THE Official 2017/2018 PGA Tour Season Thread - Page 21

23-1/2 Large Stone Removable Only with Much Effort
Q.A player's ball lies in the rough directly behind a loose stone the size of a watermelon. The stone can be removed only with much effort. Is it a loose impediment which may be removed?

A.Yes. Stones of any size (not solidly embedded) are loose impediments and may be removed, provided removal does not unduly delay play (Rule 6-7).

23-1/3 Assistance in Removing Large Loose Impediment
Q.May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc. assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?

A.Yes.

So it's pretty clear it would still be legal to move it as long as it's not solidly embedded.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 12:42 AM

#503

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

Decision 23/2.

Quote:

If a stone is partially embedded and may be picked up with ease, it is a loose impediment. When there is doubt as to whether a stone is solidly embedded or not, it should not be removed.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 12:44 AM

#504

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

If it were not obvious that Tiger gamed the rules official, got a VERY favorable ruling that the boulder was not embedded and moving it would not cause a delay, and got favorable treatment from the patrons that basically nobody else playing would have received, then GG.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 12:58 AM

#505

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerHero77

Watch the video, it's very very clear it wasn't embedded. Definitely 100% not "solidly embedded". And the rules also very clearly state that you can get help from the patrons. So you can cry that it's not fair because you wouldn't get the same help, but the rules are very clear.

You're just wrong on this one. It was legal then and it's just as legal now (possibly even more clearly legal now depending on when the decisions I posted were added).

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:06 AM

#506

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

I watched the video. Look at the flat surface of the boulder and how the people moved it. Tiger clearly gamed the rules official, who had no idea if it were embedded and ignored the delay, and it went against the spirit of the rules. But Tiger got a favorable ruling so good for him.

Regardless, decision 23/2 above. "Picked up with ease" applies here.

If you don't agree then not much more I can say.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:11 AM

#507

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

Rules officials make mistakes, not often though.

Cink's improving his lie in the 2004 Heritage was generally agreed upon to be a rules violation. (13-2 primarily, which the official ignored) It cost Ted Purdy the tournament.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:23 AM

#508

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerHero77

No, it doesn't apply at all. Your reading comprehension is terrible.

If it can be picked up with ease it's clear it's a loose impediment.
If it can't be picked up with ease it can still be a loose impediment if it's not embedded. It's very clear tiger's stone was not embedded.

Quote:

23-1/2 Large Stone Removable Only with Much Effort
Q.A player's ball lies in the rough directly behind a loose stone the size of a watermelon. The stone can be removed only with much effort. Is it a loose impediment which may be removed?

A.Yes. Stones of any size (not solidly embedded) are loose impediments

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:42 AM

#509

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

So if it is likely partially embedded but cannot be moved with ease (which cuts against 23/2), then you still think it is a loose impediment?

By watching the video there was soil displaced, so the boulder was clearly partially embedded.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:53 AM

#510

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

LOL. It's very very clear that the stone wasn't solidly embedded by any reasonable definition. Unfortunately I don't think the USGA defines "embedded" specifically for any object but a ball.

But you can continue to argue that point or you can accept that the USGA decided the ruling was correct and uses it as an example of a correct ruling on the website. In any case I win and I'll be bowing out now.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:55 AM

#511

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

It was a PGA Tour official ruling. If it were properly ruled that it was partially embedded, then Tiger does not get to move it by the rules. (23/2)

So you lose.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:57 AM

#512

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote

03-06-2018 , 01:58 AM

#513

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

Any one ton boulder with a flat underneath that is partially embedded is "solidly" embedded.

So you lose.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 02:00 AM

#514

PokerHero77

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 5,788

I'm guessing the moderator will remove the last 6 or so posts.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 02:06 AM

#515

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote

03-06-2018 , 03:44 PM

#516

scottc25

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 5,434

Went to Valspar today. Walked in and Rory was right there.

Rough is long-ish but not horrible. Was windy today. I sat on 16 a bit and saw 1 of about 30 shots get to the green.

Quote

03-06-2018 , 10:55 PM

#517

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,919

Quote:

Originally Posted by campfirewest

Sharma is definitely a Cinderella story. It would be cool to see him win and get into the Masters.

or just ship a special invitation:

India's Shubhankar Sharma gets Masters invitation

http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/...ers-invitation

great move by ANGC.

Quote

03-07-2018 , 12:05 AM

#518

ntnBO

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 7,643

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerHero77

It was clearly an angle shoot, and is now against the rules.

False. True.

The rule was changed not long after this to basically reflect a golfer must be able to move the loose impediment himself.

Quote

03-07-2018 , 12:17 AM

#519

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote:

Originally Posted by ntnBO

The rule was changed not long after this to basically reflect a golfer must be able to move the loose impediment himself.

False.

Quote

03-07-2018 , 01:44 AM

#520

brandoncla

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 5,728

Planet Earth isn't embedded either

Quote

03-08-2018 , 01:48 PM

#521

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,919

Rlolry

Quote

03-08-2018 , 02:01 PM

#522

martin_malin

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 3,332

Magical flop by Tiger! Tap in birdie at 1.

Quote

03-08-2018 , 04:26 PM

#523

ntanygd760

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 13,663

Tiger is winning this year if he hits it like this, putter only club not working today

Quote

03-08-2018 , 04:34 PM

#524

BreakYaNeck

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 8,187

He will win this year. Still think alot of the not being able to score is rust. Shot E on the front 9 and coulda been -3. Currenly -1 which is very solid