Hank Haney questions Bernhard Langer's Putting

[ZappyAd]

Is a rule a rule if you can't tell when it has been broken?  I think they need to do some rewording so that it is possible to decide whether it has been definitively broken or not from video evidence.  Even something as simple as if your hand touches your shirt near your chest then that is deemed to be anchoring.  Still want to putt that way?  Then you need to wear a tighter shirt or move your hand further away.  This whole gray area of 'my hand is close but not touching honest and I just feel more comfortable in a loose fitting shirt' just seems pointless.

I know there is the whole 'golf is a noble sport and players will call fouls on themselves' thing but even so imho the rule making body should be independently able to determine if any of their rules are broken.

 

[colin007]

6 hours ago, ZappyAd said:

Is a rule a rule if you can't tell when it has been broken?  

Good point.

This just doesn't pass the smell test for me. It's like walking into your kid's room and he slams the laptop shut and his hand's in his pants and he tells you he's doing research and his fingers are cold.

[Shindig]

9 hours ago, colin007 said:

Good point.

This just doesn't pass the smell test for me. It's like walking into your kid's room and he slams the laptop shut and his hand's in his pants and he tells you he's doing research and his fingers are cold.

I hope he doesn't anchor when he's night putting.

[Golfingdad]

Just read the post from @klineka in this new thread where he states that the rule regarding club length is:

Quote

The overall length of the club must be at least 18 inches (0.457 m) and, except for putters, must not exceed 48 inches (1.219 m).

And now I'm wondering why they wouldn't or couldn't just simply remove the putter exception from that line to solve this Langer/McCarron issue?  What if they simply said:

"The overall length of the club must be at least 18 inches (0.457 m) and must not exceed 48 inches (1.219 m)."

Of course, they'd have to keep the existing anchoring rule to keep the belly putters at bay.  And, they could delay it a couple of years like they did with the anchoring rule so as to effectively "grandfather" those two guys in; since I know they don't want to rock the boat of the Champions Tour and their successes.  But the window of 58-59 year olds is pretty small. :)

[Vinsk]

11 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Just read the post from @klineka in this new thread where he states that the rule regarding club length is:

And now I'm wondering why they wouldn't or couldn't just simply remove the putter exception from that line to solve this Langer/McCarron issue?  What if they simply said:

"The overall length of the club must be at least 18 inches (0.457 m) and must not exceed 48 inches (1.219 m)."

Of course, they'd have to keep the existing anchoring rule to keep the belly putters at bay.  And, they could delay it a couple of years like they did with the anchoring rule so as to effectively "grandfather" those two guys in; since I know they don't want to rock the boat of the Champions Tour and their successes.  But the window of 58-59 year olds is pretty small. :)

Well as @iacas pointed out short golfers would still be able to use the questionable method. I think the rule needs to be adjusted, clarified. The whole 'intent' part of the rule is absolute nonsense. 

[Golfingdad]

15 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Well as @iacas pointed out short golfers would still be able to use the questionable method. I think the rule needs to be adjusted, clarified. The whole 'intent' part of the rule is absolute nonsense. 

I wasn't saying to get rid of the anchoring rule though.

And the intent thing isn't going to work because these guys aren't claiming that they keep accidentally anchoring, they're claiming that they absolutely are not anchoring, and the powers that be seem to be on board with the that explanation.

[Vinsk]

7 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I wasn't saying to get rid of the anchoring rule though.

And the intent thing isn't going to work because these guys aren't claiming that they keep accidentally anchoring, they're claiming that they absolutely are not anchoring, and the powers that be seem to be on board with the that explanation.

I thought you were suggesting limiting putters to 48"? That would pose a problem for McCarron and BL, but it wouldn't prevent the same issue from arising from shorter golfers was my point. And the intent IS saving these guys. If a video surfaces (which I believe was posted here that confirms it) that shows BL/SM are anchoring, they aren't penalized because they simply state, "Oh, well I sure didn't INTEND to anchor"...it's nonsense. You could show a clear video of BL anchoring, and that is his defense. Sure he has wonderful integrity, nobody is saying that's the problem, that he's a cheater, it's being suggested that simple carelessness has taken place. Sorry, doesn't matter. Anchoring is against the rules and whether he intended to do it or not should be irrelevant. AND furthermore, as we all know very well....FEEL AIN'T REAL. So I really don't care what BL thinks he's doing.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Vinsk

[Golfingdad]

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

I thought you were suggesting limiting putters to 48"? That would pose a problem for McCarron and BL, but it wouldn't prevent the same issue from arising from shorter golfers was my point.

