Rules-R-Rules but this is stupid le

looking fwd to catch paddy but found this !!!

Quote :

Padraig Harrington has been disqualified from the Abu Dhabi HSBC Championship after being called to review an incident in his opening 65.

The three-time major winner, one off the lead overnight in Abu Dhabi, did not tee off in the second round after his hand brushed the back of his ball as he replaced it in front of his marker on the seventh green.

Andy McFee, European Tour Senior Referee, explained the ruling in a statement which said: “Harrington was disqualified for a breach of Rule 6-6d for signing for the wrong score on hole seven during the first round of the Abu Dhabi HSBC Golf Championship.

“On the seventh green, Padraig replaced his ball and as he began to remove his marker, his finger was seen on TV to brush the ball, causing it to move. The movement of the ball during the specific act of replacing it is covered by Rule 20-3a and there is no penalty to this movement, but the ball must be replaced

.

Golf is one of those strange games that is so high tech in equipment and instruction, yet archaic in its tradition and rules. Yet it is still a wonderful game for all its many frustrations, it takes but that one fleeting moment when it all comes together for a fantastic shot to make us return and endure further frustration and self torture.

The real bugbear here is that of TV. Is there any other sport in the world where a viewer can call in to report an infraction of the rules? And officials who themselves aren't doing a good enough job to be eagle-eyed, can then use TV footage to call a ruling long after the infraction has passed, or in some cases, even after the tournament is over. I can only think of this happening in Miss Universe, and this is no beauty pageant where we are playing for world peace.

It is unfair too those leading tournaments too, in that the cameras are more often on the leaders, and less on those not contending, meaning less chances of viewers spotting a rules infraction by a pro not leading, and added pressure on tournament leaders not to break a rule. Is it any wonder then, that we see televised situations where it takes forever to come to a rules decision and play grinds to a halt in already increasingly slow tournament rounds?

Remember Dustin Johnson at Whistling Straits and the 'bunker' incident? There was a rules official there who was useless, and it was TV that did him in. And Michelle Wie grounding her club in a hazard? No official saw it and again it was TV that did a pro in.

Imagine if this is allowed in any sport televised?

What's done is done, and it should not be reversed by TV viewers. Like in football, referees decision stands, no matter what the TV replay shows.

i recall the fevered shouts of "referee bodoh" in kallang..
TV refereeing for football like the world cup would be something i think more relevant.
can you remember the controversial "hand of god"?
numerous tackles and penalties?

oh well.. all the frustrations.. anguish.. and stupid refereeing..

In fast paced sports, TV refereeing does make some sense of course, all in the name of the correct decision.

But where does it stop? Already, it changes the way the game has been played since it was invented, where it's always been the referee's decision being final. Technology is always improving, what next will we allow into the game or sport to catch infractions?

it has to make economic sense and speed and clarity.
i think the world cup discussed using it as a finals only TV refreeing and only as a 4th referee fall back.. might have been ditched already..

its not some school yard or national football game..
heck even the NBA don't use TV refereeing.
when there are millions of eyes on live TV watching the game, and viewers literally going out to riot if the refereeing was bad and cost them their country's bid for the world cup.. i think it really makes sense to use it to prevent people really venting frustraitions because they saw the foul on TV, including commentation and replay, and yet the refereeing insists on sticking his head in the dirt..

injustice, stupidity, inflexibility of the organisers and lost opportunity to better the sport..
so many things to think about.. oh well..

Then instead of TV refereeing, let's take tech all the way with chip embedded balls and laser boundaries. No room for dispute there right?

Viewers rioting cannot be blamed on refereeing la bro, that one blame bad upbringing.

well you know those soccer hooligans..

laser boundaries? cost prohibitive.
chip embedded balls.. hmm.. possible..

Golf is a game with clear rules. Do we want it to be up to interpretation like 'should be penalty', 'was tackle from behind' where everyone got own opinion? Since it has clear rules, there's nothing wrong with DQ from any infringement if the rules state so. It doesn't matter if it's spotted by TV, the crowd, playing partner, whoever. An infringement is an infringement and should be penalised accordingly. It is not about whether the action has given the player any advantage, it is about has any rules been bridge. The former will give rise to endless debate.

