Are the current Rules of Golf helping or hurting the game of golf?

neophyte

New member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
100
Reaction score
2
Location
Florida
Handicap
15
After seeing all the division in applying the current Rules of Golf at the 2013 Masters. If the announcers and professionals could not easily reach an agreement on rules of applying slow play, and Tiger's Drop and everything concerning it. Many of the player, announcers even called for Tiger to Withdraw. Which is a public declaration of no confidence in the USGA and the R & A and the leaders of Augusta to run and make decisions concerning the Rules of Golf for the Masters.

Are the current Rules of Golf helping or hurting the game of golf?
 
They help, they make up the game we all play. There a re a couple grey areas, like anything, but not hurting the game by any means iMO.
 
Maybe there are just too many "strange" rules in Golf? Do this if it's white, do this if it's yellow, do this if it's red... Maybe the USGA and R&A should look at this...
 
Many of the older players were calling for a WD. I haven't heard from a current tour player saying WD. I'm sure there's some.

The rules need to be simplified.
 
Many of the older players were calling for a WD. I haven't heard from a current tour player saying WD. I'm sure there's some.

The rules need to be simplified.

I think these older players need to move into 2013. Rules change in every sport, deal with it. I hear older players in every sport complain like Faldo is today and they come off as bitter, petty old men.
 
Many of the older players were calling for a WD. I haven't heard from a current tour player saying WD. I'm sure there's some.

The rules need to be simplified.

Precisely. Shrink the grey areas.
 
The rule regarding Tigers drop and it being sent in by a viewer was changed at the end of last season. It no longer means DQ but as we have seen, Committee meeting and decision made on that basis.

Rules are there for a reason
 
I think these older players need to move into 2013. Rules change in every sport, deal with it. I hear older players in every sport complain like Faldo is today and they come off as bitter, petty old men.

I'm waiting for somebody to be a green and hear Faldo (or J Miller) yell at the kids to get off his lawn.
 
I don't think they hurt. Perhaps the scrutiny does. There seems to be a school of thought that the rules of golf are supposed to be fair. I don't think there was ever a requirement to be fair. There is rub of the green, there are bad bounces, balls can fall into divots....that's golf and always has been.
 
I have the rule book and hardly look at it. It's getting to be like the tax code. Full of crap that doesn't really need to be there.

Most weekend golfers don't know it and don't care. Why waste time on nit picking everything? There are circumstances that should be obvious and common sense.

I try not to play with "cheaters". I don't like that. I do my best to adhere to the rules and be honest but I won't lose sleep over some silly little thing either.

Golf should be FUN for the average weekend golfer otherwise they won't do it.
 
The only issue's I have is that the decisions book that use to be the size of the rule book, is now a three ring binder.
 
Simplifying the rule book would be an awesome first step. I bet 95% of golfers don't even know what the phrase "through the green" means...I know I didn't before joining THP. Allow players to pull the ball out of a divot when in the fairway. Get rid of stroke + distance for non-professionals, it just slows down play. Moving a leaf on the backswing is improving your lie? Right.
 
Simplifying the rule book would be an awesome first step. I bet 95% of golfers don't even know what the phrase "through the green" means...I know I didn't before joining THP. Allow players to pull the ball out of a divot when in the fairway. Get rid of stroke + distance for non-professionals, it just slows down play. Moving a leaf on the backswing is improving your lie? Right.

Part of me agrees and part of me says we should never reward a bad shot the distance gained. I'm ok with the divot change. Should be ground under repair.
 
I think simplifying the rules would be incredibly helpful in many ways, including attracting people to the game.
 
I can agree that there may be too many and somewhat out of hand but I do understand if many of them are simplified or simply removed it will cause too much controversy at the PGA level.

Most rules can start out simple but then too many variables arise causing modifications or changes. Then because of modifications and/or the changes, new variables arise and more mods or changes have to be made. It can be a catch-22.

No matter how simple or complex the rules are there will always be those who complain about whats not fair or not right. If they are simple and something happens with a specific competitor in a given situation, then others will say, hey wait a minute thats not right or not fair. Then the higher ups agree and a rule is added or modified or changed. It just wouldnt end and IMO would march on right back to the way it is now in no time anyway.

There is just so much money on the line that they must cover every inch of everything so that its as fair as posible to everyone in any situation about everything they do even if some seem rediculous. Unfortunately that leads to a huge amount of rules and subsections of rules and exclusions of such rules and evrything else inside out, up side down, and backwards.

