New Rules for Video Call-Ins

[Ty_Webb]

15 hours ago, iacas said:

Two things. First, the difference is that the 2018 rule incentivizes people to honestly not know the rules. Then they don't even have to be dishonest. But even if they choose to be dishonest… (#2 here…) there's no additional penalty. So everyone gets a free pass. The only person who doesn't? The honest, knowledgeable person, who likely added the penalty strokes himself.

Let's assume a player commits a breach and is either knowledgeable of it or not, and honest about their knowledge or not. They sign their card with the wrong score (in the Knowledgeable/Honest square, the DQ is highly unlikely as that knowledgeable/honest player probably already included the penalty on the card):

	Knowledgeable	Ignorant
Honest	Original Penalty or DQ	Freebie or Original Penalty
Dishonest	Freebie or Original Penalty	Freebie or Original Penalty

 

This is true and there is *an* incentive to not know the rules. There are however still plenty of incentives to know the rules. One of the ones I see all the time - player hits his ball into long grass, goes and looks for it, can't find it and drops a ball near where it went in the long grass and plays on - effectively playing the long grass like a lateral hazard. Out playing with your buddies and they're all playing like that I have no problem. If you do that in a tournament because you're ignorant of the rules, the original penalty is still a serious one. Probably DQ in that situation for playing from the wrong place and it's a serious breach. Plus it's kind of obvious that that's what you're doing to anyone out there in eyesight. If you lie and say you found your ball and you were taking an unplayable, then you're gonna get labelled a cheater if one of your playing partners points out that you didn't. Not to mention if you're playing in the group behind and you watch someone looking in long grass and then dropping a ball out of the long grass, if you know the rules yourself, then you can have an interesting chat with the officials later on. That person then makes the claim that they took an unplayable, you take them out to the spot and ask them to tell you where they found the ball and then explain why they took the unplayable. Unless they are very lucky and there's a rabbit hole or something nearby then they're going to look like they were cheating. If they genuinely don't know the rules and say that they lost it and took a drop, they're going to get DQ'd. I'd say that was a pretty good incentive to know the rules anyway.

In the unlikely event that they actually wind up in a situation where they have a choice between a freebie and the original penalty, if they get caught and they have to go with the original penalty, that's going to be a once only opportunity. If they hit it in a lateral hazard, take a drop and play on and "forget" to add the penalty stroke and someone asks about it, they'll either have to say that they took the penalty shot and forgot another shot (DQ I believe) or they say they didn't know about the penalty shot (original penalty). That excuse will fly precisely once, because they next time if they try the same thing, then the officials will know they were knowledgeable (if they're the same anyway or they talk to each other). 

In a similar vein, the Lexi situation. She was I think one of three things - she was either extremely careless (in a major? Really?), ignorant (possible) or she was cheating. If she gets caught mismarking her ball again, regardless of how she was caught, I think she catches the DQ and probably a ban. Carelessness doesn't fly, she's clearly not ignorant because she got 4 penalty strokes as a result of doing that in the past, which leaves only cheating. I don't know how much press this got in the US, but a few years ago a British guy got DQ'd for improving the line of his putt and it only came to light after he had marked his card. He also got a 2 month suspension for cheating although I think they suspended it 18 months. John Paramor is talking about it here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/golf/video-1059782/Golfer-caught-breaking-rules-live-TV-audience.html. Personally I think Lexi got very lucky indeed, especially when you consider what happened to Dyson for a similar thing. 

[rehmwa]

13 hours ago, David in FL said:

So, what do you think will now happen when soneone calls in to inform of a breach of the rules that was apparent on television?

It's not a trick question.  What do you think will happen?

1 - they'll review it anyway.  But not tell the world a caller sent it in.  Which is what they should have been doing all along.  Good thing

2 - Likely most penalties of this type (rare) will be ID'd in time to let the player know before the card signing - good thing

3 - if they don't find these things in a TIMELY manner - the blame will go on the officials and not the players.  So the next discussion will be on the honesty/competency of the reviewers and if they are ignoring items they are late on identifying to avoid controversy.  kinda meh there....

4 - players are off the hook, most will continue to have accurate cards

 

still more room for abuse in the AMs than the pros....

[iacas]

@Ty_Webb, nobody's said there's an incentive to not knowing any of the rules.

57 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

That excuse will fly precisely once, because they next time if they try the same thing, then the officials will know they were knowledgeable (if they're the same anyway or they talk to each other).

It's gonna fly more than once, because juniors, adults, etc. compete against different players, play under different committees… and so on.