The top pros never complain (openingly at least) about the DQ/penalty regardless of how insignificant the infringement might be. Either because they want their win to be legit or they know the infringement is undebatable. They're world top pros, and perfection is expected of them. Ignorance is no excuse.

alangolf wrote:

Golf is a game with clear rules. Do we want it to be up to interpretation like 'should be penalty', 'was tackle from behind' where everyone got own opinion? Since it has clear rules, there's nothing wrong with DQ from any infringement if the rules state so. It doesn't matter if it's spotted by TV, the crowd, playing partner, whoever. An infringement is an infringement and should be penalised accordingly. It is not about whether the action has given the player any advantage, it is about has any rules been bridge. The former will give rise to endless debate.

The top pros never complain (openingly at least) about the DQ/penalty regardless of how insignificant the infringement might be. Either because they want their win to be legit or they know the infringement is undebatable. They're world top pros, and perfection is expected of them. Ignorance is no excuse.

hahah.. alan, you have lost the point of the discussion..
it was never about questioning the rules..
its about TV refereeing.. pls re-read the whole thread..

however, having said that, what you say is exactly my point regarding TV refereeing on say football. an infringemnet is an infringment. only that the ref did not catch it and won't call it. if he did not, then the player gets the advantage to play on and score a goal even.

in golf tournaments, if there was no TV coverage because it is not a big enough event, will padraig's infringement be caught if he himself did not think he broke any rule? Now that is what this discussion is about.
its also about expediency. wait till the end of the game then your playing partner waits for you to submit the wrong score and DQ you.. hahahah

another point to note alan.. golf does not have clear rules.. in Dustin's case, what is a sand bunker? any patch where grass does not grow?
heck, go ask every golfer you meet to see how clear they think the rules are.

Very soon, we'll need to use robots to mark, move and place our golf balls. This is a stupid rule and while I appreciate that technology has given us greater visibility with ultra-zoom lenses, this is absurd.

Birdman--Xaga Ng says Hi. He was MC at a golf event I covered for a local steel industry trade magazine at Laguna Natl CC yesterday.

UR right, the new Laguna World Classic Course looks very dificult from ALL the tees! Hilly terrian, large sand/waste area and menacing water.

CU 7 Feb at OCC--let's hope it does not rain.



CK

To me......viewer should stay to what viewers do best......just VIEW !!!!


this is not macam road accident, where by police put poster to ask for witness....if its such, that the bloody Golf body should do so and only upon that, should viewers do that.


NB....I think we take the 911 bombing to golf course liao.....

mizzy wrote:

hahah.. alan, you have lost the point of the discussion..
it was never about questioning the rules..
its about TV refereeing.. pls re-read the whole thread..
....
in golf tournaments, if there was no TV coverage because it is not a big enough event, will padraig's infringement be caught if he himself did not think he broke any rule? Now that is what this discussion is about.
its also about expediency. wait till the end of the game then your playing partner waits for you to submit the wrong score and DQ you.. hahahah

1) on TV referees.
If there's infringement, doesn't matter it's from couch potatoes who knows nothing else about golf except that rule. So TV refereeing is acceptable. That's my point. Till another rule is inked that TV refereeing is banned or some form of boundaries is laid, there's nothing to stop it. Cos there's no such rule, organiser, PGA, player (whoever makes the decision) has got no choice.
I do feel sorry for the players DQ 'unnecessarily'. But there's nothing except offer condolences.

2) If no TV coverage.
If nobody knows, of course it's never an issue.

3) on expediency.
If we go down this road, the debates will be endless.

mizzy wrote:

another point to note alan.. golf does not have clear rules.. in Dustin's case, what is a sand bunker? any patch where grass does not grow?
heck, go ask every golfer you meet to see how clear they think the rules are.

I'm not too sure about this case...
But i think there should be a course layout given to players marking hazards whatsoever. While practising, players/caddie can survey the course accordingly. If this bunker (if you can call it one ) is so unnoticable, the more they should take note.

