Taking the players word......

[OrangeGravy]

I wasn't aware that you could do it in FRONT of the ball. That is mind blowing. It's essentially legal to improve your lie in the rough. Instead of tamping/pushing down on the club, you just need to let the club "rest" multiple times and in a couple different places in front and behind the ball. Eventually that long grass will lay down.

[Golfjack]

Exactly. I would never do it just for the fear of that. But pro's, many do it. Not just Rahm. It improves your lie obviously, and he tamped down not even where he was addessing the ball (slight to the left) so the hosel won't get grabbed. I absolutely think players should not be allowed to test the club's lie behind the ball in the rough. The rule would be hard to write though, or maybe not. Not sure I don't know all the circumstances or situations involved.

For me I think he saw the ball move. To place the club down so close to the ball, he had to be looking down. Even if the ball moves a tiny bit, I can usually see it. It's really not that hard when you are fixated on it. If he was grounding the club without even looking at the ball, then that's pretty careless. He actually proceeds to ground the club several more times to tamp down even more grass. I just don't see why this should be allowed (I believe under current rules it is under the guise of checking to see how your club sits behind the ball).

[OrangeGravy]

If you think the ball is suspended in the rough,then it would be dicey. If it's nestled down already it would definitely improve your lie. Shoot, you could even start "resting" your clubhead behind the ball a bit further back at first and "resting" it down progressively closer to the ball, so the grass lays down towards the ball and not into your clubhead when you swing. Not to mention doing it in front of the ball to ensure it comes out clean.

[davep043]

A couple decades ago, it was very common to rest the putter in front of the ball for a beat before setting it behind the ball, that's why that bit is in there. But before you set a club down in "a couple different places", read the rule where it says  "right in front of or right behind the ball". You can't tamp down a pathway.The Interpretation defines "lightly" as being the weight of the club and no more. Bricklayers and watchmakers get the same treatment, rest the club, but don't press down.

[Ferguson]

I love meandering debates such as this one.

 

Rules:

The rules don't apply unless applied to the situation. There was no ruling at the time and therefore "a ruling that never happened" can't be debated.

 

Integrity:

Jon Rahm's character and is his personal standard of ethics are up for debate.

If he honestly didn't see the ball move, I'm good with that.

If he saw the ball move and didn't ask for ruling, I am not good with that.

 

Lie Improvement:

This can be debated as well. Please consider that he executed the shot perfectly, had the lead and played well all four days.

It was more than dumb luck or lie improvement that helped him hole that shot. He was on his game last week.

 

 

Bones on the bag for another player:

The break from Phil was mutual. My a$$.

[oikos1]

Then why are many saying Pros are cheating when they place the club behind the ball in the rough?

Edit: The rule is quite vague:8.1b/1 – Meaning of “Ground the Club Lightly”Rule 8.1b allows a player to ground the club lightly directly in front of or behind the ball, even if that improves his or her lie or area of intended swing.Ground the club lightly” means allowing the weight of the club to be supported by the grass, soil, sand or other material on or above the ground surface. But the player gets the penalty under Rule 8.1a if he or she improves the lie or area of intended swing by pressing the club down more than lightly.

 

So on the one hand, "lightly" refers to the weight of the club, but then in the very next sentence the rule states "by pressing the club down more than lightly."

So which is it, the weight of the club or pressing down more than lightly? It certainly seems to imply that you can press the club down, just not more than lightly. Which very much so would very from person to person. In other words, one could allow the club to drop from waist height and not be pressing the club down at all, thereby allowing the the club to be supported by the ground after impact with no actual pressing down of the club at anytime.

[smashdn]

He doesn't/shouldn't need to ask for a ruling if he saw it move. Replace ball and add a stroke on the hole. Easy. Holler over to playing partner and let him know what happened.

This rule is a fundamental tenant of golf. If you move the ball with something other than an intended stroke, replace the ball and add a stroke.

I don't match play much but I think the penalty is similar in a match play scenario, add a stroke, replace and hit your shot.

[OrangeGravy]

I haven't read every word of the rule, but if that is the only language addressing where you can rest the club, one could argue it doesn't prevent you from resting in both places or multiple places behind the ball. Like a lot of rules in sports, they were written to address specific situations and failed to cover potential future issues. I would expect it say something in addition to the above like " you may rest the club behind or in front of the ball, but not both"

[Titleist99]

I can't believe that the Rules committee is reverting back to the rule from 1888 where it says that a man shall be penalize if he is responsible for the ball if it has "moved in the least degree".........So, we just disregard the amendment to the rule where it says that if the movement "can't be seen with the naked eye" ...............I challenge anyone to tell me that they could have seen that ball move without a high def camera zoomed in and replaying it over and over again.

[davep043]

The USGA commented on the decision of the PGA Rules officials:

"In viewing the video in real-time (that is, not in slow motion), it can be seen that Rahm’s ball moved. In applying the “naked eye” standard, and recognizing that Rahm noted his awareness was not on the ball, the PGA TOUR determined (even though the video was zoomed in) that the movement could have been visible for a golfer standing at address had he or she been looking at the ball. As such, they applied the general penalty for a breach of Rule 9.4."

I honestly agree with both points, you can see the movement in the full speed video, and I believe that the amount of movement would have been visible to a normal golfer, if he had been looking at the ball.

[smashdn]

Good points.And also a good point and explanation of the circumstances.

[nsxguy]

You "challenge" anyone ?

OK, challenge accepted.

The LABEL on the ball, while not completely vertical, was CLEARLY (to ME anyway) in Rahm's line of sight. That label CLEARLY moved, even MORE towards vertical. Even I can see the label from 6 feet above. WITH the "naked eye".

