European Tour's New Policy

[OpusX20]

Getting the players to know the rules better

I found this interesting...

Europe wants its players to know the rules

MARANA, Ariz. (AP) — Dustin Johnson had to call for a ruling on consecutive shots around the fifth green in the final round at Pebble Beach. One was for relief from the grandstands, the other because his chip came to rest in a sprinkler head.

"I get a little confused," Johnson said. "It's always good to get an official, so there's no question about it."

But what if the official is nowhere around and the group has to wait until one arrives?

The European Tour has a new policy this year aimed at making sure players know common rules, and encouraging them not to call for a ruling on the most routine drops.

Europe's top two officials, John Paramor and Andy McFee, have finished making a DVD that educates players on simple rulings. If they deem that a player has asked for a ruling he should know on his own, the player has three tournaments to attend a seminar (and watch the DVD) before he can enter another event.

"It's for when you get a guy asking for what we consider a frivolous ruling," said McFee, the senior referee in Europe.

And what is frivolous?

McFee described some examples as what kind of penalty drop is allowed for unplayable lies and hazards (yellow and red), along with free relief from a sprinkler head or a cart path.

"They need to know how to take relief from a cart path," McFee said. "Most golfers around the world know this, and our players should not be exempt from that."

McFee said at Abu Dhabi last month, a player he declined to identify called for an official, who was several holes away. When the official arrived, the player said, "Is it two club lengths if I declare an unplayable?"

"We now have the right to make him go to the rules seminar," McFee said.

In Johnson's case with the sprinkler, McFee saw no problem. He said some players can go blank on the rules, and even the highest-rated USGA officials are not immune from that (Trey Holland at Oakmont in 1994).

As for relief from the bleachers? McFee said anything involving a temporary immovable object can be tricky, and they would not consider a ruling that involves a TIO to be frivolous.

He said the policy is aimed at all players, with emphasis on the younger players who are reluctant to take drops on their own.

"I don't think it's something we'll use very often," McFee said. "But it's there."

Read more: http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/article/0,28136,1967615,00.html#ixzz0gT18D4zh

[eyeguy]

Bad idea.

Alot of players have lost tournaments because of not interpreting the rules as they "think" they should.

The rules officials are there to help and making a pro go to "detention school" simply for asking what they deem a dumb question to make sure they don't get penalized (losing a tournament) or worse disqualified is wrong.

I can't fathom a benefit out of this aside from the rules officials not having to get their butt off the cart and do their job. Their point is that it speeds up play, but I disagree that it is that impactful since rulings officials are not called on that often.

[Putt For Dough]

This is certainly interesting.

The last thing that anyone wants is for a player to lose a tournament just because they didn't know a particular ruling. If the rules officials are available and the player isn't sure, it's common sense for them to ask.

On the other hand, knowing the rules is part of the game. Granted, players on the major tours have to deal with spectators, advertising hoardings, television cables and grandstands but there's no reason why they should have to ask for assistance when it comes to water hazards or a ball in the bushes. Why should they have extra assistance over mini tour players (or even recreational golfers).

Maybe they think the players are becoming to reliant on the rules officials? Whatever the reason, it looks like it's happening.

[OpusX20]

Yeah, I see this both ways. I certainly understand wanting to make sure you do everything by the lettter of the law, when you have that kind of $$$ on the line. But, it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect a professional golfer to be able to take a drop from a cart path without rules official intervention.

[razorbird]

[b][i]"On the other hand, knowing the rules is part of the game."

[/i][/b]Just like most of us have a job description, I agree with this.

[mat562]

I agree with the above statement. Knowing the rules is certainly part of the game and it's not unreasonable to expect golfers to possess a solid knowledge of the rules - particularly in the case of common situations such as those involving water hazards, LWHs, unplayables and the like.

I played a lot of competitive amateur golf when I was younger and it was both expected and required that competitors should have a decent knowledge of the rules and the ability to deal with a reasonable amount of situations that required the taking of relief or a penalty drop. There was always the option of summoning a referee, but it was a fairly long-winded affair and was discouraged for run of the mill situations where players were expected to deal with and police situations themselves for the most part. None of us were rules experts, but we all had a decent grasp of the vast majority of everyday rulings, and mistakes were very rare. We weren't playing for vast pots of money, but I can guarantee that no one in the field wanted to cop for penalty strokes or a disqualification by making a rickets of a ruling. If [i]we[/i] could manage it, without the aid of a referee, it begs the question of why an overwhelming number of professionals can't do the same.

