Tour Players and 2019 Rules (Running Topic)

[iacas]

1 hour ago, drmevo said:

No, he wasn't in his stance, according to this definition. He moved.

Wow, really? So a player can move as little as one inch and that qualifies him, in your opinion, as having "backed out" of his stance and reset?

1 hour ago, drmevo said:

It's undoubtedly more defined than it was, is my point.

I don't think that it is. Now we don't know when a player is deemed to have "backed out" or "reset." Nor do we know how close one can be to their stance before they've actually begun to take his or her stance. We still have the guidelines in the Interpretation to go by there, and they certainly allow for a good deal of movement:

In the first bullet point the feet aren't in position and yet the player is deemed to have begun taking his stance. If he subsequently plays the ball, that's the stance that counts.

In the second, all we've got is one foot "in place." Does that mean the exact down-to-the-millimeter final resting place when they begin their backswing, or does it mean within an inch or two? Three? Anything less than six?

1 hour ago, drmevo said:

Not sure if you would remember but I have nit-picked over "what-if" scenarios on other rules with you in the past and as I recall (can't find my activity going back that far) your response was basically that they simply can't address every single scenario one can imagine when creating the rules.

This isn't an "every single scenario" situation - it's defining how close one can be to their final stance before they're deemed to be close enough. What constitutes:

• "in place" for the "final stance"
• backing out/resetting.

You could define backing out/resetting as moving everything outside of the definition provided for the first bullet point, but they've not defined the first bullet point.

1 hour ago, drmevo said:

Well I really can't understand that, care to explain?

I thought you meant my concerns about how much easier it is to return to the same spot, given how you can trample down grass in the rough but you can't really do that on the putting green.

Yes, my concerns over how they've failed to define "backing out/resetting" also applies to the putting green.

[drmevo]

39 minutes ago, iacas said:

Wow, really? So a player can move as little as one inch and that qualifies him, in your opinion, as having "backed out" of his stance and reset?

In terms of how they have changed and clarified the rule, yes.  Do I think the changes are the best they could have done? No. I think grounding the club behind the ball should also count as starting to take your stance, as it did originally and as I stated earlier.

Any practice swing where the club head is just outside of the ball is going to put your feet practically just as close as if you were to only move them an inch or two, and that practice swing is now allowed to take place with your caddie in line behind you. Does it allow players to skirt the intent of the rule more easily? Perhaps. Again, I don't think this change is ideal. Just better than it was. It might be trivial and stupid, but if you've moved both feet (and I would add the club head if it were up to me), then you've reset.

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

In terms of how they have changed and clarified the rule, yes.

You're probably wrong here. The "standard" is that the player moved enough that that "helpful guidance" could no longer be provided. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding an official who would say that one inch is enough for that to be invalidated.

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

I think grounding the club behind the ball should also count as starting to take your stance, as it did originally and as I stated earlier.

Not sure what you're on about here… the Interpretation that placing the club behind the ball begins the stance? I don't think that's really been "removed." I think the Interpretation still applies. (You can also place the club behind the ball without grounding the club, though that's likely rare.)

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

Any practice swing where the club head is just outside of the ball is going to put your feet practically just as close as if you were to only move them an inch or two, and that practice swing is now allowed to take place with your caddie in line behind you.

Were I the official seeing that, I'd be penalizing the guy. That isn't anywhere near enough to nullify the "helpful guidance" that could be issued.

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

Does it allow players to skirt the intent of the rule more easily? Perhaps.

Ya think!?!?

9 minutes ago, drmevo said:

It might be trivial and stupid, but if you've moved both feet (and I would add the club head if it were up to me), then you've reset.

"Backing away means that the player’s feet or body are no longer in a position where helpful guidance on aiming at the intended target line could be given."

That is a poor "clarification" IMO. Different rules officials are going to say that's a different position (though I think almost none would say that only an inch qualifies).

---

FWIW: Haotong Li would still hav been in violation:

 

USGA, R&A release clarification to controversial caddie rule; Haotong Li still considered in violation of guideline - Golf Digest

---

The USGA and R&A have released a follow-up on the controversial new rule, but it doesn't vindicate Haotong Li.

 

[drmevo]

Quote

"Backing away means that the player’s feet or body are no longer in a position where helpful guidance on aiming at the intended target line could be given."

 

11 minutes ago, iacas said:

You're probably wrong here. The "standard" is that the player moved enough that that "helpful guidance" could no longer be provided. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding an official who would say that one inch is enough for that to be invalidated.

You're right, I somehow missed that last paragraph of the change regarding backing out - my bad. I agree, that is too subjective. 

10 minutes ago, iacas said:

Were I the official seeing that, I'd be penalizing the guy. That isn't anywhere near enough to nullify the "helpful guidance" that could be issued.

Where "beginning to take a stance" is now defined as having at least one foot in place, how could you?

 

10 minutes ago, iacas said:

Not sure what you're on about here… the Interpretation that placing the club behind the ball begins the stance? I don't think that's really been "removed." I think the Interpretation still applies. (You can also place the club behind the ball without grounding the club, though that's likely rare.)