These pros are at the pinnacle of golf game. The expectations and demands are just so high of them.

alangolf wrote:

mizzy wrote:

another point to note alan.. golf does not have clear rules.. in Dustin's case, what is a sand bunker? any patch where grass does not grow?
heck, go ask every golfer you meet to see how clear they think the rules are.

I'm not too sure about this case...
But i think there should be a course layout given to players marking hazards whatsoever. While practising, players/caddie can survey the course accordingly. If this bunker (if you can call it one ) is so unnoticable, the more they should take note.

These pros are at the pinnacle of golf game. The expectations and demands are just so high of them.

alan, did you miss the fracas on the Dustin case? the whole course was just full of sand patches.. even spectators walking on down trodden grass can turn it into sand in a day. there were just too many to mark that the organisers gave up.

yup, i watch the news on GC yesterday, and it was a TV viewer who called in to complaint to the referee about paddy ! He should be penalized but not DQ.

It was mentioned that the ball moved 3 dimples forward and moved 1.5 dimples backwards.
Oh my god ! Such sadness. There was no intend on cheating and malice. it was just a genuine mistake.

Are the rules officials "STUPID" or what ?

JawereZ wrote:

yup, i watch the news on GC yesterday, and it was a TV viewer who called in to complaint to the referee about paddy ! He should be penalized but not DQ.

It was mentioned that the ball moved 3 dimples forward and moved 1.5 dimples backwards.
Oh my god ! Such sadness. There was no intend on cheating and malice. it was just a genuine mistake.

Are the rules officials "STUPID" or what ?

I didn't realize that golf was now a spectator-participant sport.

If games were based on feedback from spectators, England may have beaten Argentina.

alangolf wrote:

mizzy wrote:

hahah.. alan, you have lost the point of the discussion..
it was never about questioning the rules..
its about TV refereeing.. pls re-read the whole thread..
....
in golf tournaments, if there was no TV coverage because it is not a big enough event, will padraig's infringement be caught if he himself did not think he broke any rule? Now that is what this discussion is about.
its also about expediency. wait till the end of the game then your playing partner waits for you to submit the wrong score and DQ you.. hahahah

1) on TV referees.
If there's infringement, doesn't matter it's from couch potatoes who knows nothing else about golf except that rule. So TV refereeing is acceptable. That's my point. Till another rule is inked that TV refereeing is banned or some form of boundaries is laid, there's nothing to stop it. Cos there's no such rule, organiser, PGA, player (whoever makes the decision) has got no choice.
I do feel sorry for the players DQ 'unnecessarily'. But there's nothing except offer condolences.

2) If no TV coverage.
If nobody knows, of course it's never an issue.

3) on expediency.
If we go down this road, the debates will be endless.

there was never a rule in golf that explicitly mentioned TV refereeing. it was written before TV was invented. you are missing my point from what i think you are writting.

Expediency is the one and only issue! then are we going to say: after the trophy is given, the winner can be then DQ'ed? We can drag out some old footage and spot for infringements and DQ past great winners like Tiger,Arnold, Jack no?
if you do that the debate will be endless.. that is why it must be EXPEDIENT.

And about the point of no TV coverage, "if nobody knows, its not an issue". well, of course if there was ever a doubt, just like Tiger once did, he knows the rules very well, he would make sure before he hit the ball that the ruling official would clear any doubt. So i don't subscribe to that point of view, TV or no TV, if nobody knows its not an issue because it may be and infringment. This I think was your point was it not, several posts above?

Oh well, its not like our discussion is going to matter much to the PGA. c'est la vie.

FYI i watch the video on the said infringment.. I think Padraig really moved the ball. as a pro, he should never take his eyes off the ball like that and allow it to to be doubtful when he carried on play.

Technospaz wrote:

JawereZ wrote:

yup, i watch the news on GC yesterday, and it was a TV viewer who called in to complaint to the referee about paddy ! He should be penalized but not DQ.

It was mentioned that the ball moved 3 dimples forward and moved 1.5 dimples backwards.
Oh my god ! Such sadness. There was no intend on cheating and malice. it was just a genuine mistake.

