With one round of the Stanford
Intercollegiate in the books, I can highlight a bit of yesterday’s
happenings. It seems like months since I’ve
run an event, even though I’ve been an official at four in the past month, and
it took a minute to get my bearings again in the morning meeting. With that said, we did have an interesting
day yesterday with a couple events worth noting.
Decision 13-4/31: Touching Sand
in Bunker During Backswing
There was one two-stroke penalty
yesterday when a player brushed sand during her backswing when playing her ball
from a bunker. The breach was brought to
our attention by a opposing team’s coach, which is always a touchy situation. We had the official on site make sure to get
the facts from the player and not assess the penalty based on the coach’s
account and sent a rover in for the double check. The facts were simple as stated above and unfortunately
that results in a two-stroke penalty for a breach of Rule 13-4b. For reference see Decision 13-4/31.
Pace of Play AGAIN,Again, again
The most notable incident from
yesterday was the pace of play penalty we issued. It has become clear that
despite clear verbiage and the widespread use of the checkpoint system, that
most coaches and players just don’t seem to get the policy. Please review the NCAA/USGA Four Checkpoint
policy in the Pace of Play section of my page to get the best understanding of
this story.
The group in question missed their
first checkpoint at hole #5. They were
19 minutes over the pace of play and 21 minutes behind the group in front of
them. A fairly egregious breach. To their credit, the hustled and were back in
position through the 9th and 13th hole checkpoints. During the appeal we’re told they were
waiting on the group in front of them up to the 2nd shot on the 16th
hole. Unfortunately, somewhere between
the 16th hole and the 18th hole they fell back. They missed the 18th hole
checkpoint at 22 minutes behind the pace of play and 17 minutes behind the
group in front, making them subject to a one stroke penalty for the 2nd
missed checkpoint.
During the appeal the claim was that
the group in front “rabbited” on them, a phenomenon I would like to discuss
here. ”Rabbiting” is when a group realizes they are slow, takes off by playing
abnormally quick and leaves the group behind them without a chance to make
their checkpoint. We’ve seen this happen
many times, and in many cases it is a reasonable justification for waiving a
pace of play penalty. Typically it is
reasonable when players were waiting on the hole prior to the checkpoint or on
the tee of the checkpoint hole and then a ball search or something else held
the group back on the checkpoint hole.
For this group, the last time they were waiting was the 16th
hole. They gave us no reasons or
indications that anything but either poor or slow play held them up on the last
two holes. We even witnessed their play
on the final green, where they showed no inclination or awareness of their
speed of play.
During the appeal, the players
stated that they not only had no awareness that they were behind on the 18th
hole, but did not know or understand the policy that was in effect. Ignorance
is not bliss in this case. Needless to
say, the coaches were not happy when their players came back and revealed the
Committee’s decision. The lengthy
discussions with the coaches that followed showed that the coaches did not have
a complete understanding of the policy either.
The main discussion revolved around whose responsibility it was to
inform the players of their status. The correct answer is…it is the player’s
responsibility to understand the policy and be aware of their status. It is a checkpoint official’s responsibility
to tell the players if they have missed their checkpoint. The player is permitted at any time to ask an
official or to check their own watch to determine their pace of play
status. The time to finish is listed on
the bottom of the scorecard, and had they looked to see they were behind time,
they could then have seen when the group in front was leaving the green that
they had 14 minutes to finish the hole.
It is not the job of a tournament official to hand-hold, especially
players of this level or caliber.
The official statistics for the day: there were 6 warnings issued and 3 potential
penalties. Two of the penalties were
overturned and one was upheld. The two
that were overturned missed by only one minute at one or both of their
checkpoints and had legitimate causes that slowed them for more than that
minute.
A New Topic; Simon Dyson and the
Ball Tap
It is worth mentioning the Simon
Dyson DQ at the BMW Masters. Dyson was
disqualified for returning a score lower than actually taken, because he failed
to include a two-stroke penalty in his score that he did not know he had
received. A viewer call-in led European
Tour official John Paramour to see that Dyson had breached Rule 16-1a by
touching his line of putt when not permitted.
I say when not permitted because 16-1a has 7 internal exceptions when a
player may touch his line of putt including: to remove loose impediments
without pressing anything down, in the act of addressing the ball without
pressing anything down, in measuring, in lifting or replacing the ball, in
pressing down a ball-marker, in repairing old hole plugs or ball marks on the
putting green or in removing movable obstructions. What Dyson was tapping down with his ball, I’m
not sure, but the action did not fall under any of those internal exceptions
and he was in breach of Rule 16-1a for touching his line of putt.
No comments:
Post a Comment