Attending the Flagstick

[GolfLug]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

It also helps with depth perception/distance control.

Sure, an added bonus that cannot be avoided, I think.

 

[Golfingdad]

6 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

To locate the hole if it is not visible from some reasonable distance. as far as I know.

Right ... in other words, a visual aid? ;)

[GolfLug]

9 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Right ... in other words, a visual aid? ;)

Sure, but not a stroke aid. Isn't that why caddies have to move out of the line after they help the player lineup and BEFORE the stroke is executed? Don't see much with the guys but see it on LPGA all the time.

[drmevo]

39 minutes ago, iacas said:

Because that changes the Decision in such a way that it contradicts the rule itself. It's A's responsibility, having selected someone to attend the flagstick, to make sure they're paying attention and can remove the flagstick in the time constraints given.

 

How can A be reasonably expected to control the attendee to that degree?  B could be fully at attention and still fail to remove the flag. 

I understand what the decision is saying, I guess I was assuming changing it could/would involve changing the rule as well.  

Also, none of what I'm saying is meant to downplay all of the thought that has gone into the current rules and decisions.  On my part, I'm curious as to why it's a penalty and even with the explanations provided I still don't quite see why it needs to be that way.

[Fourputt]

4 hours ago, GolfLug said:

I guess I was under the wrong impression. Still think lot of them seem to be bending awfully more than not at all. I don't know how you ensure it rest in the center if not in the socket? Appx? Also I guess these guys are good enough to ensure no lip damage.

On topic,I would NEVER refuse to tend. That would be real douchey IMO. But this 'hold the pin but don't let it bend' thing is interesting. Struck an off chord with me and in the least I thought was skirting fair play in spirit of the game. He also requests the pin to be tended a lot more than most would from the distances in the same ''no bend/lean' manner, which furthers my feel that he is using not just to locate the hole but actually alignment/level/plumb bobbing, whatever way.

I just wanted to check if it was clear violation (which it is not) and 'game' him back a bit by bending a tad anyway, since I run into him in our league a lot.

   

The next time he makes that request, just stand near the hole and wait for him to finish his alignment procedure.  If he tries to tell you that you have to hold the flagstick refer him to Rule 17-1, note 1:

Quote

17-1. Flagstick Attended, Removed or Held Up

Before making a stroke from anywhere on the course, the player may have the flagstick attended, removed or held up to indicate the position of the hole.

If the flagstick is not attended, removed or held up before the player makes a stroke, it must not be attended, removed or held up during the stroke or while the player's ball is in motion if doing so might influence the movement of the ball.

Note 1: If the flagstick is in the hole and anyone stands near it while a stroke is being made, he is deemed to be attending the flagstick.

Note 2: If, prior to the stroke, the flagstick is attended, removed or held up by anyone with the player's knowledge and he makes no objection, the player is deemed to have authorized it.

Note 3: If anyone attends or holds up the flagstick while a stroke is being made, he is deemed to be attending the flagstick until the ball comes to rest.

You do not have to be touching the flagstick to be attending it.

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, drmevo said:

How can A be reasonably expected to control the attendee to that degree?  B could be fully at attention and still fail to remove the flag.

How can A be reasonably expected to control his caddie?

The simple fact is that he authorizes someone to attend the flagstick. He's responsible for the actions of that person up to the point where the other person (opponent, fellow competitor) intentionally tries to cause the player harm (17-3/2).

16 minutes ago, drmevo said:

On my part, I'm curious as to why it's a penalty and even with the explanations provided I still don't quite see why it needs to be that way.

I imagine it's because the folks in charge of the Rules of Golf don't want you to make putts by hitting the ball off the flagstick.

[Shindig]

Looks like the effective parts have already been said, but I'd like to add:  I think Mark Wilson was penalized a few years ago while attending the flagstick for another player.  I can't seem to find it on Google (all the terms are common, even when grouping, so I'm not surprised), but I want to say it was early in the season.  I think the issue was he removed the flagstick after someone else in his group hit a putt, from the green, with the flag in, and no one attending it.  

[drmevo]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

How can A be reasonably expected to control his caddie?

The simple fact is that he authorizes someone to attend the flagstick. He's responsible for the actions of that person up to the point where the other person (opponent, fellow competitor) intentionally tries to cause the player harm (17-3/2).

I imagine it's because the folks in charge of the Rules of Golf don't want you to make putts by hitting the ball off the flagstick.