Oh, I see what you're saying.  Yes, you're totally right about that.  Now that I consider it, 48" is quite a bit longer than I was picturing.  I just checked with a tape measure and I'm 6-3 and I wouldn't even have to bend over that far to putt "anchored" with a 48" putter.  This wouldn't really solve anything in this regard.

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

And the intent IS saving these guys. If a video surfaces (which I believe was posted here that confirms it) that shows BL/SM are anchoring, they aren't penalized because they simply state, "Oh, well I sure didn't INTEND to anchor"...it's nonsense. You could show a clear video of BL anchoring, and that is his defense. Sure he has wonderful integrity, nobody is saying that's the problem, that he's a cheater, it's being suggested that simple carelessness has taken place. Sorry, doesn't matter. Anchoring is against the rules and whether he intended to do it or not should be irrelevant. AND furthermore, as we all know very well....FEEL AIN'T REAL. So I really don't care what BL thinks he's doing.

I don't agree with this though.  The videos and photos we've seen so far are inconclusive.  It appears as though they're anchoring in some of them, but it's impossible to say for certain.  For the sake of your argument, though, if a video did surface that showed clearly that one of them was anchoring, I do not think people would let it slide simply because they said they had no intent.

It's not the intent portion of the rule saving them right now, it's the lack of ability to enforce it combined with their fearlessness in treading so close to the line.

[Vinsk]

20 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Oh, I see what you're saying.  Yes, you're totally right about that.  Now that I consider it, 48" is quite a bit longer than I was picturing.  I just checked with a tape measure and I'm 6-3 and I wouldn't even have to bend over that far to putt "anchored" with a 48" putter.  This wouldn't really solve anything in this regard.

I don't agree with this though.  The videos and photos we've seen so far are inconclusive.  It appears as though they're anchoring in some of them, but it's impossible to say for certain.  For the sake of your argument, though, if a video did surface that showed clearly that one of them was anchoring, I do not think people would let it slide simply because they said they had no intent.

It's not the intent portion of the rule saving them right now, it's the lack of ability to enforce it combined with their fearlessness in treading so close to the line.

 You're right and It's the inconclusive bit I don't like. Is there any reasonable way to actually confirm whether anchoring is taking place other than their word? I mean, it's not like we can  yell "freeze!" then go on the green and see if his hand/arm is in contact with his body (which I think it was in the video). It's putting. Essentially there's these two guys who have a questionable technique who just happen to be leading the money list I believe. If these professional golfers can't simply adapt a putting stroke that strays far away from anchoring then the hell with 'em..lol. Like you said, 'the lack of ability to enforce it" shouldn't be an issue with regards to a rule.

[iacas]

4 hours ago, Vinsk said:

The whole 'intent' part of the rule is absolute nonsense. 

That's in large part because you keep misunderstanding what the "intent" part of the rule is about.

As I said before:

On 7/6/2017 at 5:44 AM, iacas said:

I don't think the "intent" part is being used correctly here.

I think that holding a club "intentionally" means, in this rule, that it's not accidental, like if you follow through, pull the putter toward yourself as a reaction, stick yourself a little with the butt end of your club… that's not intentionally holding it against yourself (it's also after the stroke is made).

If you know it's there and you do nothing to prevent it from even touching you, it's intentional.

This will hopefully clarify it for you further:

You can't get out of it by saying "I didn't intend to anchor it."

4 hours ago, Vinsk said:

And the intent IS saving these guys. If a video surfaces (which I believe was posted here that confirms it) that shows BL/SM are anchoring, they aren't penalized because they simply state, "Oh, well I sure didn't INTEND to anchor"...it's nonsense.

No. That's not how it works.

You're misunderstanding how "intent" is used in the Rules of Golf.

[Vinsk]

29 minutes ago, iacas said:

That's in large part because you keep misunderstanding what the "intent" part of the rule is about.

As I said before:

This will hopefully clarify it for you further:

You can't get out of it by saying "I didn't intend to anchor it."

Better clarified. However it still remains to be resolved as to whether BL or SM have anchored on occasion. The only real conclusions that have been made are statements by BL saying he hasn't. Well, how will it ever be resolved? Just quit asking or speculating? Rham's cases were reviewed and a decision was made. Same with Lexi. Just seems this rule is very difficult to enforce. But I still don't think BL simply saying ' I don't anchor' is enough nor do I feel Tom Lehman stating those who have questioned it should 'be ashamed of themselves' has any merit. But thanks for the 'intent' clarification. That certainly makes more sense.