I meant placing the club behind the ball, yes. How can you have "beginning to take your stance" explicitly defined as one foot being in place for the actual stroke and then also have other examples? If that's true, then you're right, they really haven't solved anything.But I took this at face value, that you are NOT beginning to take your stance until one foot is in place.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, drmevo said:

But I took this at face value, that you are NOT beginning to take your stance until one foot is in place.

The Interpretation 10.2b(4)/1 has included "club behind the ball" (without one foot in place) for as long as the Interpretations have been out.

[drmevo]

Just now, iacas said:

The Interpretation 10.2b(4)/1 has included "club behind the ball" (without one foot in place) for as long as the Interpretations have been out.

I understand that but then why didn't they include it in the clarification? Omitting it there seems like they removed "club behind the ball" as a criteria. 

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, drmevo said:

I understand that but then why didn't they include it in the clarification? Omitting it there seems like they removed "club behind the ball" as a criteria. 

Ask them.

[3jacker]

It was really weird watching them putting with the flagstick in while the wind was whipping north of 20 mph and the flag was gyrating all around.  Seems 1) distracting, and 2) any benefits obtained from leaving the pin in during normal conditions would be erased by the unpredictability of a violently oscillating flatstick.

[Angler]

Regarding Rickie’s bad drop the other day:   Looked like his caddy was looking away when it happened, but what about the many spectators who are rarely shy about hollering during play.  Surprised that no one yelled at him when he stuck his arm out.  

There was even a cameraman right behind, although I’d guess the network has a policy of not intervening, even in that situation.

 

 

 

[iacas]

On 2/25/2019 at 12:32 PM, Angler said:

Regarding Rickie’s bad drop the other day:   Looked like his caddy was looking away when it happened, but what about the many spectators who are rarely shy about hollering during play.  Surprised that no one yelled at him when he stuck his arm out.  

There was even a cameraman right behind, although I’d guess the network has a policy of not intervening, even in that situation.

Another case when someone "calling in" (by a local spectator yelling out, in this case) could have helped a Tour player.

[DeadMan]

Alex Cejka got DQed for having an illegal greens book: 

Alex Cejka disqualified from Honda Classic

---

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. – Alex Cejka was disqualified from the Honda Classic on Thursday for using “greens-reading materials that did not fit the new scale allowed” according to a PGA …

 

[Vinsk]

22 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

Alex Cejka got DQed for having an illegal greens book: 

Alex Cejka disqualified from Honda Classic

---

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. – Alex Cejka was disqualified from the Honda Classic on Thursday for...

 

That’s just a really dumb error. Should’ve asked.

[DeadMan]

Apparently it's the 9th time he's been DQed from a tournament.

That's a real dedication there. I'm honestly impressed.

[iacas]

The thing about Rickie’s behind the back squatty drop is that it would have been perfectly legal.

[Vinsk]

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

The thing about Rickie’s behind the back squatty drop is that it would have been perfectly legal.

So true. I'm surprised Ricky is being so silly about this. He so calmly handled his misfortune in his last win when his ball rolled back into the water yet a simple issue of dropping from knee height has him all bungled.

[DaveP043]

9 hours ago, Vinsk said:

So true. I'm surprised Ricky is being so silly about this. He so calmly handled his misfortune in his last win when his ball rolled back into the water yet a simple issue of dropping from knee height has him all bungled.

I think the shank got him bungled.  Yesterday he was just poking fun at the rule, and at himself.  

[IowaGreg]

5 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I think the shank got him bungled.  Yesterday he was just poking fun at the rule, and at himself.  

Without some kind of sense of humor, Golf will cause negative mental issues......  LOL

[iacas]

I'm no longer a Justin Thomas fan. He's coming off like a whiny, spoiled brat that would rather whine about everything than actually understand why something was done.

New golf rules anger Justin Thomas again at Honda Classic

---

The new golf rules have had a vocal critic in Justin Thomas all year. At the Honda Classic, Thomas found another rule to complain about.

First he complains about the new rules regarding a damaged club, despite the fact that it wouldn't have changed the outcome for him.

Under the new golf rules, if a player bends a shaft during play, they can choose to repair the club and continue to use it. That’s a change from the old rules, when players were prohibited from using clubs damaged during the round.

Thomas made it clear how he felt about the change, saying, “You can just add that one to the list of rules that don’t make any sense.”

But the rule change would not have altered the outcome for Thomas. After trying and failing to repair the club by stepping on the hosel, Thomas chose to keep the damaged club in his bag because he didn’t know how the loft had changed and “wasn’t going to risk it.”

Then he gets pissy about the caddie standing (or squatting) in a spot behind a player on or near an extension of the line of play:

 

 

A caddie could say "you've been lining up left today."

Anyway, screw Justin Thomas. Whiny, whiny, whiny.

The USGA and PGA Tour got the rule right in penalizing Adam Schenk.