57 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

Personally I think Lexi got very lucky indeed, especially when you consider what happened to Dyson for a similar thing. 

Dyson, like Lexi, apparently had a habit of doing this quite a bit.

But we've seen many times over how the European Tour enforces rules more harshly (correctly?) than the PGA Tour. They've handed out more pace of play penalties, too, IIRC.

7 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

3 - if they don't find these things in a TIMELY manner - the blame will go on the officials and not the players.  So the next discussion will be on the honesty/competency of the reviewers and if they are ignoring items they are late on identifying to avoid controversy.

Yup.

[arab_joe]

On 12/21/2017 at 9:04 PM, Hardluckster said:

That said, let's assume hypothetically that Lexi knew exactly what she was doing.  Let's assume that there was a spike mark or other imperfection in her line of putt.  Let's assume, again hypothetically, that she marked the ball incorrectly so as to avoid having to putt over the imperfection.  Do you think that in this hypothetical situation that the 4 strokes be an appropriate penalty?

We cannot know what Lexi knew.

My view is that, if Lexi intentionally cheated, then 4 strokes would indeed have been a lenient penalty (especially, as noted by others, that Simon Dyson got a ban for a similar infraction on the European Tour).  However, on the other hand, if she accidentally misplaced her marker then, in my opinion, even 2 shots is harsh...

My real issue with the armchair rules officials is the role they can play in tournaments - whether they call in one day or the next may determine the outcome of a tournament (as it did with Lexi).  I prefer the determination of a tournament winner to be down to skill, not luck.

On 12/21/2017 at 11:20 PM, rehmwa said:

I hardly play real golf, I more play 'hit ball, drink bloody marys, drive cart' than anything.

Now that's a notion I can fully get behind! 

On 12/22/2017 at 7:46 PM, iacas said:

Dyson, like Lexi, apparently had a habit of doing this quite a bit.

Then the armchair rules officials really need to up their game... 

[Ty_Webb]

4 hours ago, arab_joe said:

 I prefer the determination of a tournament winner to be down to skill, not luck.

I prefer that it be skill too. Skill playing the game not bending/breaking the rules. I appreciate that this is a difficult concept, but if you play by the rules and pay attention to what you’re doing/don’t cheat, then you have nothing to fear from a call-in. That Lexi caught four penalty strokes is Lexi’s fault. She doesn’t appear to think so but that speaks to her mindset, not the facts. 

[iacas]

6 hours ago, arab_joe said:

However, on the other hand, if she accidentally misplaced her marker then, in my opinion, even 2 shots is harsh...

That’s part of the issue, though. People like you think two strokes is too harsh for the exact specific thing she did. But there are cases where playing from a wrong place warrants a two-stroke penalty.

So the penalty is the penalty.

6 hours ago, arab_joe said:

My real issue with the armchair rules officials is the role they can play in tournaments - whether they call in one day or the next may determine the outcome of a tournament (as it did with Lexi).  I prefer the determination of a tournament winner to be down to skill, not luck.

It’s not luck. Lexi is responsible for knowing the rules. She failed to do so. It was completely within her control.

Besides, videos that came out after showed she had a habit of doing this. So maybe it caught up to her.

[Missouri Swede]

Here’s an interview with Thomas Pagel, Senior Director of Rules of Golf and Amateur Status for the USGA about these changes.

http://augustagolfshow.com/?p=4661

[GolfLug]

8 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

I prefer that it be skill too. Skill playing the game not bending/breaking the rules. I appreciate that this is a difficult concept, but if you play by the rules and pay attention to what you’re doing/don’t cheat, then you have nothing to fear from a call-in. That Lexi caught four penalty strokes is Lexi’s fault. She doesn’t appear to think so but that speaks to her mindset, not the facts. 

+1

Edited December 24, 2017 by GolfLug

[iacas]

47 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

Here’s an interview with Thomas Pagel, Senior Director of Rules of Golf and Amateur Status for the USGA about these changes.

http://augustagolfshow.com/?p=4661

Almost nothing new to learn there.

I think they're overshooting if they think that a rules official monitoring a telecast is going to catch everything, all the time. Pagel was asked about what a tournament would do if there was a discussion on Twitter about a player breaking the rules, and his response was only "we would have already caught that." But… what if you didn't already catch that?

Then the interviewer asked about intent, and I found the question poorly worded, as the 2019 Rules do away with some parts that had "intent" in them, and Pagel's answer was so-so anyway.

