powerbelly said:
AgPrognosticator said:
powerbelly said:
SmackDaddy said:
jja79 said:
1-1. General
The Game of Golf consists of playing a ball with a club from the teeing ground into the hole by a stroke or successive strokes in accordance with the Rules.
1-2. Exerting Influence on Movement of Ball or Altering Physical Conditions
A player must not (i) take an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play or (ii) alter physical conditions with the intent of affecting the playing of a hole.
*In the case of a serious breach of Rule 1-2, the Committee may impose a penalty of disqualification.
Forget the penalty. The guy wasn't going to win. The thing to me, and maybe no one else, was the blatant disregard for the rule. It doesn't say the player should not take an action with the intent of influencing the movement of a ball in play. It say he must not.
For all you "toughen up" guys, golf is different. He blatantly influenced the movement of a ball in play. The USGA chose the easy way out with a 2 stroke penalty. They should have enforced 1-2.
Why? He violated 14-5, not 1-2.
Huh?! How can you possibly say that Phil did not intend to alter the movement of a ball in play????
My head hurts.....
14-5 deals with taking a stroke at a ball that is moving. 1-2 deals with all other ways to interfere with a ball that is moving.
Actually, 14-5 specifically exlcudes the purposeful stopping of a ball by a player. 14-5 addresses unintentional actions.
Phil's actions were intended to alter the movement of the ball. As such, rule 1-2 should have been applied.
Under that rule, the rules committee could have (and I believe should have) DQ'd him.
Golf is a game of rules. They must be enforced objectively.