Camilo possible rules violation... Phoned in?

I don't agree with the phone in/twitter.

I do agree with having a rules official watching the feed.



where our opinions differ is I would choose to hold the independent contractor/player responsible for his own actions, firstly. had he known the rule/followed the rule....he wouldn't be in the predicament to take the penalty or be dq'd.
 
I don't agree with the phone in/twitter.

I do agree with having a rules official watching the feed.



where our opinions differ is I would choose to hold the independent contractor/player responsible for his own actions, firstly. had he known the rule/followed the rule....he wouldn't be in the predicament to take the penalty or be dq'd.

I agree with that. He broke the rule and it was pretty stupid on his part. Just think it should have been handled differently.
 
I didn't miss that point. I voiced those same thoughts earlier. but it is ultimately the players' responsibility to follow the rules.

hence my opinion that the DQ is certainly justified and the players have no re-course to change that rule. unless they petition the USGA and the R&A.....that's the rule.

It truly is a rule of golf. Nobody is disputing that fact. Nor is anyone disputing that CV received the appropriate penalty (DQ) for violating said rule. What is at issue, however, is the perceived inequity on how it was handled. We can all probably agree that had CV's violation been acknowledged immediately, CV would have signed the correct scorecard that would only have stated the 2-stroke penalty for his infraction. Rather, due to significant delay from couch guy to Tour, the penatly was not acknowledged until after CV signed the card, leading to the DQ (as is proper for such a violation).

This can lead to numerous absurd results that, by nature of letting the TV viewing public become rule hawks, are not inequitable on paper, but are inequitable in procedure. For example, say that CV does the same infraction on hole 1. A guy from Cobra notices the infraction, but because he holds a grudge, decides not to inform the Tour of the infraction until after the card is signed (leading to a DQ if incorrectly signed). Same Cobra guy notices IJP make a similar rules infraction, but immediately calls the Tour so that IJP can make the adjustment penalty on the card and is not DQ'd. This allows the vewing public too much power in the enforcement of rules.

The original rule drafters likely never envisioned the TV viewing public to be enforcers of rules and, in my opinion, is completely against the spirit of rules.

And, like you said, the spirit of the rules is for the players to enforce the rules against themselves!

P.S. TV viewer infraction calling is a slipperly slope... very slippery. Is there a statute of limitations? Can I review tape from the 98 Masters for rule violations, and have people DQ'd for violations? Disgorge winnings?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JB
It truly is a rule of golf. Nobody is disputing that fact. Nor is anyone disputing that CV received the appropriate penalty (DQ) for violating said rule. What is at issue, however, is the perceived inequity on how it was handled. We can all probably agree that had CV's violation been acknowledged immediately, CV would have signed the correct scorecard that would only have stated the 2-stroke penalty for his infraction. Rather, due to significant delay from couch guy to Tour, the penatly was not acknowledged until after CV signed the card, leading to the DQ (as is proper for such a violation).

This can lead to numerous absurd results that, by nature of letting the TV viewing public become rule hawks, are not inequitable on paper, but are inequitable in procedure. For example, say that CV does the same infraction on hole 1. A guy from Cobra notices the infraction, but because he holds a grudge, decides not to inform the Tour of the infraction until after the card is signed (leading to a DQ if incorrectly signed). Same Cobra guy notices IJP make a similar rules infraction, but immediately calls the Tour so that IJP can make the adjustment penalty on the card and is not DQ'd. This allows the vewing public too much power in the enforcement of rules.

The original rule drafters likely never envisioned the TV viewing public to be enforcers of rules and, in my opinion, is completely against the spirit of rules.

And, like you said, the spirit of the rules is for the players to enforce the rules against themselves!

P.S. TV viewer infraction calling is a slipperly slope... very slippery. Is there a statute of limitations? Can I review tape from the 98 Masters for rule violations, and have people DQ'd for violations? Disgorge winnings?



once a tournament is final....so are the results.

I brought up a question earlier....let's say it wasn't couch potato that viewed the infraction but another player later that night during the replay? how is who viewed the infraction any different? another player has more on the line than couch potato.

the PGA tour could indeed have prevented this but so could the player.
 
You are missing the point that I think a few are making here. If a rules official was on hand viewing the same feed and making the rulings on the spot, then there would be no signing of an incorrect scorecard.

You ar the one who's missing the point. Golfers are supposed to know the rules and to police themselves. Period. If they can't do that then they get whatever comes their way. Good grief... what is so difficult about that??????
 
once a tournament is final....so are the results.

I brought up a question earlier....let's say it wasn't couch potato that viewed the infraction but another player later that night during the replay? how is who viewed the infraction any different? another player has more on the line than couch potato.

the PGA tour could indeed have prevented this but so could the player.

Exactly, so let the player and rules officials do it, not couch guy.

