Ernie Els Calls Own Penalty, Branden Grace Gets Drop in Bunker

[iacas]

41 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

So millions of fans can see it, people can call in at a later time resulting in a penalty...but an onsite official missed 30 seconds of feet shuffling but oh hell....that's the way it goes....no way can the tape be watched? He was on a pretty steep bank ....I didn't see his footing to be too excessive in developing a stance. I'm sure it could be easily found where his amount of shuffling doesn't exceed what's been done many, many times by others in a bunker.

I don't really agree. I think he was very close and likely across the line in building a stance.

Call-ins are pretty irrelevant here. Too much if a judgment call not a question of fact.

[Vinsk]

50 minutes ago, iacas said:

I don't really agree. I think he was very close and likely across the line in building a stance.

Call-ins are pretty irrelevant here. Too much if a judgment call not a question of fact.

Iacas, what would be the situation if his playing partner told Grace and official he believes the building of stance was violated? Does the rule official take the playing partners opinion or is this an ethics violation more than a rules violation? 

Seems like a tough situation in regards to determine what's 'excessive?'

[Hardluckster]

I'd guess that if a competitor were to challenge the ruling before the drop had actually occurred and the final ruling been made, video could be used by officials to judge the extent of manipulation. No?

[Golfingdad]

5 hours ago, iacas said:

@Golfingdad, you're not guaranteed "solid footing." He was very, very close to building a stance.

I get that.  I'm just saying that there really isn't more evidence one way or the other of him trying to build a stance vs just trying to take a stance.

And I agree with @drmevo in that his previous ruling and knowledge is kind of a double edge sword in his favor and against him.  Did he remember the other ruling before he found the lining, or did it click in his head after?  If it was before, then his "digging" would be a lot more suspect in my eyes, but if it was after, then it's entirely innocent, IMO.

Regardless, I still think that Willett was out of line (unless he has some evidence that Grace was being shady, which I doubt) and without his tweet this is a non-story.

[iacas]

10 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Iacas, what would be the situation if his playing partner told Grace and official he believes the building of stance was violated? Does the rule official take the playing partners opinion or is this an ethics violation more than a rules violation? 

Seems like a tough situation in regards to determine what's 'excessive?'

They'd probably review the video and the rules official would be able to look at the sand in person.

6 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

I get that.  I'm just saying that there really isn't more evidence one way or the other of him trying to build a stance vs just trying to take a stance.

…

Regardless, I still think that Willett was out of line (unless he has some evidence that Grace was being shady, which I doubt) and without his tweet this is a non-story.

I too think the pros who questioned it were slightly out of line. But maybe Grace has a reputation as playing fast and loose with the rules, and this is their way of "fixing it within the brotherhood" or something?

To your first point… yeah, it's a judgment call. There's a point at which everyone will feel that he passed what's allowed. To me, it's really close.

[Golfingdad]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

I too think the pros who questioned it were slightly out of line. But maybe Grace has a reputation as playing fast and loose with the rules, and this is their way of "fixing it within the brotherhood" or something?

Yep, that is entirely possible.

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

To your first point… yeah, it's a judgment call. There's a point at which everyone will feel that he passed what's allowed. To me, it's really close.

I agree that it's close and wonder what the rules official thinks now - assuming he's seen the video of what occurred before he got there.

[Hardluckster]

42 minutes ago, iacas said:

I too think the pros who questioned it were slightly out of line.

OK, I haven't seen the social media stuff on this incident (in fact, about all I do know I've gotten from this thread) but if competitors feel that there was a beach it is their obligation to say something. What did these guys do that makes you say they crossed the line?

**Not intended to be argumentative. This post is a fact finding mission where I'm being too lazy to look up the stuff myself. 

[Vinsk]

“It was ridiculous,” McGinley said on Sky's telecast of the European Tour's flagship event. “If you twist your feet enough you’re bound to eventually reach the bunker lining. That means anytime a player wants relief from a poor lie he can simply twist his feet until he reaches the bunker lining. That can’t be right.”

[Hardluckster]

Gotta say that I agree with McGinley. 

As for posting to social media, I do not have "the Facebook" or "the Twitter". After thinking about it for a while I've come to the conclusion that players posting objections there is most likely in poor taste. 

[boogielicious]

8 hours ago, Vinsk said:

“It was ridiculous,” McGinley said on Sky's telecast of the European Tour's flagship event. “If you twist your feet enough you’re bound to eventually reach the bunker lining. That means anytime a player wants relief from a poor lie he can simply twist his feet until he reaches the bunker lining. That can’t be right.”

Footjoy will start making special shoes to help dig faster! 

I agree he seemed to keep digging a bit. I understand he wants good footing, but there either shouldn't be relief for touching the lining or more explicit description of getting a secure stance.

[Golfingdad]

Related to the Grace thing; while watching the NCAAs yesterday, one of the kids had a shot that plugged in the face of the bunker.  He did exactly what we've seen countless other players do in that situation, which was to really struggle to find footing.  There was digging, twisting, trying a few different locations for the left foot, etc.  The only thing about Grace's situation that stands out is that he happened to hit the liner (and notice, and know that that meant a specific ruling)

I believe that if you could take out the "confirmation bias" that is added in by him having to get the (favorable) ruling, and just pretend like he hit the shot before calling the official over, that nobody would view his actions as close to building a stance, or even odd in the least.

[iacas]

18 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I believe that if you could take out the "confirmation bias" that is added in by him having to get the (favorable) ruling, and just pretend like he hit the shot before calling the official over, that nobody would view his actions as close to building a stance, or even odd in the least.

I don't.

I think perhaps we've gotten lax with regards to how much is required to "build a stance."

http://www.golf-monthly.co.uk/videos/rules/rules-of-golf-building-a-stance

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!decision-13,d13-3-3

It's not just his top foot, but look at his bottom foot, too. Particularly in light of the video in the Golf Monthly link here.

[Golfingdad]

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

I think perhaps we've gotten lax with regards to how much is required to "build a stance."

That's totally fair.  Before even clicking on the links it now dawns on me that I'm comparing what he's doing to what we see everybody else doing ... rather than what the rules actually say we should be doing. 

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

That's totally fair.  Before even clicking on the links it now dawns on me that I'm comparing what he's doing to what we see everybody else doing ... rather than what the rules actually say we should be doing. 

An old rules guy told me… if the rake job for the stance takes more than a "back-and-forth" with the rake, you should be suspicious of the stance.

[Golfingdad]

14 minutes ago, iacas said:

An old rules guy told me… if the rake job for the stance takes more than a "back-and-forth" with the rake, you should be suspicious of the stance.

Hmmmm ... I went through the rules and decisions and while there is a decision that you linked about "knocking down the side of a bunker," there isn't anything in the decision addressing a "normal" bunker shot in regards to digging your feet into the bunker like so many people (myself included) all do these days.

Based on the simplicity of the rule and the comment from the old guy, I see your point about how we've strayed from where we should be.

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Hmmmm ... I went through the rules and decisions and while there is a decision that you linked about "knocking down the side of a bunker," there isn't anything in the decision addressing a "normal" bunker shot in regards to digging your feet into the bunker like so many people (myself included) all do these days.

Based on the simplicity of the rule and the comment from the old guy, I see your point about how we've strayed from where we should be.

Yes, it's one of the "judgment call" rules, and unfortunately, we've all got slightly different standards for what "fairly taking your stance" is versus "building a stance."

I try to tread lightly in bunkers. I try to just get below the looser top level. Bunkers are supposed to be more difficult - I'm not entitled to have a firmer stance than when I'm in the fairway.