Fitzpatrick cracked driver ruling a disgrace...

[2over]

As TV picked up Matt Fitzpatrick was absolutely right to say it was an absolute disgrace the PGA Tour rules official did not allow him to replace a cracked face driver. Even Sheffler chimed in the ball flew 80 yards shorter and Fitzpatrick said it was flying completely unpredictably as well. And to say that's not "significant damage" is simply asinine. Those rules officials should be fired.

[drbonesvt]

I’m hoping Fitzy gets on the gram or x and shares his damage 

[Shilgy]

The tour/tour officials should know that , if nothing else, when hitting a ball with a cracked driver head at 120+mph the broken pieces would cause potential serious harm to spectators-players-caddies-volunteers….even rules officials could be harmed.😎

 

Terrible ruling.

[tatertot]

2 hours ago, 2over said:

As TV picked up Matt Fitzpatrick was absolutely right to say it was an absolute disgrace the PGA Tour rules official did not allow him to replace a cracked face driver. Even Sheffler chimed in the ball flew 80 yards shorter and Fitzpatrick said it was flying completely unpredictably as well. And to say that's not "significant damage" is simply asinine. Those rules officials should be fired.

Did they say he cracked it through "abuse".

[Shilgy]

17 minutes ago, tatertot said:

Did they say he cracked it through "abuse".

No, normal play.  They just said it wasn’t damaged “enough”.

Edited August 25, 2024 by Shilgy

[bcjim]

They were pretty adamant and I heard 3 officials looked at it.

 

They also probably did not witness the alleged 80y short drive. So,  they can only go on what they see and the specifics of the rule.

[Climbhard]

Clown show. These people have no business making rulings if that’s what they come up with.

[TiScape]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

No, normal play.  They just said it wasn’t damaged “enough”.

During the broadcast they mentioned that the rule is that the face has to be cracked all the way through and it wasn’t 🤷🏼‍♂️

[Shilgy]

19 minutes ago, TiScape said:

During the broadcast they mentioned that the rule is that the face has to be cracked all the way through and it wasn’t 🤷🏼‍♂️

If, as Scheffler and Fitzpatrick asserted, it was a crack you could feel the ridge then it’s “all the way through”.  If it wasn’t what appears to be a crack would be a deep scratch. 
 

I wonder where the “all the way through” comes from?  I would say the “property”/ playing characteristics were definitely changed.

 

Damaged during a round” means when any part, feature, or property of a club is changed because of any act during the round 

[Shilgy]

2 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If, as Scheffler and Fitzpatrick asserted, it was a crack you could feel the ridge then it’s “all the way through”.  If it wasn’t what appears to be a crack would be a deep scratch. 
 

I wonder where the “all the way through” comes from?  I would say the “property”/ playing characteristics were definitely changed.

 

Damaged during a round” means when any part, feature, or property of a club is changed because of any act during the round 

I’ll answer my own question.  I re-read the link I provided above and the rules official repeatedly mentioned the local rule used on tour.

Model Local Rule G-9.

 

It still sounds to me like it was damaged significantly but they ruled otherwise.

 

Model Local Rule G-9
“Rule 4.1a(2) is modified in this way:
Rule 4.1a(2) applies except that a club that is damaged by the player or their caddie during the round (including while play is stopped under Rule 5.7a) may only be replaced if it is "broken or significantly damaged".
For the purposes of this Local Rule:
A club is “broken or significantly damaged” when:
    •    The shaft breaks into pieces, splinters or is bent (but not when the shaft is only dented)
    •    The club face impact area is visibly deformed (but not when the club face is only scratched or cracked)
    •    The clubhead is visibly and significantly deformed (but not when the clubhead is only cracked)
    •    The clubhead is detached or loose from the shaft, or
    •    The grip is loose.
Exception: A club face or clubhead is not “broken or significantly damaged” solely because it is cracked.

[TiScape]

23 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If, as Scheffler and Fitzpatrick asserted, it was a crack you could feel the ridge then it’s “all the way through”.  If it wasn’t what appears to be a crack would be a deep scratch. 
 

I wonder where the “all the way through” comes from?  I would say the “property”/ playing characteristics were definitely changed.

 

Damaged during a round” means when any part, feature, or property of a club is changed because of any act during the round 

Terrific points! Just telling ppl what the beloved commentators said 😇

 

And I agree. Cracked, deep scratch, dent what have you. If damaged during the normal course of use and it affects playing characteristics, let em switch it out. 

Edited August 26, 2024 by TiScape

[Nickb333]

And some folks wonder why some of us believe many of the rules of golf are ridiculous. 

[TiScape]

Not sure why I ever post in these rules related threads. A lot here act like it’s curing cancer and I just don’t care that much! Just entertainment 😊

 Cheers 🍻 

[Shilgy]

4 minutes ago, Nickb333 said:

And some folks wonder why some of us believe many of the rules of golf are ridiculous. 

Why…I don’t even think this ruling reaches ridiculous really.  Let’s say a player knows the rules well and is hitting the ball too low of the tee the first couple holes.  Should he be able to swap it out for a driver with a bit more loft by claiming it’s damaged?   Maybe for us that would change little bit for them it could be huge.

 

This just makes the standard a bit higher for damaged replacement.

 

I think it’s stupid that in baseball you get four balls to get a walk but only need three for a strikeout.

So unfair!🤣

Edited August 26, 2024 by Shilgy

[st1800e]

Whats the origin/logic of this rule, denying a replacement when it’s cracked?   

