# Another Rule Change?



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

Webb Simpson lost at the Zurich Classic due to the wind moving his ball as he lined up his putt. he subsequently was in a play-off with Bubba Watson, which he lost. Now, the USGA, are seriously considering changing the rule....this after they have already changed a rule which involved Padraig Harrington being disqualified after a TV viewer phoned in. Are these rule changes good? Should the game not be kept as pure as possible as it was initially intended to 300 years ago?


----------



## Big Hobbit (Nov 2, 2010)

Hi Tagel,

I'd rather leave the rule as it is for the simple reason that if its changed it then becomes subjective. It ends up as did the wind move it or did the player touch it? Whereas at present its the ball moved therefore a penalty of one stroke.

The pro's know that on a windy day they should hover the putter rather than ground it. If they hover the putter, and the ball moves, they can remark it and replace it at no penalty. Once the ball is addressed and the putter grounded if the ball moves it could be their fault or it maybe the wind... how do you tell if its the wind or grounding the club a grass leaf moved another grass leaf moving the ball?

Its getting too messy, leave the rule as it is would be my call.


----------



## Surtees (Sep 11, 2007)

I agree with hobbit leave it as it currently stands and Hobbit said they should be smart enough to know in wind conditions not to ground the putter it is after all what they do for a living. I'm not saying that they should be 100% with all the rules that is what the officials are for but they should at least know the tricks of the trade.


----------



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

watching the golf, it looked to me as there wasn't much wind. i agree that the pros should know what to do in certain cases to not be penalised with a stroke penalty but surely the player can't be penalised for outside forces affecting the lie of his ball. i feel that that if the wind moves your ball as u address it, you should be allowed to replace your ball to its original position, without penalty. if the player himself moved the ball, then fair enough, penalise him. so why penalise a player for outside forces affecting his lie?


----------



## FrogsHair (Mar 4, 2010)

The rules should either be left alone, or the ruling bodies should revamp the rule book completely from top to bottom. The idea that some of these rules are being changed to appease professional golfers, just sounds a little bit self serving.


----------



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

would changing the entire rule book not cause major uproar and confusion among current players? however, if its just one rule being tweaked, surely it could have a more positive impact


----------



## harrison1 (Oct 29, 2010)

I think your right changing a few rules that clearly need to be changed will have a better more positive impact on golfers already accustomed to the rules and regulation.


----------



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

all is good with changing a few rules but dont u feel that this would open up a whole new can of worms? as players could try and possibly manipulate things to try and get more rules to change? just a thought


----------



## 373 (Jun 9, 2006)

There are certain rules that could be changed to make the game fair for tournament play, but the difficulty is changing them in a way that doesn't create a loophole for other circumstances at the same time. If the USGA and Royal & Ancient sit down to discuss the rules they feel have penalties for situations beyond the player's control, I think it would be a welcome change.

I have confidence in them to get it right.


----------



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

do you not think that this could become a catalyst for further rule changes and exploitation of loopholes in the current rules?


----------



## 373 (Jun 9, 2006)

Tagels03 said:


> do you not think that this could become a catalyst for further rule changes and exploitation of loopholes in the current rules?


Anything like this has potential, but the USGA and R&A have stood their ground on some issues for a long time and seemingly listened on issues with popular support at other times. The key is knowing when to stand and when to listen. Like I said, I have confidence in them to keep the integrity of the game intact, but to occasionally fix something that becomes questionable.

I do think the idea of grounding the club, with the subsequent rules that come into play defining it as part of the stroke, might reasonably be discussed among the powers that be, but Nicklaus rarely if ever grounded his club, so he couldn't cause himself the kind of problem Webb Simpson did. Jack seemed to do OK.

One of the commentators made an observation the other day, that it's harder to hover a long putter, in other words to suspend it above the ground and not sit it down behind the ball. I don't think the rules officials are yet ready to change rules to adapt to modern technology. If they were, maybe they would have had more serious discussions about ball limitations for PGA tournament play.


----------



## Tagels03 (May 3, 2011)

but if technology is ever changing, shouldnt the rules change to accommodate it? if this game is going to keep progressing, shouldnt the rules got through something similar as well?


----------



## 373 (Jun 9, 2006)

No, I think those who want to avail themselves of technology must adapt themselves to the rules of the game.

What technology has done is create the ability for people to hit the ball farther and straighter. A biproduct of that is that there is supposedly a bigger gap between the longest and shortest hitters on tour where that gap was supposedly a smaller amount of distance back in the days when all irons were forged and all woods were wood. The rules haven't changed to level the playing field, but new courses and redesigns of old courses have made the "playing field" longer, creating an advantage the rules makes didn't see coming. 

I agree with the hesitation on the parts of the USGA and the T&A to create one ball for tournament play, limiting how far a pro can hit it with any given club. That would mean the pros and us amateurs play games even more dramatically different from one another than we do now.

I think I read somewhere that Augusta is about 800 yards longer than it was 20 years ago. Unfortunately, some clubs don't have room to expand, so they get dropped from PGA Tour lists of venues to play. Personally, I find that foolish, but clubs seem to be embarrassed by someone shooting so far under par on their course. What's the difference? I want to see a pro make birdies, not play a humdrum round of even.

I digress... sorry... My point is, regardless of technology, the rules making bodies are slow to act. I'll guess they take things slowly to see whether there is a natural solution that occurs without having to regulate the game too frequently. The more they change the rules, the more people would probably complain about whatever rule bit them any given day, wanting it changed to suit their purpose. I prefer the rules to stay intact.


----------