Yeah, but a caddy seems different - if your caddy sabotages you, you're not protected by the rules. If the player is protected from intentional harm in this case, why not accidental harm as well? It seems inconsistent. 

To the last point, if the player is made to replay the shot in the case of the attendee failing to remove it, doesn't that solve the issue?

 

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, drmevo said:

Yeah, but a caddy seems different - if your caddy sabotages you, you're not protected by the rules. If the player is protected from intentional harm in this case, why not accidental harm as well? It seems inconsistent. 

I disagree. In both instances, the player chooses a person to assist him, and is thus responsible for that person's actions (except in very specific cases).

4 minutes ago, drmevo said:

To the last point, if the player is made to replay the shot in the case of the attendee failing to remove it, doesn't that solve the issue?

Yes, in the same way that cutting off your finger stops your hangnail from hurting.

[Fourputt]

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

To the last point, if the player is made to replay the shot in the case of the attendee failing to remove it, doesn't that solve the issue?

 

The player now knows the line and speed of the putt.  For all we know that first putt may have been hit too hard to drop without the flagstick, but now you give the player a second chance with accurate information.  Basically, you just gave him a free practice putt.

[Golfingdad]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

The simple fact is that he authorizes someone to attend the flagstick. He's responsible for the actions of that person up to the point where the other person (opponent, fellow competitor) intentionally tries to cause the player harm (17-3/2).

It seems kind of like the rule (and decision) already kind of contradict each other.  Not so much on paper - I get what you're saying there - but in spirit.  In many competitions, especially those where you would ask an opponent or FC to attend the flag, it's because there aren't any other choices.  Many of us play without caddies and galleries, so if we're putting from apart of the green where we can't see the hole, we have no choice in who we elect to attend.

And the very existence of Decision 17-3/2 confirms that the ruling bodies acknowledge that there are unscrupulous people out there, so they are basically saying that we are responsible for the actions of a jerk opponent.

---

Additionally, the more I think about it, the Decision seems like its all lip-service.  It sounds great on paper but how would you ever prove that your opponent "failed to remove the flagstick for the purpose of causing [you] a penalty" deliberately?  I mean, if the guy was enough of a cheat to do that, all he would have to do is say "I'm sorry, it got stuck" or "I'm sorry, I got distracted by that bee over there."

 

1 hour ago, Fourputt said:

The player now knows the line and speed of the putt.  For all we know that first putt may have been hit too hard to drop without the flagstick, but now you give the player a second chance with accurate information.  Basically, you just gave him a free practice putt.

But the situations we're discussing here are only when an opponent or FC is the one attending the flagstick, so he wouldn't really have a reason to want to give you a free practice putt.

[Fourputt]

14 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

It seems kind of like the rule (and decision) already kind of contradict each other.  Not so much on paper - I get what you're saying there - but in spirit.  In many competitions, especially those where you would ask an opponent or FC to attend the flag, it's because there aren't any other choices.  Many of us play without caddies and galleries, so if we're putting from apart of the green where we can't see the hole, we have no choice in who we elect to attend.

And the very existence of Decision 17-3/2 confirms that the ruling bodies acknowledge that there are unscrupulous people out there, so they are basically saying that we are responsible for the actions of a jerk opponent.

---

Additionally, the more I think about it, the Decision seems like its all lip-service.  It sounds great on paper but how would you ever prove that your opponent "failed to remove the flagstick for the purpose of causing [you] a penalty" deliberately?  I mean, if the guy was enough of a cheat to do that, all he would have to do is say "I'm sorry, it got stuck" or "I'm sorry, I got distracted by that bee over there."

 

But the situations we're discussing here are only when an opponent or FC is the one attending the flagstick, so he wouldn't really have a reason to want to give you a free practice putt.

Which in my opinion is why the rule is fine as it is.  I'm not really sure what the debate is about.  In 40 years I've never had a playing companion, whether in a competition or otherwise, fail to remove the attended flagstick in a timely manner.  It is sufficiently rare for a putted ball to strike the attended flagstick in this situation that I have never seen this rule result in a penalty.  It really isn't worth losing any sleep over.

[Golfingdad]

19 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

In 40 years I've never had a playing companion, whether in a competition or otherwise, fail to remove the attended flagstick in a timely manner.  It is sufficiently rare for a putted ball to strike the attended flagstick in this situation that I have never seen this rule result in a penalty.  It really isn't worth losing any sleep over.