For every person to argue and advocate about most any rule neading a change someone else will probably feel the other way. We just had an entire thread on discussing some general rules and also if amateur rules should differ from pro rules. Alot of good points made but it didnt seem as though a common agreement would of been reached and that leads back to no matter what the rules are, no matter how simple or complex there will always be contraversy. Once again a catch-22.

So are they bad for the game? I'm just not sure because I think it could possibly be just as bad if they were too simple.

Heres one the best things about golf.
Unless one is playing competative or putting the round towards a usga handicap anyone can basically just go out and play without much respect for the rules whenever they want to anyway. One can go out tomorrow and casualy play for no other reason other than to have a good time, strike balls, give themselves a lie for every shot, not keep score, do some experimenting, etc, etc.....and no one would care. I've seen plenty people do that. I know i certainly would not give a hoot what anyone in my group did. Some may even go out together and play thier own friendly competative version of how ever and what ever they want. Nobody cares nor should they.
 
I think the general rules are fine but the ones that catch the headlines are or are looking to be changed are very grey. Local rules can also make the game complicated.
 
Maybe there are just too many "strange" rules in Golf? Do this if it's white, do this if it's yellow, do this if it's red... Maybe the USGA and R&A should look at this...

this. There needs to be uniformity on a lot of the rules that are similar but different. The fact that the major golf magazines have a monthly feature asking about rules situations tells you that they're probably too complicated. I love baseball, and it's got some of the most ridiculous rules ever, but they're mostly uniform.
 
After seeing all the division in applying the current Rules of Golf at the 2013 Masters. If the announcers and professionals could not easily reach an agreement on rules of applying slow play, and Tiger's Drop and everything concerning it. Many of the player, announcers even called for Tiger to Withdraw. Which is a public declaration of no confidence in the USGA and the R & A and the leaders of Augusta to run and make decisions concerning the Rules of Golf for the Masters.

Are the current Rules of Golf helping or hurting the game of golf?

If you are basing your opinions on the announcers then you don't know any more about the rules than they do, which is usually very little. They can gripe all they want and it doesn't mean a fig to an official who actually does know the rules. In both cases what was done was what was seen as correct at the time.

If you follow the event of Tiger's drop in the timeline, there were a few mistakes made, but as it played out, the 2 stroke penalty was the only reasonable result. The main error in the whole affair was the committee's failure to discuss it with Tiger before he returned his card. They were aware that there was a possible question about the drop, and they should have approached Tiger about it immediately. Their failure was the only reason why Tiger might have faced disqualification, because they were aware of the situation before he returned his card. No special rules for Tiger, no favoritism, just an error in judgment by the committee.

As to the answer to the question: The rules neither help nor hurt. They simply tell you how to correctly play the game. Most people choose to ignore most of the rules anyway, so making different rules wouldn't change how those people play. The rules really aren't that complex. Most people who have actually bothered to try to learn them have found that out themselves. A player can create complex situations by not knowing the rules, but learning the correct on course playing procedures is relatively simple.

The Rules of Golf started out simple - just 13 of them. Didn't work. Golf has too many variables with courses, weather, players. They are now what they have evolved to, just like the natural world, survival of the fittest. Simplification doesn't work, because then situations arise which the rules don't have an answer for. Forget the Decisions - nobody needs them except a rules official or a student of the rules. Everything you need to know on the course is in rules 1 through 28, and most of it is in 13, 14, 20, and 23-28.
 
Last edited:
There are a few rules would be helpful to change because they would speed things up, make golf a little more fun for the avg golfer.

- roll a ball backwards out of a divot. It's not like it used to be when players often repaired there divots. So maybe time for this one to change.

-drop and penalty for oob, lost balls. It just isn't practical to go back and rehit most of the time. Besides costing time, it interferes with other players, so would like to see that change.

Those two changes alone would make me happy.
 
If you follow the event of Tiger's drop in the timeline, there were a few mistakes made, but as it played out, the 2 stroke penalty was the only reasonable result. The main error in the whole affair was the committee's failure to discuss it with Tiger before he returned his card. They were aware that there was a possible question about the drop, and they should have approached Tiger about it immediately. Their failure was the only reason why Tiger might have faced disqualification, because they were aware of the situation before he returned his card. No special rules for Tiger, no favoritism, just an error in judgment by the committee.


Rick,

To me, Tiger knew he had made an incorrect drop. He knows his options for dropping after hitting into a water hazard, and so does his caddie. The "he didn't know" logic doesn't hold water. Perhaps, in the heat of the moment, he wasn't thinking clearly and that's why he dropped wrong, but he had to have realized it afterwards. I believe if we're going to continue with the "golf is a gentleman's game" concept, then tiger should have DQ'd himself once he realized he broke the rule and therefore signed an incorrect scorecard.