Obviously, professional golf is a different kettle of fish when it comes to prize monies, ranking points and all the rest, but is it really beyond the pale to expect players to know the more straightforward rules and be able to apply them, correctly, in the majority of situations? A lot of pros that I see are on the blower for an official in perfectly straightforward situations like water hazards, unplayable lies and similar. Fair enough, they're worried that they'll make a mistake, but let's be honest; a lot of the rules are [i]just about[/i] simple enough for a monkey to understand. Even if you can't remember them, there's the very obvious solution of carrying a rule book in your bag and, between two or three people who play golf for a living, it's a pitiful state of affairs when a ball's in a bush and they're all scratching their heads and waiting around for a referee because they can't get their heads around the three fairly simple options that exist.

I think it's a great initiative and perfectly reasonable. Whether we'll see a difference in the number of calls for help from officialdom is debatable, but I applaud the Tour for their efforts.

Next on the agenda should be the insistence on allowing the following group through whenever there's an obvious hold-up in play. For whatever reason, a bit like shouting 'Fore!' when a ball's heading towards a crowd, the art of waving one arm and allowing the following group to play through seems to have totally disappeared from the professional game in recent years.

[Asleep]

Good idea that players should know [i]at least[/i] the most common rules well enough to resolve a situation without slowing play.

I mean, c'mon ..... relief from a sprinkler head?

[KevCarter]

I agree for the most part. If I were running a tour, everybody would attend rules school before they were allowed to play. It would be part of their "business" training they already attend after earning their card. I was really happy to see Anikka in her prime attending a 4 day USGA workshop.

That being said, it isn't going to help much, the officials are still going to be called whenever the player is in contention. I know all to well from experience, in the heat of battle, you space out and forget even the basics. I have had it happen to me, and I have seen it happen to professional friends who I KNOW are very knowledgeable with the rules of golf.

If the player makes a mistake, he may end up DQ and down the road. If the referee makes a mistake, you are back to play another day. They play for to much cash to take that chance.

Just my opinion.

Kevin

[Sid Vicious]

It's pretty simple: If you are a touring professional and have to get relief, call your playing partner(s) over, announce your intentions and get on with it. If between the 2 or 3 of you, you can't figure out where to get relief from a cart path or sprinkler head, then you are all doinks. Very talented doinks, mind you, but doinks just the same.

Now if you have a disagreement about where and how, they have this neat little rule called the provisional ball rule for that. And there's no limit on how many provies either. You have four different opinions, you play four different balls. I can guarantee you no one wants to go through that so the issue will most likely get resolved the minute someone proposes playing multiple provies. And if the guys in the group behind you witness an abortion like that, they are definitely going to let you know about it in the locker room. If that's not enough self-policing, I don't know what is.

If they are really that paranoid about making the wrong call and getting DQ'ed, the committee will look at the issues involved and if it's deemed that no advantage was gained by the botched drop, they have the power to rescind the DQ. No committee ever wants to DQ someone, because at the very least, it screws up their precious pairing sheet for the next day, so they don't usually send a guy packing unless he really, really messed it up. And if a touring pro or three messes a simple relief drop up, I refer you to my first paragraph.

Now that I think about it, if three guys can't get together and get the drop right, and the player gets DQ'ed, then the committee should DQ the whole group just on general principle. Someone ought to send that one to the USGA and the R&A to chew on. Maybe it'll get their minds off phantom groove problems for awhile.

This is a great idea and every tour all the way down to the minis should do it.

[OpusX20]

[quote name='Sid Vicious' date='25 February 2010 - 12:00 PM' timestamp='1267120809' post='2276518']
It's pretty simple: If you are a touring professional and have to get relief, call your playing partner(s) over, announce your intentions and get on with it. If between the 2 or 3 of you, you can't figure out where to get relief from a cart path or sprinkler head, then you are all doinks. Very talented doinks, mind you, but doinks just the same.