[Hardluckster]

On 12/24/2017 at 2:06 AM, arab_joe said:

My view is that, if Lexi intentionally cheated, then 4 strokes would indeed have been a lenient penalty (especially, as noted by others, that Simon Dyson got a ban for a similar infraction on the European Tour).

I completely agree with this. DQ would have been the appropriate penalty if this was obvious. 

On 12/24/2017 at 2:06 AM, arab_joe said:

However, on the other hand, if she accidentally misplaced her marker then, in my opinion, even 2 shots is harsh...

Here, I cannot agree. It is the player's responsibility to replace correctly, something that Lexi clearly did not do in this case. 

[NM Golf]

On 12/24/2017 at 12:06 AM, arab_joe said:

My view is that, if Lexi intentionally cheated, then 4 strokes would indeed have been a lenient penalty (especially, as noted by others, that Simon Dyson got a ban for a similar infraction on the European Tour).  However, on the other hand, if she accidentally misplaced her marker then, in my opinion, even 2 shots is harsh...

That's the rule! In football do they look at holding calls and say, "oh that holding call wasn't that bad so its only a 5 yard penalty"? Of course not, because that's ridiculous. She broke a rule, that's the penalty.

On 12/24/2017 at 12:06 AM, arab_joe said:

My real issue with the armchair rules officials is the role they can play in tournaments - whether they call in one day or the next may determine the outcome of a tournament (as it did with Lexi).  I prefer the determination of a tournament winner to be down to skill, not luck.

And playing by the rules isn't a test of skill? I would say making sure the rules are followed is the ONLY way that skill prevails. So you would rather someone be "lucky" by not getting caught breaking the rules? That's a bad kind of luck, especially when the infraction eventually comes to light and nothing is done about it.

On 12/24/2017 at 4:59 AM, Ty_Webb said:

I prefer that it be skill too. Skill playing the game not bending/breaking the rules. I appreciate that this is a difficult concept, but if you play by the rules and pay attention to what you’re doing/don’t cheat, then you have nothing to fear from a call-in. That Lexi caught four penalty strokes is Lexi’s fault. She doesn’t appear to think so but that speaks to her mindset, not the facts. 

+1. I have lost respect for Lexi over this one. She really does not think she did anything wrong. She sees herself as a victim. YOU BROKE A RULE! 

On 12/24/2017 at 1:37 PM, iacas said:

Almost nothing new to learn there.

Nope, 11 minutes of my life I won't get back.

[Yukari]

It baffles me that Lexi had a habit of incorrectly replacing her ball.  For god sakes, she's a freaking professional.  Even most amateurs know not to replace the ball incorrectly.

I think she got off easy with only 4 stroke penalty at ANA. 

As for the new rule, it does not make sense to me.  If they indeed do take a look and assess penalty without announcing to the world that someone had called in, it would be fine.  But what is the rule exactly?  That they (i) will NOT review any video from a call-in; (ii) will review the video after a call-in but will not assess any penalty; (iii) will not announce why they reviewed the video; or (iv) will not even accept a call-in from a viewer?  No matter what, it sucks as the rest of the field got screwed.

[SG11118]

From a golf standpoint, I agree with others that this was not a good rules change for golf as we know it, and it wasn't necessarily "good for the game".

It seems like this decision was made for the golf industry and the companies that make a living off golf.  Some of these recent rules episodes (DJ, DJ, Lexi, etc.) have given golf a black eye as it relates to growing the game and getting casual fans into the game.  Hopefully this move will quell some of the negative publicity around rules violations, so the game can grow.  It does have a chance to backfire though - depending on how many and what types of violations the rules officials watching video catch.

[arab_joe]

http://www.golf.com/tour-news/2018/05/07/lpga-player-cleared-penalty-then-assessed-stroke-later

This fries my head...

So the player breached the rules and should have known she did and played from the wrong place (and presumably signed an incorrect scorecard), but was only given a 1 stroke penalty because she raised the fact that she may have breached the rules to a rules official who was nearby but not close, so ultimately could not have seen whether she had breached the rules in any event!?

Also, why is it permissible for the on-course rules official to trust the word of the player (which, one assumes, must have happened as the on-course rules official said that there was no penalty (as opposed to saying "I don't know")) but not for the off-course rules official to trust the word of the player?

[iacas]

The off-course rules official has proof. That’s why.

Also I hate that it’s called the “Lexi Rule.” She still would have been penalized too.

If there was a “Lexi Rule” it should be the removal of any penalty for an incorrect scorecard in those situations.