228 replies to this topic

[Ty_Webb]

jabrch, on 09 May 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Vindog, on 09 May 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

tatertot, on 09 May 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

Actually, not the EXACT SAME RULING. Someone saw the women pick up the ball.

Ahhhh...so then it happens...someone picking up the ball.

I don't believe anyone has denied it happens....the difference is in the Mallon case, it was witnessed.  The rule requires virtual certainty that it did happen, not the potential that it could happen.  That's my issue...  Now precedent has been set that virtual certainty can be attained with logic along the line of "based on what I saw, nothing else is as likely to have happened" and that, to me, isn't virtual certainty...but I am not a roles official.  This guy is trained to understand the PGAs norm for this defintion.  I'm sure the head of the Rules Officials will defend that decision - and it's good enough for me...it just means I expect to see this rule applied a lot more in the future, in similar cases.

The judgment was never based on "nothing else is as likely to have happened". The judgment was based on a fan seeing the ball come to rest in an open area with no bushes or anything around it and then the ball wasn't there. Assume for a second that the witness did see the ball come to rest in open ground. What other possibility is there?

It is similar to if you hit your ball towards a water hazard, but there's a bank for it to roll down that you can't see to get in the hazard. If when you get there the bank is cut down to fairway height and there is nowhere else for the ball to be, that qualifies as virtual certainty that the ball went in the hazard. If there's long grass on the bank and the ball could be lost in that, then you have to treat it as lost, even if it seems likely that it went in the water (unless you can find the ball in the water).

[TheDarkOne]

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

Also, I just want to hear from anyone here how, according the the witness account, the ball was en circled by people but not a single one saw the ball being taken. Infact, what a coincidence that the Woods fan who recnated this incident to the ref also suggested to him that it must have been stolen.

[minitour]

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

And how are you "virtually certain" if no one saw them? Hey we can't find a ball, well I guess that means we can be virtually certain someone stole it even though there isn't a single witness to the act. It couldn't be that the ball is legitimately lost, that never happens.

You don't understand the difference between "virtually certain" and "absolutely certain".  One word.  Big difference.

[minitour]

pingman1, on 09 May 2012 - 06:18 AM, said:

I don't believe the same rule would apply to the other 143 players in the field

Your belief has little to do with reality.  There's no way to know.  

I wish more people would use speculation to rule the game.  Then I could pick up every 5' putt and say "so I'm $50 up today...because I believe that I would have made all of those and you would have missed".

[Vindog]

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

made the cut?

Edited by Vindog, 09 May 2012 - 02:56 PM.

[jabrch]

Ty_Webb, on 09 May 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

jabrch, on 09 May 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Actually, not the EXACT SAME RULING. Someone saw the women pick up the ball.


I don't believe anyone has denied it happens....the difference is in the Mallon case, it was witnessed.  The rule requires virtual certainty that it did happen, not the potential that it could happen.  That's my issue...  Now precedent has been set that virtual certainty can be attained with logic along the line of "based on what I saw, nothing else is as likely to have happened" and that, to me, isn't virtual certainty...but I am not a roles official.  This guy is trained to understand the PGAs norm for this defintion.  I'm sure the head of the Rules Officials will defend that decision - and it's good enough for me...it just means I expect to see this rule applied a lot more in the future, in similar cases.

The judgment was never based on "nothing else is as likely to have happened". The judgment was based on a fan seeing the ball come to rest in an open area with no bushes or anything around it and then the ball wasn't there. Assume for a second that the witness did see the ball come to rest in open ground. What other possibility is there?

It is similar to if you hit your ball towards a water hazard, but there's a bank for it to roll down that you can't see to get in the hazard. If when you get there the bank is cut down to fairway height and there is nowhere else for the ball to be, that qualifies as virtual certainty that the ball went in the hazard. If there's long grass on the bank and the ball could be lost in that, then you have to treat it as lost, even if it seems likely that it went in the water (unless you can find the ball in the water).

Unless I am mistaken, the fan didn't see the ball land and come to rest.  The eyewitness said they saw it hit a tree and come down - but at no time did they see the ball sitting there....