[TiScape]

6 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Why…I don’t even think this ruling reaches ridiculous really.  Let’s say a player knows the rules well and is hitting the ball too low of the tee the first couple holes.  Should he be able to swap it out for a driver with a bit more loft by claiming it’s damaged?   Maybe for us that would change little bit for them it could be huge.

 

This just makes the standard a bit higher for damaged replacement.

 

*I think it’s stupid that in baseball you get four balls to get a walk but only need three for a strikeout.

So unfair!🤣

Reminds me of something an old friend of mine use to say. “Golf is harder than hitting a baseball because in golf you have to hit your foul balls”. 
 

*btw, I disagree! 😂 

 

Edited August 26, 2024 by TiScape

[Shilgy]

1 minute ago, TiScape said:

Reminds me of something an old friend of mine use to say. “Golf is harder than hitting a baseball because in golf you have to hit your foul balls”. 
 

*btw, I disagree! 😂 

 

Without seeing it I cannot disagree based on how the MLR is written.

[Nickb333]

12 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Why…I don’t even think this ruling reaches ridiculous really.  Let’s say a player knows the rules well and is hitting the ball too low of the tee the first couple holes.  Should he be able to swap it out for a driver with a bit more loft by claiming it’s damaged?   Maybe for us that would change little bit for them it could be huge.

 

This just makes the standard a bit higher for damaged replacement.

 

I think it’s stupid that in baseball you get four balls to get a walk but only need three for a strikeout.

So unfair!🤣

But they can grab a new bat anytime they like. 
 

Seriously though. A pro hits a 220 yard drive but his club isn’t broken? Ridiculous. 

[Yacho]

2 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Should he be able to swap it out for a driver with a bit more loft by claiming it’s damaged?  

 

Sure, why not?  Who cares, as long as it makes the product better.  Make it a single-substitution rule if they want, but sure, I'm all for it. More strategy to follow for the super-geeks like us.

 

Can a player switch out gloves if he believes the current one is not working out optimally? How come this is allowed?

 

Watching the best players in the world have to do this dance is not in the best interest of the game's intended result, imo.

[Yacho]

Giving props where due though, he still gave my 11yr old son a high-five on his way to the 12th teebox even though he had this b.s. bouncing around his head. Class act.

[Shilgy]

4 minutes ago, Yacho said:

 

Sure, why not?  Who cares, as long as it makes the product better.  Make it a single-substitution rule if they want, but sure, I'm all for it. More strategy to follow for the super-geeks like us.

 

Can a player switch out gloves if he believes the current one is not working out optimally? How come this is allowed?

 

Watching the best players in the world have to do this dance is not in the best interest of the game's intended result, imo.

Glove≠ club

 

You can carry as many gloves as you wish but 14 clubs is the limit.

[Shilgy]

7 minutes ago, Nickb333 said:

But they can grab a new bat anytime they like. 
 

Seriously though. A pro hits a 220 yard drive but his club isn’t broken? Ridiculous. 

Even pros hit bad shots…did you see Schefflers last week it was worse than that…..and the officials didn’t see it.

[JungleJimbo]

 

 

 

[Yacho]

8 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Glove≠ club

 

You can carry as many gloves as you wish but 14 clubs is the limit.

 

Yes, I may be in devil's advocate mode here, but ...

 

Optimising equipment for results = optimising equipment for results.

 

Clubs, gloves, hats, shoes, balls, tees... 

 

Apparently if some of these things aren't working at an optimized level for a player's intentions, it's totally fine to change them at will, even though it can also alter the results of a performance. 

 

So what bottom line are we trying to achieve with the club replacement rule as written, when we explicitly allow other equipment substitutions mid-round in order to, presumably, allow the player to function at the highest level possible? 

[Nickb333]

17 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Even pros hit bad shots…did you see Schefflers last week it was worse than that…..and the officials didn’t see it.

Did he have a cracked driver? No. Did he ask to change his equipment? No. Apples and bananas. 

[TexasTurf]

He was obviously to weak to break it enough, could have cracked it with his teeth if he really wanted it replaced. 

[Shilgy]

15 minutes ago, Nickb333 said:

Did he have a cracked driver? No. Did he ask to change his equipment? No. Apples and bananas. 

Did the read the post I replied to?

A poor shot is not proof of damage.

[Nickb333]

2 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Did the read the post I replied to?

A poor shot is not proof of damage.

Of course. Scotty didn’t have a cracked driver so that has not to do with this discussion.

 

If a pro has a cracked driver that’s hitting 80 yards short it’s clearly damaged severely. End of discussion. 
 

Ridiculous ruling. 

 

[Yacho]

5 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

A poor shot is not proof of damage

 

It is in the NHL. And then my kids get a free stick from their heroes at intermission...  this could be cool 😉

 

Rory handing out QI10's after every shot that misses the fairway.  Grow the game, baby!

[Yacho]

As not to stray off topic too much though, at the end of the day, I believe that everything is better if we get Matt Fitzpatrick playing top-level golf tournaments like Matt Fitzpatrick, and it is not nearly as good if we end up getting Matt Fitzpatrick playing golf like Matt Fitzpatrick without a driver.

 

Fwiw, I do believe the officials were correct in their interpretation of the rule as written, it's just unfortunate that they were forced to uphold such an ill-conceived and detrimental policy in a situation of such great importance.  Who knows what may have come for Fitzy if he made it to East Lake...

 

Hopefully the USGA will review and revise