Agreed, me neither.  (I admit that the rule is pretty inconsequential, it just doesn't sit right with me, which is why I brought it up :))

But, rest assured, the only thing I'm losing sleep over is the second round of the British Open. 

[iacas]

7 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

But the situations we're discussing here are only when an opponent or FC is the one attending the flagstick, so he wouldn't really have a reason to want to give you a free practice putt.

From the start I've pointed out that anyone may be asked to attend the flagstick. You can't penalize or DQ a spectator.

The RoG have to work in every situation. Playing alone or on the PGA Tour.

The rule is fine. It's not "lame." It does what it intends to do and has logic behind it.

P.S. A FC may have a reason to give you a free putt. Just as he may play out of order to give you an advantage, for which there is also a penalty. FCs are capable of helping. They could give you advice, too. So clearly the rules consider situations where even an FC could attempt to "help" you.

[drmevo]

10 hours ago, iacas said:

I disagree. In both instances, the player chooses a person to assist him, and is thus responsible for that person's actions (except in very specific cases).

Fair enough, but I can't remember the last time I got to choose who attended the flag for me.    I guess the moral is, if you're going to ask someone to do it, you have to accept the risk they'll f--- it up, however small that risk may be.

10 hours ago, iacas said:

Yes, in the same way that cutting off your finger stops your hangnail from hurting.

Ha, OK,OK.  Thanks for humoring my questioning of the rule.  I'm still not totally sold, but that's my issue and I doubt the ruling bodies care much  

[GolfLug]

8 hours ago, Fourputt said:

In 40 years I've never had a playing companion, whether in a competition or otherwise, fail to remove the attended flagstick in a timely manner.  

Out of curiosity and maybe OT a bit, but I always notice, especially on 'TV' again, that once the putt is struck many caddies wait for a long time to pull the pin, sometimes seems like the ball is well within 10 feet or less to the hole. Why wait? Why don't they pull the pin immediately after the ball is struck so as to leave nothing to chance? Is this etiquette or something else? If tending, I pull immediately after the ball struck as I do not want to risk leaving it in by accident or damage the lip by wanting to pull out in haste.   

[Fourputt]

35 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Out of curiosity and maybe OT a bit, but I always notice, especially on 'TV' again, that once the putt is struck many caddies wait for a long time to pull the pin, sometimes seems like the ball is well within 10 feet or less to the hole. Why wait? Why don't they pull the pin immediately after the ball is struck so as to leave nothing to chance? Is this etiquette or something else? If tending, I pull immediately after the ball struck as I do not want to risk leaving it in by accident or damage the lip by wanting to pull out in haste.   

In part that's because they habitually pass the flagstick on the the caddie of the next player to play.  They never lay it on the ground like we casual players do.  Sometimes they just leave it in the hole in case the next guy also wants it attended, other times they hand it over to the next guy's caddie.  

If the flagstick has been freed from the socket, it doesn't really matter when it's removed as long as the ball doesn't strike it.  In my own play, if I'm attending the flagstick for another player, I may leave it in the hole after he putts if there is another player who might need it attended.  I'll step away briefly until the next guy is about ready to putt, then step up and attend or remove it for him.

There is an etiquette to attending the flagstick.  I learned much of it back in the stone age during the one summer that I caddied at an exclusive yacht club.  The instruction I got from the caddie master has served me well, even though I didn't start playing golf for years after that.

[GolfLug]

13 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

In part that's because they habitually pass the flagstick on the the caddie of the next player to play.  They never lay it on the ground like we casual players do.  Sometimes they just leave it in the hole in case the next guy also wants it attended, other times they hand it over to the next guy's caddie.  

If the flagstick has been freed from the socket, it doesn't really matter when it's removed as long as the ball doesn't strike it.  In my own play, if I'm attending the flagstick for another player, I may leave it in the hole after he putts if there is another player who might need it attended.  I'll step away briefly until the next guy is about ready to putt, then step up and attend or remove it for him.

There is an etiquette to attending the flagstick.  I learned much of it back in the stone age during the one summer that I caddied at an exclusive yacht club.  The instruction I got from the caddie master has served me well, even though I didn't start playing golf for years after that.

Greatly appreciate you passing along the finer points!

So in short, pull only when you absolutely have to (and maybe not pull at all if the putt has no chance of even grazing the hole?). Thanks much for the reply.

BTW, mods, I know this might be meandering slightly off topic but I am assuming the thread has run it's course anyway.