[Ty_Webb]

jabrch, on 09 May 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

Unless I am mistaken, the fan didn't see the ball land and come to rest.  The eyewitness said they saw it hit a tree and come down - but at no time did they see the ball sitting there....

Maybe. I'm working off this quote here:

Quote

Finally, the crowd gathered around Tiger, Russell and an older gentleman in a pale yellow shirt, who said he saw the ball fall out of the trees, roll down the pine straw to a flat collection area with a perfect opening to the green.

That certainly reads to me like he said he saw the ball come to rest. He didn't say "towards a flat collection area", he said "to a flat collection area". It's quite possible that I'm misunderstanding though.

[NPVWhiz]

Sawgrass, on 09 May 2012 - 08:53 AM, said:

NPVWhiz, on 09 May 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

What about the perfectly reasonable possiblity that a kid picked up the ball, walked thirty yards with it, then rethought the idea of taking the ball and simply dropped it, but nobody saw any of it take place?  In this case, the ball was findable, but might not have been found in the alotted time.  If found it could have been replaced in proximity.  In the abstract, and in the absence of a witness either way, wouldn't this be just as plausible as the other scenario?  If it's just as plausible, how can the official not consider that possiblity in fairness to the other players, which presumes that it's fair to the rest of the field for a player to incur a penalty when a penalty is due?

NPVWhiz, I won't debate your belief that in Tiger's case here the Ref should not have concluded that it was virtually certain someone took the ball.  It's a judgement call.  I feel one way, you feel the other, and I don't think you're crazy for differing from me -- you just have a different valid opinion.

But to clarify, if a kid picked up the ball and dropped it 30 yards away, it would clearly be a ball moved by an outside agency and not a lost ball.  The five minute rule would not apply, and the fact that the ball could possibly have been found but was not found wouldn't make any difference at all.  What would be fair in that situation would be for the player to drop penalty free in the area where it was judged the ball came to rest before the child took it.

Indeed, but at the risk of sort of getting deep into the weeds on an example, I was thinking about the case where the ball was found, but no one knew that it had been moved by an outside agency. In that case, there would have been no reason to abandon the 5 minute (even though it would have been appropriate in full view of the facts).  

I'm not trying to be contrary insomuch as just raising angles for discussion.  If there were nothing to discuss, I'd be annoying my significant others by putting on the living room carpet while they're trying to watch TV, rather than pecking away at a WRX reply.

[Yuck]

]


I don't believe anyone has denied it happens....the difference is in the Mallon case, it was witnessed.  The rule requires virtual certainty that it did happen, not the potential that it could happen.  That's my issue...  Now precedent has been set that virtual certainty can be attained with logic along the line of "based on what I saw, nothing else is as likely to have happened" and that, to me, isn't virtual certainty...but I am not a roles official.  This guy is trained to understand the PGAs norm for this defintion.  I'm sure the head of the Rules Officials will defend that decision - and it's good enough for me...it just means I expect to see this rule applied a lot more in the future, in similar cases.


The judgment was never based on "nothing else is as likely to have happened". The judgment was based on a fan seeing the ball come to rest in an open area with no bushes or anything around it and then the ball wasn't there. Assume for a second that the witness did see the ball come to rest in open ground. What other possibility is there?

It is similar to if you hit your ball towards a water hazard, but there's a bank for it to roll down that you can't see to get in the hazard. If when you get there the bank is cut down to fairway height and there is nowhere else for the ball to be, that qualifies as virtual certainty that the ball went in the hazard. If there's long grass on the bank and the ball could be lost in that, then you have to treat it as lost, even if it seems likely that it went in the water (unless you can find the ball in the water).




Again my only point is that the ball went through some trees.  The ball that flies into a tree is not always the same ball that falls to the ground.   if you see a ball fly into a tree and you can see it from the ground, it is still lost unless positivly identified.  Why is that different?

[Awsi Dooger]

My impression of the Meg Mallon incident is there was no question the ball had landed. That course is tree lined but not tight to left of that 4th fairway and her shot was not deep into the trees, merely toward a food compound left of the fairway. Tiger wasn't saying, "What do you mean you can't find my ball?" as Mallon did. She apparently saw the ball land, and marshals in the area. A lost ball made little to no sense minus outside influence.

Tiger walked into a comparative jungle, where his ball had crashed high into the trees. Fans pointed into those trees during the search process. I still think the severely under valued variable is the ball never emerged from the trees, regardless of the pale yellow gentleman and the 10-minute delayed revelations of a ball dropping over yonder and rolling over here.

Edited by Awsi Dooger, 09 May 2012 - 07:41 PM.

[nochct1]

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

Also, I just want to hear from anyone here how, according the the witness account, the ball was en circled by people but not a single one saw the ball being taken. Infact, what a coincidence that the Woods fan who recnated this incident to the ref also suggested to him that it must have been stolen.

Well it depends which Bobby J (see that, I created a nickname for him) you're talking about. Young Bobby was known for his temper, so he probably would have cursed up a storm and maybe thrown a club.

Who knows was 36 year old Bobby would have done, wasn't he retired by that point? But while on the topic, think about Bobby Jones and the fact that his tournament didn't have it's first black competitor until 1975!!! Four years after he died. Many people pushed to have a black player in the Masters, but good ol Mr. Jones didn't push for it. Again, 1975!!!!!

Is your problem with Tiger, or the rule?

Let me ask you this, let's say you tee off and your ball goes onto another fairway. Everyone sees it go onto that fairway. There's another group playing and they are around your ball. You drive up, but they've already headed towards the green, and your ball is gone. It's a pretty open fairway, so you're virtually certain that someone in that group hit or took your ball. Do you go back and play 3, or do you follow the rule?

[golfnut-2X]

nochct1, on 09 May 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

Also, I just want to hear from anyone here how, according the the witness account, the ball was en circled by people but not a single one saw the ball being taken. Infact, what a coincidence that the Woods fan who recnated this incident to the ref also suggested to him that it must have been stolen.

Well it depends which Bobby J (see that, I created a nickname for him) you're talking about. Young Bobby was known for his temper, so he probably would have cursed up a storm and maybe thrown a club.

Who knows was 36 year old Bobby would have done, wasn't he retired by that point? But while on the topic, think about Bobby Jones and the fact that his tournament didn't have it's first black competitor until 1975!!! Four years after he died. Many people pushed to have a black player in the Masters, but good ol Mr. Jones didn't push for it. Again, 1975!!!!!

Is your problem with Tiger, or the rule?

Let me ask you this, let's say you tee off and your ball goes onto another fairway. Everyone sees it go onto that fairway. There's another group playing and they are around your ball. You drive up, but they've already headed towards the green, and your ball is gone. It's a pretty open fairway, so you're virtually certain that someone in that group hit or took your ball. Do you go back and play 3, or do you follow the rule?

Up until the new tiger free drop rule i would have had to retie.  lost ball.  didn't actually see someone or something visually remove it off the course.  Though i am going to try to use the new tiger free drop rule next time when i see it land in a spot of rough and can't find it and therefore virtually certain an outside agency must have removed it.

[minitour]

nochct1, on 09 May 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

Is your problem with Tiger, or the rule?

TDO?  Really?  This has to be a rhetorical question...

[TheDarkOne]

golfnut-2X, on 09 May 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

nochct1, on 09 May 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

Also, I just want to hear from anyone here how, according the the witness account, the ball was en circled by people but not a single one saw the ball being taken. Infact, what a coincidence that the Woods fan who recnated this incident to the ref also suggested to him that it must have been stolen.

Well it depends which Bobby J (see that, I created a nickname for him) you're talking about. Young Bobby was known for his temper, so he probably would have cursed up a storm and maybe thrown a club.

Who knows was 36 year old Bobby would have done, wasn't he retired by that point? But while on the topic, think about Bobby Jones and the fact that his tournament didn't have it's first black competitor until 1975!!! Four years after he died. Many people pushed to have a black player in the Masters, but good ol Mr. Jones didn't push for it. Again, 1975!!!!!

Is your problem with Tiger, or the rule?

Let me ask you this, let's say you tee off and your ball goes onto another fairway. Everyone sees it go onto that fairway. There's another group playing and they are around your ball. You drive up, but they've already headed towards the green, and your ball is gone. It's a pretty open fairway, so you're virtually certain that someone in that group hit or took your ball. Do you go back and play 3, or do you follow the rule?

Up until the new tiger free drop rule i would have had to retie.  lost ball.  didn't actually see someone or something visually remove it off the course.  Though i am going to try to use the new tiger free drop rule next time when i see it land in a spot of rough and can't find it and therefore virtually certain an outside agency must have removed it.

Oh absolutely!
I sincerely hope other pros start doing this to make a point. The preferential treatment of Woods has to stop. If I were them I would claim this happened every single time a ball is lost. How could you rule against it now?

I love the fact that no one addresses how someone could have taken this ball that people supposedly encircled. When you look at the behavior of the Woods fans here, can you imagine how a horde of them would have reacted to seeing someone steal their heroes golf ball?

[kellygreen]

TheDarkOne, on 10 May 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

Oh absolutely!
I sincerely hope other pros start doing this to make a point. The preferential treatment of Woods has to stop. If I were them I would claim this happened every single time a ball is lost. How could you rule against it now?

I love the fact that no one addresses how someone could have taken this ball that people supposedly encircled. When you look at the behavior of the Woods fans here, can you imagine how a horde of them would have reacted to seeing someone steal their heroes golf ball?

[nochct1]

golfnut-2X, on 09 May 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

nochct1, on 09 May 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 09 May 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here's a fun question.
What if this exact same thing would have happened to Bobby Jones, wonder what he would have done?

Also, I just want to hear from anyone here how, according the the witness account, the ball was en circled by people but not a single one saw the ball being taken. Infact, what a coincidence that the Woods fan who recnated this incident to the ref also suggested to him that it must have been stolen.

Well it depends which Bobby J (see that, I created a nickname for him) you're talking about. Young Bobby was known for his temper, so he probably would have cursed up a storm and maybe thrown a club.

Who knows was 36 year old Bobby would have done, wasn't he retired by that point? But while on the topic, think about Bobby Jones and the fact that his tournament didn't have it's first black competitor until 1975!!! Four years after he died. Many people pushed to have a black player in the Masters, but good ol Mr. Jones didn't push for it. Again, 1975!!!!!

Is your problem with Tiger, or the rule?

Let me ask you this, let's say you tee off and your ball goes onto another fairway. Everyone sees it go onto that fairway. There's another group playing and they are around your ball. You drive up, but they've already headed towards the green, and your ball is gone. It's a pretty open fairway, so you're virtually certain that someone in that group hit or took your ball. Do you go back and play 3, or do you follow the rule?

Up until the new tiger free drop rule i would have had to retie.  lost ball.  didn't actually see someone or something visually remove it off the course.  Though i am going to try to use the new tiger free drop rule next time when i see it land in a spot of rough and can't find it and therefore virtually certain an outside agency must have removed it.

huh? if there's nobody around your ball then there is no reason to think someone took your ball. no sure what just landing in the rough has to do with it. and the rule has been around before tiger starting playing golf. sounds like your issue is with tiger, not the rule.

[xan_user]

. posted before and still wanting a clarification, so ill try again .

this was actually on the wed before tiger got his drop.
last round of the day, sun going down quickly and sprinklers coming on behind me. I hit my tee shot on 18 in the rough ~10 yards from fairway. as I start walking to my ball's landing area I see a guy playing fetch with his dog using a golf ball near where my ball landed. by the time I got there the guy and dog had walked off and my ball was nowhere to be seen. couldn't yell to the guy with the dog, as a mower was between us at the time. the rough was not very long and if there had been better light I might have actually been able to see it off the tee. no trees, bushes, hazards, drainage, irrigation or ground under repair nearby.

I am  99.9% certain the walker's dog (or a gopher) took or moved my ball.

-before tiger's drop that would have been a lost ball, now its a free drop (even after looking 5+ mins), right? or 'No, its still a lost ball', cause ive got no witness' to state they saw it land and then disappear...?

PS. IF i had found my ball and it had dog bite marks and slobber on it, could i have played a new ball without penalty?

Edited by xan_user, 11 May 2012 - 10:25 AM.

[jabrch]

xan_user, on 11 May 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

. posted before and still wanting a clarification, so ill try again .

this was actually on the wed before tiger got his drop.
last round of the day, sun going down quickly and sprinklers coming on behind me. I hit my tee shot on 18 in the rough ~10 yards from fairway. as I start walking to my ball's landing area I see a guy playing fetch with his dog using a golf ball near where my ball landed. by the time I got there the guy and dog had walked off and my ball was nowhere to be seen. couldn't yell to the guy with the dog, as a mower was between us at the time. the rough was not very long and if there had been better light I might have actually been able to see it off the tee. no trees, bushes, hazards, drainage, irrigation or ground under repair nearby.

I am  99.9% certain the walker's dog (or a gopher) took or moved my ball.

-before tiger's drop that would have been a lost ball, now its a free drop (even after looking 5+ mins), right? or 'No, its still a lost ball', cause ive got no witness' to state they saw it land and then disappear...?

PS. IF i had found my ball and it had dog bite marks and slobber on it, could i have played a new ball without penalty?

It's your call.  Not are ou 99.9% certain - but are you VIRTUALLY CERTAIN.  If you are, then I don't see how you can't apply this rule.

[Sawgrass]

xan_user, on 11 May 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

. posted before and still wanting a clarification, so ill try again .

this was actually on the wed before tiger got his drop.
last round of the day, sun going down quickly and sprinklers coming on behind me. I hit my tee shot on 18 in the rough ~10 yards from fairway. as I start walking to my ball's landing area I see a guy playing fetch with his dog using a golf ball near where my ball landed. by the time I got there the guy and dog had walked off and my ball was nowhere to be seen. couldn't yell to the guy with the dog, as a mower was between us at the time. the rough was not very long and if there had been better light I might have actually been able to see it off the tee. no trees, bushes, hazards, drainage, irrigation or ground under repair nearby.

I am  99.9% certain the walker's dog (or a gopher) took or moved my ball.

-before tiger's drop that would have been a lost ball, now its a free drop (even after looking 5+ mins), right? or 'No, its still a lost ball', cause ive got no witness' to state they saw it land and then disappear...?

PS. IF i had found my ball and it had dog bite marks and slobber on it, could i have played a new ball without penalty?

To me, whether or not you can be virtually certain the dog took your ball is significantly dependent upon whether you were originally able to see your ball come to rest from a distance, and once getting to the area where you once saw it come to rest assuring yourself that it is virtyually impossible that the ball later, based on gravity or wind, could not "hide itself" by rolling into one of many holes or the like.  (If you, like Tiger, were not able to see the ball come to rest, you'd need a viable witness or witnesses to gain relief.)

Under the above conditions, if you saw it and then it disappeared, IMO you could legitimately claim interference from an outside agency and take a free drop.  I would have said this before the Tiger incident, and I will say it after the Tiger incident.

18-1 has been around a long time:


18-1. By Outside Agency
If a ball at rest is moved by an outside agency, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced.

Note: It is a question of fact whether a ball has been moved by an outside agency. In order to apply this Rule, it must be known or virtually certain that an outside agency has moved the ball. In the absence of such knowledge or certainty, the player must play the ball as it lies or, if the ball is not found, proceed under Rule 27-1.

I can't find a specific reference to the dog teeth mark/slobber replace the ball part of your question, but I'm sure that 1-4 will free you to replace the ground up ball even if the rules in fact don't otherwise cover it.

Edited by Sawgrass, 11 May 2012 - 02:04 PM.