Ewan Murray Says Rule Change Nothing To Do With Tiger Woods. Would Have Saved Padraig Harrington
There are a hell of a lot of bullshitters in the golf game who you should never listen to, but Ewan Murray is an exception. And he says the oscillation-gate rule change made yesterday, has nothing to do with Tiger Woods.
To recap, the R&A and USGA have now determined: "New Decision 18/4 provides that, where enhanced technological evidence (eg HDTV, digital recording or online visual media, etc.) shows that a ball has left its position and come to rest in another location, the ball will not be deemed to have moved if that movement was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time."
In his Guardian column Murray says
Privately, the R&A points out this change has been in the offing for 18 months and was set in stone before the Woods controversy. Golf's rulemakers are also not of a mind to halt the ability of television viewers to report possible breaches, as this has proved a help at times.
Regarding the Woods case, David Rickman, the R&A's executive director for rules and equipment, said: "That was the type of scenario where there was some uncertainty and which the tournament committee might have decided fell under this decision.
"If they had decided that Tiger Woods's ball had moved but that the movement was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time, then there would have been no penalty."
Murray goes on to highlight the DQ of Padraig Harrington in Abu Dhabi in 2011. Under the rule change there would be no penalty and who knows, Padraig might be in a lot better place than he is now.
The Irishman's ball moved on a green as his hand brushed against it after replacement in front of his marker, an instance that was spotted by a television viewer.
Rickman added: "He had broken the rules as they stood then and, as he had signed for a wrong score, was disqualified. In April 2011, a decision was adopted which authorised committees to waive the disqualification penalty in circumstances in which the player could not reasonably have been aware of a breach that was later only identified through video evidence.
"In effect, it made it possible for a player to be retrospectively penalised after he or she had signed their scorecard, without being disqualified. This decision takes it forward, so if the committee decided that Padraig couldn't have known his ball had moved, then there would now be no penalty."
Good to have another perspective from a man in the know on this but I’m still not convinced this hasn’t anything to do with Tiger.
Comments
Post a Comment