And if we allow TV Viewer Rule Officiating, why is it equitable to allow the results be final at close of tourney. This leads to an absurd result when couch guys calls tour on Sunday night as opposed to Friday night. What you are telling me then, is that had CV's infraction occurred on Sunday, things may have been different. If the infraction came to light from couch guy on Sunday night after the results were in, then couch guy would have been SOL. Hmmm... like I said, this is an absurd result by allowing something that was never contemplated by the drafters of the rules.

Indeed, such a policy brings two things to mind. On Thursday through Saturday, you hope that TV Rules Hawks are watching live and will call in any brain-fart (unwittingly) rule violation prior to end of round. But on Sunday, you hope that everyone is watching on TIVO or DVR, so that their rules-infraction call is too late and the results are "final."
 
Last edited:
I'm still comtemplating calling in and reporting that red headed hefer that pulled Peggy Sue's hair in the local mud wrestling tournament. Crap like that should not be allowed and is against the USMWA regs. It caused Peggy Sue to miss a year's supply of Barbeque at the Pork & Pig restaurant. The ref missed the call and it was as plain as day! Heck it was aired on the local channel and I got it all on tape. Mud wrestlers are educated on all rules and by passing such rules is strickly forbidden. Foulplay is not tolerated and party found doing so is DQ'd for future tournaments.

Edit: The above content shows how silly I think it is for a couch potatoe to call in a rules infraction. The PGA Tour adding a position to review events live and immediately report infractions is the best possible way to resolve future rules concerns.
 
you guys in georgia have great sports on tv ole gray... i need to contact my local cable company and demand a mud wrestling channel hahaha
 
once a tournament is final....so are the results.

Why isn't it that once the day is final the results are final?

Isn't an incorrect scorecard an incorrect scorecard no matter how long it has been incorrect?

This to me follows the same logic that everyone is following. No matter what, your scorecard is incorrect and you signed it. So you should be DQ'ed, even if I watch it 20 years later.

I've argued previously for a statute of limitations. Even if we allow fans to call in rules violations, if the PGA Tour doesn't get the call or doesn't make the decision on the rule until after the round is over, there shouldn't be a DQ for an incorrect scorecard because CV never had the chance to correct his mistake. I'm sure that CV would have taken his two stroke penalty if he knew about it, even if it was called in by fan.
 
you guys in georgia have great sports on tv ole gray... i need to contact my local cable company and demand a mud wrestling channel hahaha

Whoops there ya go! Another couch potatoe wanting in on the action :banghead:
 
You ar the one who's missing the point. Golfers are supposed to know the rules and to police themselves. Period. If they can't do that then they get whatever comes their way. Good grief... what is so difficult about that??????

That's not the point at all. The point that most of us are trying to make is that the PGA should figure out a way to officiate their own events and not rely on the general public to report infractions. There are quite a few very good arguments as to why allowing viewer input is inequitable, yet you are stuck on the same line. Yes, he broke the rule. Yes, he shouldn't have done it and was stupid. Yes, he should have called it when it happened. But, yes, the PGA TOUR should have noticed it before a fan and they should be placing the same scrutiny on every other player in the field. As you said, "what is so difficult about that??????"
 
You ar the one who's missing the point. Golfers are supposed to know the rules and to police themselves. Period. If they can't do that then they get whatever comes their way. Good grief... what is so difficult about that??????

Huh? The whole point of this is that they DID NOT police themselves and instead some dude on a couch policed it for them. Nobody is disputing the rule violation!!!!!!
 
That's not the point at all. The point that most of us are trying to make is that the PGA should figure out a way to officiate their own events and not rely on the general public to report infractions. There are quite a few very good arguments as to why allowing viewer input is inequitable, yet you are stuck on the same line. Yes, he broke the rule. Yes, he shouldn't have done it and was stupid. Yes, he should have called it when it happened. But, yes, the PGA TOUR should have noticed it before a fan and they should be placing the same scrutiny on every other player in the field. As you said, "what is so difficult about that??????"

I thought I was the only one for a second. Thank you.
 
You ar the one who's missing the point. Golfers are supposed to know the rules and to police themselves. Period. If they can't do that then they get whatever comes their way. Good grief... what is so difficult about that??????

I've been playing golf for 35 years and I'm sure I don't know every rule and every decision in the book.
 
I've been playing golf for 35 years and I'm sure I don't know every rule and every decision in the book.


i don't get paid to play golf at that level....but i promise you if i did...i would do the best i could to know the rules. it's a shame more of the players don't.

i found this story an interesting read:
 
but something is certainly broken here when I can call in and get someone dq'd from a tournament. (By the way, when does JD play again?)

You can't just call in and get someone DQ'd from a tournament. They'd have to have actually broken the rules first and not realised it.