Now, if what happened is the committee told Tiger prior to signing that there was no violation, then I can see why the committee would determine they could not DQ him. However, I still think Tiger knows he violated the rule, should have been DQ'd and should DQ himself.

Note that I am not a Tiger hater. But if we're going to allow Blayne Barber to DQ himself rather than just assess him a 2-stroke penalty, then we should do the same for Tiger.
 
Rick,

[/COLOR]To me, Tiger knew he had made an incorrect drop. He knows his options for dropping after hitting into a water hazard, and so does his caddie. The "he didn't know" logic doesn't hold water. Perhaps, in the heat of the moment, he wasn't thinking clearly and that's why he dropped wrong, but he had to have realized it afterwards. I believe if we're going to continue with the "golf is a gentleman's game" concept, then tiger should have DQ'd himself once he realized he broke the rule and therefore signed an incorrect scorecard.

Now, if what happened is the committee told Tiger prior to signing that there was no violation, then I can see why the committee would determine they could not DQ him. However, I still think Tiger knows he violated the rule, should have been DQ'd and should DQ himself.

Note that I am not a Tiger hater. But if we're going to allow Blayne Barber to DQ himself rather than just assess him a 2-stroke penalty, then we should do the same for Tiger.

You are making an assumption not supported by the known facts. That isn't how rulings are made.
 
I would like to see a rules book from the sixties, I remember it being less than 10 pages, but I have a poor memory too. I went through the latest version and thought I had it down pretty good till you start looking at all the decisions. I really believe it could be simplified a little and would be a plus for the majority. Like many I play using a simplified version of the rules, but don't play in a formal competitions so as long as I am consistent it works for me as I only judge myself against myself.

The divot rule really should change, I have no problem playing from a repaired (sanded) divot, but around here when wet I have seen divots so deep the ball would disappear from sight.

If there was a little more uniformity in penalties/drops from yellow, red and white staked areas it sure wouldn't hurt my feelings. If pros can't get it right how would a weekend amateur ever be expected to play them properly.
 
I would like to see a rules book from the sixties, I remember it being less than 10 pages, but I have a poor memory too. I went through the latest version and thought I had it down pretty good till you start looking at all the decisions. I really believe it could be simplified a little and would be a plus for the majority. Like many I play using a simplified version of the rules, but don't play in a formal competitions so as long as I am consistent it works for me as I only judge myself against myself.

The divot rule really should change, I have no problem playing from a repaired (sanded) divot, but around here when wet I have seen divots so deep the ball would disappear from sight.

If there was a little more uniformity in penalties/drops from yellow, red and white staked areas it sure wouldn't hurt my feelings. If pros can't get it right how would a weekend amateur ever be expected to play them properly.

In 1968 there were 40 rules, while today there are 34. So much for that theory. They were also arranged and grouped in a more confusing order.

Rules of Golf c. 1968
 
I cant say whats right or wrong but if one wants to play the rules exactly as written (and is there any other way?) even if rediculous than heres what i found and you be the judge.

First part copied states the player is responsible for knowing rules. Even goes on to say says if his caddy breaks a rule the player is also responsible.

Second says player responsible for correct score card.

Third says committee can not wave any rule.
And here they are;

6-1. Rules
The player and his caddie are responsible for knowing the Rules.


d. Wrong Score for Hole
The
competitor is responsible for the correctness of the score recorded for each hole on his score card. If he returns a score for any hole lower than actually taken, he is disqualified.


33-1. Conditions; Waiving Rule
The Committee has no power to waive a Rule of Golf.



What I gather from it - Wether he new at the time what he did was wrong or not doesnt matter. He is supose to know the rules regardless and therefore take a 2 stroke penalty for breach of rule. He is also then supose to hand in a score card reflecting the 2 stroke penalty. If he doesnt he is supose to be disqualified. The committe can not wave any rule as stated in the rules so..... Unless he handed in the card with the penalty strokes already added in is the only way he should still be playing.

Rediculous or not and i personaly wouldnt want to see that happen but they are bending thier own rules if he handed in the card that way. If so and they bend the rules then whats going to make all else follow them? And what about the next players in the mix? How is any of it fair to any of them? I just dont know.
 
Last edited:
The rule book is getting larger and the play is getting slower. Coincidence? I think not.:alien:
 
Back
Top