OP
- Jan 8, 2009
- 8,204
- 6,042
- Country
-
Australia
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #31
The USGA statement.
-
Welcome To ShotTalk.com!
We are one of the oldest and largest Golf forums on the internet with golfers from around the world sharing tips, photos and planning golf outings.
Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon!
Vail Phil Mickelson
- Thread starter TheTrueReview
- Start date
Looks good to me. Still a bush league move.
- Jul 3, 2006
- 13,545
- 95
I stand by it, hogwash. They are going to interpret the rules now not for accuracy, but to protect themselves. Because, yknow, USGA.
Yes, rule 14-5 addresses his actions in part. But so does 1-2. And they are going to go with the judgment call that defends their negligence.
Yes, rule 14-5 addresses his actions in part. But so does 1-2. And they are going to go with the judgment call that defends their negligence.
I'll admit, I don't like the USGA.
Libre
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2007
- 185
- 107
- Country
-
United States
There are contradictions within the rule set.
The worst one here is having one rule for hitting a ball in motion AT the hole (14-5) and a different rule if you stop or deflect the ball (1-2) which the USGA says did not apply.
So he didn’t deflect the ball, huh? In what universe or parallel dimension. DQ. I’m all for lightening up on some of the harsher rules and penalties but not here. You may not affect the path of the ball after you strike it. Basic golf.
I wrote technical specifications and requirements for a living. They must be written to preclude the option to violate the requirements at advantage to the violator. But anyway it was a clear DQ in my mind. Craig Stadler was DQd for kneeling on a towel.
The worst one here is having one rule for hitting a ball in motion AT the hole (14-5) and a different rule if you stop or deflect the ball (1-2) which the USGA says did not apply.
So he didn’t deflect the ball, huh? In what universe or parallel dimension. DQ. I’m all for lightening up on some of the harsher rules and penalties but not here. You may not affect the path of the ball after you strike it. Basic golf.
I wrote technical specifications and requirements for a living. They must be written to preclude the option to violate the requirements at advantage to the violator. But anyway it was a clear DQ in my mind. Craig Stadler was DQd for kneeling on a towel.
DeVicenzo signs an incorrect scorecard at the 1968 Masters and is disqualified.
Tiger Woods signs an incorrect scorecard at the 2013 Masters and is handed a 2-stroke penalty and allowed to play the following rounds.
1996 Greg Norman disqualified himself because of a marking on the ball. The ball he was using had been tested and approved for use by the USGA. The ball he was using had a stamping that included a "0" that was not on the one tested. Therefore, he was using non-conforming equipment.
The Rules of Golf are probably the most confusing of any game out there. We have Baptists and Presbyterians simply because one interprets what they are reading different than the other. The Rules of Golf can lend themselves to similar interpretational differences. That component of vague and subjective interpretation is the one thing I dislike about the Game I love!
OP
- Jan 8, 2009
- 8,204
- 6,042
- Country
-
Australia
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #37
Phil Mickelson confuses the heck out of me. When you think he’s going to dominate, he fizzles. Just when you think he’s going to disappear from the golfing scene, he hits a rich patch of form.
He’s currently not playing well. I’m still scratching my head.
He’s currently not playing well. I’m still scratching my head.
He’s a mess on the golf course right now. :shrug:
