subject: Middle Ground OnThe Rules Of Golf [print this page] I hear many debates on the inflexibility of the Rules of Golf. I hear many discussions on "honor and integrity", then the opposite side of the coin with "stupid and inflexible" on certain rules. And situations that have occurred on the professional golf tour feed and fan this debate even more.
One example is Roberto De Vicenzo's tragic loss at the 1968 Masters. Why did he lose this Major? He signed the wrong scorecard. Look at the recent disqualification of Jim Furyk from a FedEx cup event because he overslept and missed the Pro-Am part of the golf tournament. Both of these point out examples that will make event the ardent golf traditionalist question things.
And personally I think that maybe it is time for the USGA and the R&A to take a look at things. One example that I always quote about the rules is the rule that states if you ball moves for any reason while you are addressing it, that is a penalty. This rule seems a little crazy to me. And I am a big traditionalist when it comes to the game of golf.
So what makes sense? Well I will leave it to the ultimate "experts" in the golf world to figure it out, but I do have a few thoughts on the matter.
I think that it is time to add a little common sense to the mix. I think that there are a number of things that can be done and that won't affect the integrity of the sport. The rule that I mentioned on ball movement while the golfer is addressing it could be modified. Here is another example: If you ground your club while in a hazard, it's a penalty. And it doesn't matter if you are anywhere near your golf ball.
I understand the purpose of this specific rule. It's to prevent a golfer from improving his or her lie in a sand trap for example. So no grounding your golf club to prevent us from building a better lie for the ball. Ok that makes perfect sense. But if I am in the opposite end of the trap and just happen to touch the sand with my golf club, should I be penalized? This type of thing is where I believe that the rules could be modified and bring some common sense into play.
Will this, in fact, happen? Who knows? But I did find it interesting that the PGA suspended the rule that got Furyk in trouble to be looked at further. Good for them! At least there is some recognition that things need to be looked at. Now this situation is not technically a rules situation, it is a PGA rules violation, but I believe that the concept is the same and I hope that the thinking will translate to the rules and prod the "powers that be" in golf to take a look.