Now if you have a disagreement about where and how, they have this neat little rule called the provisional ball rule for that. And there's no limit on how many provies either. You have four different opinions, you play four different balls. I can guarantee you no one wants to go through that so the issue will most likely get resolved the minute someone proposes playing multiple provies. And if the guys in the group behind you witness an abortion like that, they are definitely going to let you know about it in the locker room. If that's not enough self-policing, I don't know what is.

If they are really that paranoid about making the wrong call and getting DQ'ed, the committee will look at the issues involved and if it's deemed that no advantage was gained by the botched drop, they have the power to rescind the DQ. No committee ever wants to DQ someone, because at the very least, it screws up their precious pairing sheet for the next day, so they don't usually send a guy packing unless he really, really messed it up. And if a touring pro or three messes a simple relief drop up, I refer you to my first paragraph.

Now that I think about it, if three guys can't get together and get the drop right, and the player gets DQ'ed, then the committee should DQ the whole group just on general principle. Someone ought to send that one to the USGA and the R&A to chew on. Maybe it'll get their minds off phantom groove problems for awhile.

This is a great idea and every tour all the way down to the minis should do it.
[/quote]

I'm with you on the 'doinks' part Sid. But just to be clear, if you were in doubt with how to proceed, you would play a second ball and not a provisional ball (Rule 3-3). A provisional can only be played if a ball may be lost or out of bounds (Rule 27-2). And you can't play unlimited "second balls" (Decision 3-3/10).

[Sid Vicious]

[quote name='OpusX20' date='25 February 2010 - 12:55 PM' timestamp='1267124103' post='2276645']
[quote name='Sid Vicious' date='25 February 2010 - 12:00 PM' timestamp='1267120809' post='2276518']
It's pretty simple: If you are a touring professional and have to get relief, call your playing partner(s) over, announce your intentions and get on with it. If between the 2 or 3 of you, you can't figure out where to get relief from a cart path or sprinkler head, then you are all doinks. Very talented doinks, mind you, but doinks just the same.

Now if you have a disagreement about where and how, they have this neat little rule called the provisional ball rule for that. And there's no limit on how many provies either. You have four different opinions, you play four different balls. I can guarantee you no one wants to go through that so the issue will most likely get resolved the minute someone proposes playing multiple provies. And if the guys in the group behind you witness an abortion like that, they are definitely going to let you know about it in the locker room. If that's not enough self-policing, I don't know what is.

If they are really that paranoid about making the wrong call and getting DQ'ed, the committee will look at the issues involved and if it's deemed that no advantage was gained by the botched drop, they have the power to rescind the DQ. No committee ever wants to DQ someone, because at the very least, it screws up their precious pairing sheet for the next day, so they don't usually send a guy packing unless he really, really messed it up. And if a touring pro or three messes a simple relief drop up, I refer you to my first paragraph.

Now that I think about it, if three guys can't get together and get the drop right, and the player gets DQ'ed, then the committee should DQ the whole group just on general principle. Someone ought to send that one to the USGA and the R&A to chew on. Maybe it'll get their minds off phantom groove problems for awhile.

This is a great idea and every tour all the way down to the minis should do it.
[/quote]

I'm with you on the 'doinks' part Sid. But just to be clear, if you were in doubt with how to proceed, you would play a second ball and not a provisional ball (Rule 3-3). A provisional can only be played if a ball may be lost or out of bounds (Rule 27-2). And you can't play unlimited "second balls" (Decision 3-3/10).
[/quote]

Right, poor choice of words. My mistake. And I was also mistaken about the number of balls you can play, although I'm sure I saw this somewhere before. Anyway, no matter. Professionals should know the rules and be able to apply them. If they can't they shouldn't be out there. It's not fair to the rest of the field. or at least the part of the field that knows the rules and how to apply them.

[Sawgrass]

Thanks for posting this Opus, it is interesting.

If ever there were a situation where the punishment fits the crime, this is it:

You don't know a basic rule . . . you must soon learn the basic rules. It's not as if they were proposing giving you a stroke penalty for blank-mindedness.

Another solution for the nervous pro is to hire a caddie that has strengths were the pro has weaknesses. I'm confident that even I could keep you out of "rules school" -- but I'd be terrible at throwing a fan's camera in a lake when that became necessary.

