Jump to content
Subscribe to the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Subscribe to the Spin Axis Podcast!

Rulesman

Established Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,428

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Rulesman

  1. Rulesman
    A competition is set up as a series of knockout rounds but each game is played as a 'match' using strokeplay counting (ie the winner is the one with the lowest net score). Should each game/'match' be treated as a 2 man field strokeplay competition or should each player record their score as a general play score?
  2. Rulesman
    A statement from the PGA Tour:“The PGA Tour conducted a four-tournament test of Distance Measuring Devices on the Korn Ferry Tour in 2017, with varying results,” the Tour said in a statement released Tuesday. “We decided at the time to continue to prohibit their use in official competitions on the PGA Tour, PGA Tour Champions and Korn Ferry Tour for the foreseeable future. We will evaluate the impact rangefinders have on the competition at the PGA of America's championships in 2021 and will then review the matter with our player directors and the Player Advisory Council.”
  3. Rulesman
    In my experience of officiating at elite (national) level amateur golf, pop has improved since DMDs were permitted. Not a lot but noticeably. I and other refs have commented that now we rarely have to think about timing a player when it is his turn to play.
  4. Rulesman
    Lasers, phone apps etc and GPS watches are both electronic Distance Measuring Devices. The players will soon sort out which device helps them most.
  5. Rulesman
    I gather the PGA of America is going to permit DMDs in their events. Thoughts?
  6. Rulesman
    Are you sure the commentators knew the difference between the old and new? But I don't believe anyone here was actually anywhere near the live situation so we are expressing opinions based on the TV coverage.
  7. Rulesman
    I would suggest that the people in the booth had no better indication of any slope change than we do. They were probably nowhere near or seeing the same picture we are. My reading was that there was a significant change in slope because of the rapid deceleration. The referee was no doubt reacting to comments. There is no evidence in the clip that he was close by at the time. Whether the referee thought the ball would have reached the divot is not known. But there was no breach because seemingly the referee decided there was no intent.
  8. Rulesman
    That ball was never going to reach the divot and it had been rolling in the wrong direction anyway.
  9. Rulesman
    IMO the 'intent' is related to the potential outcome rather than the action itself. I'm sure he intended to knock the divot out of the way but did he do it with the intention of taking it out of the possible path of the still moving ball. I wasn't the referee who interviewed him but am happy to go with the man who was. However, I would like to see the RBs make it clearer. Although the Interpretation does go some way. The player’s ball lies in the general area at the bottom of a slope. The player makes a strokeStroke: The forward movement of the club made to strike the ball.(...Continued) and, while the ball is rolling back down the slope, the player presses down a raised piece of turf for the purpose of preventing the ball from coming to rest in a bad lie.
  10. Rulesman
    I agree with that.
  11. Rulesman
    If you are 'old' you will surely be familiar with the pre 2019 definition of 'Lost Ball'. The new version says Lost/1 – Ball May Not Be Declared Lost A player may not make a ball lost by a declaration. A ball is lost only when it has not been found within three minutes after the player or his or her caddie or partner begins to search for it. For example, a player searches for his or her ball for two minutes, declares it lost and walks back to play another ball. Before the player puts another ball in play, the original ball is found within the three-minute search time. Since the player may not declare his or her ball lost, the original ball remains in play.
  12. Rulesman
    Doesn't Pebble Beach have a bunker adjacent to the beach which is marked as a red PA (old water hazard)?
  13. Rulesman
    any part of the ball touches the putting green That means actually touching the grass surface not clear of the surface but overlapping the edge.
  14. Rulesman
    In my refereeing experience and that of colleagues discussing the change when it came, we all reckoned that in practice 'if a ball wasn't found in 3 minutes, it wouldn't be found'. Further, we found that most elite players would give up after 2.5 to 3 minutes and if we got as far as calling a time at or after 3 minutes, the player would immediately give up. There were exceptions of course.
  15. Rulesman
    13.1a does point to the specific issue in the picture ie 2.2c If part of the ball is both on the putting green and in another area of the course, see Rule 2.2c.
  16. Rulesman
    Not Allowed. Using any type of golf training or swing aid (such as an alignment rod or a weighted headcover or “donut”) or a non-conforming club to make a practice swing or in any other way that creates a potential advantage by helping the player in preparing for or making a stroke (such as help with swing plane, grip, alignment, ball position or posture).
  17. Rulesman
    First question on original post. Doh 😳 Of course. Where else would it be. ??? Thanks
  18. Rulesman
    Re the original question; the definition previously said a ball touching the green is on the green. Where has that statement been moved to? I can't find it.
  19. Rulesman
    "where part of the ball is below the level of the ground." Seems to be good enough
  20. Rulesman
    Have I missed something? When he decided to mark the spot with the tip of his tee in case the ball rolled away, wasn't he on the green? 9.3 Exception. Edit: The initial picture showing a flagstick threw me. Watching again I see he wasn't.
  21. Rulesman
    Following the Rules is not considered to be cheating.
  22. Rulesman
    I am surprised but it such an obvious change that I reckon they intended it. I can't say I'm too fussed either way.
  23. Rulesman
    I wonder if the RBs consider that as bunker surfaces and underlying ground in individual bunkers at most clubs is so variable, that screwing his feet in tells the player nothing about the ground where his ball lies. And therefore they have seen no need for a prohibition.
  24. Rulesman
    That originates with a situation at my club some years ago when I asked for a ruling from the R&A. At the time the answer was as you post above. I asked the same question a few weeks ago in the light of the rule changes and was told the ruling has now changed. "No the answer would be different under today’s Rules. The old answer used equity which is no longer part of the Rules. Just like the ruling with the twig, the same would apply for the leaf. Grant actually covered this question in a recent Q&A that he did. You can see the Q&A here: The R&A - Rules from the Garden Special A special interactive edition of ‘Rules from the Garden: #AskGrant’ will be showcased by The R&A on Friday afternoon. The question is at about 12:40 on the above video."
  25. Rulesman
    Yes
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

  I accept
The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...