[iacas]

25 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

However it still remains to be resolved as to whether BL or SM have anchored on occasion.

And if they are ever pretty definitively shown to have done so, they should be penalized.

25 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

The only real conclusions that have been made are statements by BL saying he hasn't.

Right, but find actual evidence that he has. You can't. I can't. It certainly looks like he might have, but definitively? So you have to go by his word.

It's not like he has a poor reputation.

25 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Just quit asking or speculating?

In a few years they'll retire. Maybe that's all it will take, because seriously, what younger guy wants to try to putt like that AND have the questions surrounding them constantly about whether they cheated that one time, or that other time, or look at this video, or look at this camera angle…

25 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Rham's cases were reviewed and a decision was made. Same with Lexi.

Same here. They reviewed cases and made a decision.

You just don't like their decision.

25 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

But I still don't think BL simply saying ' I don't anchor' is enough nor do I feel Tom Lehman stating those who have questioned it should 'be ashamed of themselves' has any merit.

Then find definitive proof, or take the man at his word.

[Vinsk]

16 minutes ago, iacas said:

Then find definitive proof, or take the man at his word.

That's the issue. That puts us (me) back to square one. Why was the rule ever made if it can't be enforced? I thought the video posted here clearly showed contact with his hand/wrist during his swing. Others don't. How could this ever be definitively proven? Are there any other rules of golf that have such difficult measures to evaluate whether an infraction was done? I'm not suggesting BL is a cheat. I'm suggesting, just like Rham and Lexi that he commits an error and isn't even aware of it.  

[Golfingdad]

17 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Are there any other rules of golf that have such difficult measures to evaluate whether an infraction was done?

Tons of them.  Anytime there is a question about a ball possibly moving or a club being grounded where it shouldn't be, except for the rare cases where it's caught on TV, it's always going to be up to the player to make the decision.  The player calls the infraction if it happened and doesn't if he thinks it didn't happen, and the case is closed.  That is the same thing that is happening here but because he seems so, so close to being in violation on those videos, some of us are hesitant to let it drop, and let the case be closed.  And I'm including myself in that group.  But I'm not willing to say that it's clear that he's in violation, because it simply is not.  And until it is, we pretty much have to take him at his word (or further change the rules).

[iacas]

34 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Why was the rule ever made if it can't be enforced?

Dude, c'mon… it's not like people are out there, anchoring away, and getting away with it left and right because they're smart enough to face just the right angle for any cameras or their playing partners to not be sure…

These two guys move their hand away from their chest. So it's not a matter of "enforcement" if they're not breaking the rule.

You've got a bug up your ass about this, and you're losing sight of the picture here, or the forest for the trees, or whatever.

Either they're breaking the rules or they're not. I believe that they're not. I'm not certain of it, but I'd lean that way now if forced to vote.

If you see someone anchoring, or you have definitive proof of it, then guess what? Very easy to enforce!

34 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I thought the video posted here clearly showed contact with his hand/wrist during his swing. Others don't.

There are subjective rules in golf. There are subjective rules in every sport. Look at the infield fly rule - you can have balls that are borderline, right? Do you call it, do you not call it…?

34 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

How could this ever be definitively proven?

Find a video where virtually everyone agrees he's anchoring. That simple.

34 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Are there any other rules of golf that have such difficult measures to evaluate whether an infraction was done?

EVERY sport has these kinds of rules. Very rarely is any call 100% cut and dry. Look at holding in the NFL. They get it wrong all the time. They miss it often, and they occasionally call it when it's not actually holding.

Golfers are assumed to be honest, and BL has a good reputation.

[Vinsk]

On 7/3/2017 at 11:38 AM, iacas said:

I think Bernhard is cheating.

 

On 7/5/2017 at 10:32 PM, iacas said:

I hope this keeps blowing up.

Also, this is the most interested anyone's been in the Champions Tour in years.

Well, you did say these things, can you blame me?

[colin007]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

These two guys move their hand away from their chest. So it's not a matter of "enforcement" if they're not breaking the rule..

And if their forearm is planted firmly on their chest?

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Well, you did say these things, can you blame me?

That was before the PGA Champions Tour and USGA weighed in. If they're satisfied, I have no reason to continue to be dissatisfied.

It blew up. It reached a boiling point. Then we got some answers.

16 minutes ago, colin007 said:

And if their forearm is planted firmly on their chest?

I'm including that in there. I haven't seen that definitively either.