclusive. Player says no. = no

[Lihu]

Video inconclusive. Player says no. = no

Just curious if this is this a de facto rule?

BTW, I would even go further along this direction and state that the video did not show any signs of lie improvement. I didn't see any large tufts of grass moving around with his club movement.