That's not the point at all. The point that most of us are trying to make is that the PGA should figure out a way to officiate their own events and not rely on the general public to report infractions. There are quite a few very good arguments as to why allowing viewer input is inequitable, yet you are stuck on the same line. Yes, he broke the rule. Yes, he shouldn't have done it and was stupid. Yes, he should have called it when it happened. But, yes, the PGA TOUR should have noticed it before a fan and they should be placing the same scrutiny on every other player in the field. As you said, "what is so difficult about that??????"

Out of curiosity, would you add "yes, he should have been penalised" to the end of that? If not, why not? He broke the rule, why should he not be penalised?

I think what everyone seems to miss is that the person that called in or tweeted or whatever didn't enforce the rules (or police them or whatever). He simply pointed out an infraction. The rules officials enforced the rules. If you see someone shoplifting and point it out to a police officer, that doesn't mean that you're the police. You're simply ensuring that someone doesn't get away with breaking the rules.

As to some suggestions that the penalty should only be applied if it's discovered before he's signed for his card, suppose they had let it fly. Everyone would know he'd broken the rules and should have been disqualified for signing for an incorrect score, but he'd still be out there playing for the tournament. I, personally, don't think that's a particularly satisfactory state of affairs.

What do you think is a fairer situation?

1) Player A is on TV and breaches the rules, someone calls in and the player has a penalty imposed on them. Player B is not on TV and makes the same breach of the rules. No one sees it and he doesn't know the rule and so he gets away with it.

2) Player A is on TV and breaches the rules, someone calls in, but the PGA ignore it and there is no penalty imposed. Player B is not on TV and makes the same breach of the rules. No one sees it and he doesn't know the rule and so he gets away with it.

Now, I imagine that some would suggest that situation 2 is preferable, because 1 is unfair on Player A, because he was on TV and hence penalised while B was not on TV and hence not penalised. But, what about the rest of the field? For all 153 of them (or 32 or whatever the number happens to be) situation 1 is preferable, because in that situation only one person has gained an unfair advantage over them. In situation 2, two people have gained an advantage over them. To my mind, situation 1 is definitely the better option.
 
Im still confused on why having a Tour Official watch the feed that the viewers are seeing and make the calls over a guy on the coach is not perhaps #3?

That way, it is not "bush league" as Hawk said and everybody on TV still must follow (generalization about incident) the rules and does not get penaliZed.

Nobody is disputing that someone broke the rules on here that I have seen. I dont even think anybody is disputing the penalty that they should incur. What is being disputed is how the penalty is called and how it is ruled upon.

Having an official or PGA Tour make the ruling from the feed completely eliminates this entire ordeal. We keep hearing that the players police themselves. But clearly that is not the case.
 
I agree he should have been penalized. Sorry, I thought was implied in my posts.
 
My opinion:
1. He committed an infraction of the Rules Of Golf (tm)
2. A penalty of 2 strokes was appropriately assessed
3. He signed his score card before he was aware of the infraction, and therefore signed an incorrect score card
4. A penalty of a DQ was appropriately assessed

5. The PGA Tour should take steps to protect its players from these circumstances
5a. This could be in the form of more rules officials, better places officials (view the feeds) or by removing the ability to have fans call in
6. The PGA should reevaluate the penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard.
6a. This could be in the form of an extended grace period or by removing the rule entirely

Recap: The infraction and penalty were addressed appropriately according to the Rules Of Golf (tm), however the situation spotlights the need for a rules change or modification to protect professional players from future situations that may arise.
 
JB: did you just see the golf central episode that was just on? An opinion piece at the end advocated the exact same thing.

Im still confused on why having a Tour Official watch the feed that the viewers are seeing and make the calls over a guy on the coach is not perhaps #3?

That way, it is not "bush league" as Hawk said and everybody on TV still must follow (generalization about incident) the rules and does not get penaliZed.

Nobody is disputing that someone broke the rules on here that I have seen. I dont even think anybody is disputing the penalty that they should incur. What is being disputed is how the penalty is called and how it is ruled upon.

Having an official or PGA Tour make the ruling from the feed completely eliminates this entire ordeal. We keep hearing that the players police themselves. But clearly that is not the case.
 
JB: did you just see the golf central episode that was just on? An opinion piece at the end advocated the exact same thing.

Was it done by Charlie Rymer or Scott Walker?
 
These guys dont need to know the rules because the PGATour doesnt require them to know the rules. If you can count to 5, or 6, you can play on the PGATour. And if you ever think your possibly violating the rules, just yell the name sluggo, and someone will come running to you.

IMO, there should be testing done in late december and players should have to receive 75 or above to pass. Tough cookies kids, you need to take a quiz before you get to swing a golf club and get paid to do it.
 
Back
Top