Are the rules officials "STUPID" or what ?

I didn't realize that golf was now a spectator-participant sport.

If games were based on feedback from spectators, England may have beaten Argentina.

Hear hear!.. which is my point of comparing football and golf as spectator-participant-referee sport.
only the rules officials call the shot. but since the referee can see the video, he can rule on it. football wise, go ask FIFA why they don't want to use it!!?

Golf is also the game where spectators can help look for a ball, possibly saving some strokes for the player . Its not tv Refereeing, it's the officials being pointed out of their mistake... Just as a spectator can point to a missing ball. Even the camera guys can be called to give inputs on where the ball lands

Tronos, think you may have also missed the point of this discussion...

If you re-read the thread from the beginning, you'll get a better picture.

Our bone of contention is that TV spectators should not be allowed to influence a tournament, for many reasons.

One of the worst things is that if an infringement is reported by a tv spectator during a round, it's just penalty strokes. If reported after a round, it's DQ for signing a wrong scorecard.

I'd like to see TV spectators being allowed to report rules infringements during the Olympics. Wouldn't that be fun!!!

Similar case with Julie Inkster in a LPGA tournament resulting her being DQed. While Juli was waiting for the next flight to move off, she attached a weighted item on to her club to warm up. A TV spectator saw this and reported it, resulted Juli's DQ.

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/blog/devil_ball_golf/post/TV-viewer-busts-Juli-Inkster-gets-her-DQ-d-from?urn=golf-264211

Its sad but is it right? I don't think so but it is what it is.

It's the tv audience that pointed it out...not make the call. Since golf is one of a few game that last many days..technically the ruling is made during the game. It's the same as the official requesting the tv station to replay for him to see if a ball landed out of bounds after asking a photographer nearby if he saw where the ball landed. I am more against a photographer telling and influencing an official on where the ball landed than a tv audience tipping off an official who then check it on replays and make a decision based on actual evidence.

However in the future I can forsee tv audience feedback displayed inthe stadium on referee calls or goal line calls

The sad thing is the player knew he touched the ball but probably forgot at that very moment, the rule that he can reposition the ball with no penalty, and tried to 'get away with it'. The reason that he thought the ball did not move is a bit weak. If he knew the rules he would just go thru the motion of repositioning the ball back to the original position to avoid any potential penalty.

Why just shrug shoulders and say what to do? It's the rules, we have to accept it. The thing is, we don't.

You don't even have to know the history of the game to know that the rules HAVE CHANGED! The golf rules you play under now are not the same rules that Mary, Queen of Scots played under. Do you think she played with red and yellow stakes and white OB lines back in her day? How long ago was that? Let's just say that the ball she played with was stitched leather stuffed with feathers.

If they can change the rules for drivers and wedges to differentiate between what is conforming and non-conforming in recent years, they can certainly modify the rules that border on silly sometimes.

Let me cite another example of a rules change a couple of decades back. The size of the golf ball you now play is 1.68in in diameter, also know as the American size. There was a time when there was a British sized ball at 1.62in in diameter, till some boffin discovered that the British sized ball played better in the wind than the American sized one. It was then decided by the rules makers that there was an unfair advantage using one ball over the other. The British sized ball was then ruled illegal, and has been so ever since.

Alangolf, you say the rules of golf are clear, sorry bro, I'm with Mizzy on this one. The rules of golf are many and muddied. Even tour rules officials have been known to get it wrong. I urge you you to sit for a rules test to become a volunteer referee, then tell me again with conviction how clear the rules of golf are.

Change can be lobbied for, to shrug one's shoulders just shows apathy, until it happens to you. Then you KPKB!

After all the discussion, here's an article on the Harrington incident. Note the comments from the European Tour Senior Referee who had Pagraig DQed, and other notable pros.

But first, click on the link and watch the video for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J9Bh-ZVAz48

Padraig Harrington disqualified after viewer e-mails rules violation

Just another ho-hum day in the crazy, whirlwind life of Padraig Harrington.