Now if I could only become this cocky over a four-footer . . .

[grabthepin]

Definitely like the idea. In a game which revolves around honesty, how you can you call a penalty upon yourself if you don't know even the absolute basics?

If they lose big money because of it, so be it. A simple mistake in any business can cost big bucks.

[Sawgrass]

[quote name='jontyc' date='25 February 2010 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1267155621' post='2277941']
. . . In a game which revolves around honesty, how you can you call a penalty upon yourself if you don't know even the absolute basics?
[/quote]

Wow, that is a great observation. It's not just a pace of play thing, it's bigger than that as you clearly point out.

[Newby]

[quote name='eyeguy' date='24 February 2010 - 04:06 PM' timestamp='1267027592' post='2274019']
Bad idea.

Alot of players have lost tournaments because of not interpreting the rules as they "think" they should.

The rules officials are there to help and making a pro go to "detention school" simply for asking what they deem a dumb question to make sure they don't get penalized (losing a tournament) or worse disqualified is wrong.

[/quote]

If a soccer or rugby player breaches a rule he doesn't 'know', he gets penalised. Why should a pro golfer be any different? These guys are paid to do their job.

In a number of European countries you aren't allowed on the course until you've passed a basic rules test.

[razorbird]

[i][b]"If they lose big money because of it, so be it. A simple mistake in any business can cost big bucks. "

[/b][/i]Spot On.

[highergr0und]

Can't a major tour afford a few extra marshals? It would open up a few jobs that probably wouldn't even need to be high paying as I'm sure there's a lot of PGA or R&A members out there that would jump all over it.

I'm sure these guys all understand the rules, but the penalty for making a mistake is severe, especially considering that you can be penalized after the round is over.

[Putt For Dough]

[quote name='highergr0und' date='01 March 2010 - 09:24 PM' timestamp='1267478698' post='2286066']
Can't a major tour afford a few extra marshals? It would open up a few jobs that probably wouldn't even need to be high paying as I'm sure there's a lot of PGA or R&A members out there that would jump all over it.

I'm sure these guys all understand the rules, but the penalty for making a mistake is severe, especially considering that you can be penalized after the round is over.
[/quote]
It's not a cost cutting exercise!

As you say, the penalty for making a mistake is severe but between player and caddy, surely they should know the rules. They don't get any assistance when signing their card and we've seen players disqualified in winning positions (anyone remember Padraig Harrington at the Belfry in 2000?). Why should they get assistance on the course?

I understand that players have to deal with differing conditions at tournament courses but there's absolutely no excuse for a player needing assistance with the basics. The rules of golf are an integral part of the game.

[avrag]

Excellent idea.
After all, The rules of Golf start like this:

"Definitions

1-1. General
The Game of Golf consists of playing a ball with a club from the teeing
ground into the hole by a stroke or successive strokes [u][b]in accordance
with the Rules.[/b][/u]"

So, by definition, you only play golf, if you play in accordance with the rules. If you want to earn money by doing it, you should not only be able to swing a club in a consistent manner, but you also should know the rules that apply.
And I totally agree with Sawgrass here, that the punishment fits the crime. Having them take a basic rules course is the perfect way to handle this. Remember, this is not a punishment for breaking a rule, but for "asking for what is considered a frivolus ruling". So in effect, it is punishment for wasting the rules officials' and the spectators' time. And that has to be applauded.
BTW, if you have ever seen John Paramor face to face, you would think twice about getting on his nerves, anyway. I would not want to call him to get a ruling, in a situation, in which his response could be "Are you serious?"

[larrybud]

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a professional golfer to know when he gets a 1 club relief vs. 2 club relief, or what "nearest point of relief" means.

[TheLastDon]

In this modern age of technology, they have these things called "paper" that almost magically accepts dark scratches from these strange pointy things called "pencils". Some extremely fortunate souls may stumble upon the darker scratching version called "pens". It is rumored that a person can make these scratches on "paper" in such an arrangement that you can actually discern a meaning from them, truly remarkable. Perhaps it could be possible for a higher order being with opposable thumbs to use them highly technologically advanced devices to remember something that could be useful?

Wonders never cease