Frankly, even if there was nothing but white showing, IF I was looking at the ball the entire time, I'm sure I would have seen it move. It "left its place and came to rest in another place" (Bagger Vance reference LOL)

[nsxguy]

It's called "honor". Quite the thing in golf actually.

If you do it lightly, as allowed by the Rules, you're good to go.

If you do it to improve your lie you're breaking the Rules and expected to call the penalty on yourself.

It's really is just that simple.

[Titleist99]

If you're fixated on the label of your ball then your fixated on the wrong thing. You should be more conscious of your landing area.....Unless you're a high handicapper. Congratulation, you may be the only good golfer that does that. I played twenty holes yesterday and not ones did I look at the label on my ball as I chipped from the rough.

[Titleist99]

Might as well go back to letting viewers call in when the cameras zoom in and penalize the players for things that he should have seen while chipping in six inch rough..... I will agree with that when the tour supply cameras for all 65 players.....Yeah, I think that would be fair.

[Dpavs]

In all fairness I think most of us would be looking down at the ball or in the near vicinity of it while grounding our club "repetitively" in preparation for a shot and during most of the swing.

That said, once the club is grounded a look up towards the landing area is certainly part of the process so if Rahm says he was looking up and didn't see the ball move, I have no reason not to believe him.

In this situation I believe the determining language for the penalty which was applied is in Decision 34-3/10 - "In applying this “naked eye” standard, the issue is whether the facts could have been seen by the player or someone else close by who was looking at the situation, not whether the player or anyone else actually saw it happen."

[Titleist99]

The ball moves all the time.....what the player must determine in a split second is....does the ball oscillate or does the ball move from its position by a centimeter....

While I will not try to get you to come over to my position, what I will tell you is that a touring pro do not fixate on the ball like you think nor should he.... They're trying to hit their spot on the green.

[Dpavs]

 

So I am really saying two things. I do think there are times while grounding a club behind or in front of the ball that a pro might well see the ball move or they might not even if it actually did... but again that is irrelevant in keeping with Decision 34-3/10.

Also I a not trying to argue to what extent a touring pro focuses on the ball during their routine or swing as I do not have any insight into such a thing. If I were venturing a guess I would guess that the answer depends on the pro. Either way though, that does not change the rule as it stands today. Under the current rules the penalty was properly assessed. That really is all that I am saying in that regards.

 

[Titleist99]

And all I'm saying is that in order to see that ball move with the naked eye, one had to crawl on the ground with a worms eye view and play it over and over and check the writing on the ball.

The penalty was correct if one believes that he was in control of his own ball and should have seen it move........I don't.

Here we'll just have to agree to disagree....I'll write the R&A and suggest that they throw out the amendment to the move ball rule if they will not enforce it.....LOL!

[Dpavs]

The Tour obviously disagrees with you so for the time being we will have to go with their decision.

Where I think you and disagree is when you state "The penalty was correct if one believes that he was in control of his own ball and should have seen it move" because that is not what the decision regarding the rule says. There is no applicable standard that I can decipher from the Decision as to whether or not the player or anyone else for that matter should have seen the ball move.

Conversely, Decision 34-3/10 unfortunately does not address setting any level of probability that the movement might be seen. It appears to simply set the standard as to whether it was possible or not that it could have been seen. Given this I cannot come to any interpretation of the Decision other than that regardless how small the probability is that the movement would have been seen, if it is at all possible it could have been seen, then the penalty must be assessed.

However if you are saying that you feel like no one, regardless of being close by and looking at the situation could have possibly seen the ball move, then I understand.

[Chazb]

Unless they can watch every players shots thru out he tournament instead of a select few then it is wrong because some are under a microscope and others are not.

[Titleist99]

"However if you are saying that you feel like no one, regardless of being close by and looking at the situation could have possibly seen the ball move, then I understand."

That's exactly what I'm saying........

 

[nsxguy]

LOL

Who said "fixated" on a label ? I'm looking at my ball as I ground my club behind it. The label was clearly facing upwards. It was in one place and then it moved to another.

When I look at my landing spot my club isn't pushing down behind the ball. In fact, I may not even have it soled behind the ball at all while I'm looking for a spot - you know, in case I MOVED it - by mistake of course.

The cameras are there to see the players the viewers want to see. Viewers don't want to see 65 players. They want to see the leaders.

And in case no one's told you yet, life,,,,,, and golf,,,,, aren't always fair.

Write to the PGA. Maybe they'll care what you think is fair or not. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Titleist99]

One thing that I am certain of.......A cameraman standing 10-15 Yards behind a player does not have the same sight line or angle as a player with the ball off his right foot.

[nsxguy]

I agree.

The player should have a much better view. That's why it's hard to believe he didn't see the ball move.

I suggest it was because he probably was looking for his spot while keeping the club pressed to the grass. Lesson learned ?

[oikos1]

I appreciate the position you represent, but we're also talking about players playing for literally millions of dollars each week, not your local $2 Nassau ( I use that phrase liberally, not that you may actually play said format).

A professional player most certainly may have a different interpretation of "lightly".

[nsxguy]

You posted the definition of "lightly" yourself. Didn't you read it ?

[oikos1]

Absolutely. What's your point?

[nsxguy]

I quoted your post.

You said "A professional player most certainly may have a different interpretation of "lightly""

It doesn't MATTER what the pros "interpretation" is. It's defined. Only "pressure" permitted is from the weight of the club.

If he chooses to ignore it he's cheating.

That's my point.

 

[oikos1]

Ok. So who is cheating? Perhaps you missed the first page of this thread where there are close to 1/2 dozen posts claiming Professional players are cheating when setting the club down behind the ball.