On Thursday, he confused everyone with his 11 swing changes. On Friday, he was disqualified from the Abu Dhabi Championship for inadvertently and innocently breaking a rule on the seventh green in his first round.

No one would ever have known if not for an e-mail sent to the European tour from yet another of what seems to be a growing army of TV snitches, as Ian Poulter calls them. And not even golf's latest snitch could have spotted Harrington's crime had he not been on his sofa pressing the pause, rewind, play and slow motion buttons on his high-definition TV.

The amateur rules official noticed that the Irishman's ball moved after Harrington's hand brushed it as he was removing his marker. Since Harrington didn't replace the ball at the original spot, it should have been a two-stroke penalty. Because the penalty wasn't assessed at the time, Harrington signed an incorrect scorecard after Thursday's round, which led to the disqualification.

After the e-mail arrived, Andy McFee, the European Tour's senior referee, had a sleepless night in Abu Dhabi. He viewed the video evidence about 60 times before concluding that Harrington's ball had indeed moved forward by the length of about one-and-a-half dimples.

Asked if he thought such an incident makes golf's rules look daft, McFee said: "Yes, I'd have to agree with that. The movement is so minimal. But it is clear that it moved. The rules deal in facts. Padraig is a class act."

That's one fact that is indisputable.

Harrington accepted his fate with his usual grace, good humor, humility and sportsmanship. "A lot worse things could happen. You could be five ahead going into the last round," he said laughing. He was referring to the 2000 Benson & Hedges International, where he was disqualified on Sunday morning when it was discovered that he had failed to sign his scorecard on Thursday.

Harrington said he knew he had touched his ball but was certain it had not moved forward, so it never entered his head to call for a referee. McFee said the wobble forward happened in the half-second it took for Harrington to take his eyes off the ball and stand upright. "In slow motion, it's pretty clear the ball has moved three dimples forward, and it's come back maybe a dimple and a half," Harrington said.

Golf's rules have once again overshadowed the main event. It is only two months since Poulter suffered a one-stroke penalty to lose a playoff for the Dubai World Championship after he dropped his ball on his marker and it flipped over. Camilo Villegas was disqualified for signing an incorrect card during the opening event of the PGA Tour season earlier this month, also after a viewer spotted a rules violation.

Harrington refused to blame anyone other than himself. "I believe I'm not going to do anything untoward," Harrington said. "I hope there are 100 million people watching me play and checking me out. It's good for the game. Yeah, it takes a certain individual to act upon it, but we do need those individuals."

Graeme McDowell, eight under par and four shots off the lead held by Martin Kaymer, was not quite so understanding or generous about this week's amateur rules official. "Too much time on his hands," he said. "TV viewers are important to us, and high-definition and 3D and slow-mo add to the experience of watching golf on TV. But we are under scrutiny to the nth degree. And 95 percent of the field don't have to deal with that, only the five percent that are on TV. We need to take a serious look at the Rules of Golf and make sure that, yeah, they are protecting people, but we need to have a look at some of these fiddly little pernickety stupid little rules. It's just not great for the game. Common sense has got to take over trial by TV and all this stuff."

McDowell was almost the victim of another whistle-blower after the first round, when he had to wait around to view a video of his ball on the 18th green before he was set free. His near misdemeanor was another case of an oscillating ball on the green. He believes it is time to review this rule, too. "Marking and remarking a golf ball is not a scientific maneuver," he said. "It's very difficult to get that ball back on the right spot, you know, because you just slide the marker and you're picking it up and putting it back and sliding it back out. Your fingers are very close to the ball all the time. I don't think a player should be penalized for trying to take his marker out of the way and glancing his ball. It's a gray area."

Such was the miniscule detail of Harrington's dilemma: his playing partner Kaymer didn't notice a thing. "I don't even know which putt it was," he said. "Padraig is one of the fairest persons on tour. I cannot believe he did anything on purpose."

As is so often the case these days, the never-shy Poulter offered via Twitter the final and eloquent word on Harrington's bad luck: "The rules of golf are complete bollocks and are stuck back in 1932."