Equitable isn’t always apparent when it comes to The Rules of Golf
The Rules of Golf have certainly come under some intense scrutiny this past week. First we get the ruling at the PGA Championship that Dustin Johnson grounded his club in a sand trap on the 72nd hole incurring a two-stroke penalty that knocked him out of a playoff.
On Saturday LPGA Tour veteran Juli Inkster gets DQ’d from the Safeway Classic for using a weighted ring to warm up after a rain delay. Inkster was in second place at the time.
And closer to home, Jose de Jesus Rodriguez, one of the hottest players on the Canadian Tour, fired a course record tying 61 on Saturday at the Seaforth Country Classic but left the scoring tent before signing his card. Instead of taking a three shot lead into Sunday’s final round, Rodriguez will be heading on down the road muttering something like, “what a stupid I am!”
There is no doubt in any of these examples that the players clearly breached the rules. The web traffic, blogs and editorials are pretty divided on the issue, especially about Johnson’s bunker gaffe. The video evidence is clear – he did ground his club. However, what is unclear is whether he or anybody else could tell if he really was in a bunker. On TV it looked like hard packed dirt. Spectators were walking all over the area, kids were building sand castles.
The Rules of Golf are very specific and in case there is any doubt about their application, there exists an even bigger book called the Decisions of the Rules of Golf that accounts for virtually every scenario that has been encountered in assessing the Rules. Already there’s probably a new Decision for the Johnson ruling.
What is unclear and what has never been explained to my satisfaction is the part about the Rules of Golf being equitable. OK, so Johnson grounded his club in a bunker – technically a breach. However, it’s clear from the video that he didn’t test the sand, didn’t drag any material away from the back of the ball to provide for a cleaner hit and in fact didn’t do anything at all to gain an advantage over his fellow players. So how is it “equitable” to assess him a two stroke penalty for something he wasn’t even aware was a bunker.
The Inkster situation is even weirder. Inkster could have taken a couple of wedges from her bag to warm up if she wanted to swing additional weight. Instead she uses the lead donut and gets the bum’s rush from the premises.
Not signing a scorecard is something probably every competitor has done once in their lives. And just once, because forever after, in every tournament you play, it will be indelibly etched on your brain to sign the damn thing before you get up from the table. I don’t know the specifics of the Rodriguez situation but he was undoubtedly excited after shooting a 61 and breaking the course record, he would be thinking about having a three shot lead and there would be a pile of media people waiting to talk to him. However, his caddie would be there, his fellow competitors and at least two officials of the Tour would be at the table, yet not one of them checked to see if his scorecard was signed.
It happens and I get it but it’s another golf technicality that makes no sense. It’s certainly not equitable. Rules purists will blame the player alleging that it’s his responsibility. They’re correct but that doesn’t make it right.
All of these rulings stir the pot and make for great debate but if you read the input from casual golf fans and players you’ll note an almost unanimous sentiment that they think the rules are stupid and should be changed. Most casual golfers play by their own rules so these infractions are very curious to them.
In the case of Sarah Brown, a month or so ago, the officials at a Duramed FUTURES Tour event were so convinced that Brown was using wedges with illegal grooves that they DQ’d her mid round. Turns out they were wrong and the grooves were OK. Too late for Sarah though.
To me it seems like the Rules of Golf have resulted in a lot of players being penalized for things that didn’t give them an advantage over their fellow competitors. There’s nothing equitable about that.
Someone once said, and I’m paraphrasing here a bit, “if the law results in one innocent man being hanged then the justice system is not working.” Maybe it’s time the Rules of Golf had a do-over.
The Return of Derek Gillespie
Although he didn’t win in Mexico yesterday, Derek Gillespie of Oshawa led the Iberostar Riviera Maya Open until the back nine on Sunday and still gave eventual winner Spencer Levin a good run down the stretch. Going into the final round with a one shot lead and shooting 67 will usually get the job done. If your opponent shoots 65, it just wasn’t meant to be. For Gillespie, this past weekend was further affirmation that he has climbed back from the abyss.
In 2002 and 2003, Derek was labelled a “can’t miss prospect” winning a couple of times on the Canadian Tour and recording a number of Top 10 finishes. He appeared to have all the tools – the talent to make it to the big time – and was compared favourably to peers like David Hearn and Jon Mills. While Hearn and then Mills went on to experience life on the PGA Tour, Gillespie slipped a notch or three. There were minor injuries, stories of dissent with agents, coaches and his support group. Maybe there was too much pressure to be the “next” Mike Weir or to keep up with his peer group. There were also suggestions that maybe golf wasn’t Derek’s first priority. Whatever the reason, Derek played on and had some Top 10′s in 2005 but was never again mentioned as the flavour of the month – more like, “whatever happended to Derek Gillespie?” His career definitely appeared to be on the wane.
2007 seems to feature a different Derek. He has played some of his best golf in Mexico throughout his career and the southern swing this year didn’t disappoint with finishes of T17, T3, T27 and the close call with victory on Sunday. Reports are that he has dedicated himself once again to a more rigorous fitness regimen and made his golf career the number one priority. The Tour moves back to Canada for its summer swing in two weeks. Gillespie sits fifth on the money list and has his game working well. He’s back in the spotlight. Here’s hoping he can win again and take the next step towards fulfilling all that potential.
Putting Canadian back in the Canadian Tour
Congratulations to Wes Heffernan on his victory yesterday in Mexico. It was the Calgary golfer’s second win of the year on the Canadian Tour and vaults him into second spot on the Order of Merit. If he can hang onto that spot for the rest of the season he gets a free pass into the second stage of PGA Q-school. Heffernan’s probably not thinking about that just yet but it’s noteworthy to point out that in addition to Heffernan there are three other Canadian golfers in the Top 10. Scott Hawley of Ottawa (6th), Adam Spiers of Winnipeg (8th) and Graham DeLaet from Saskatchewan (9th) are all having banner years too. Then there’s Oshawa’s Derek Gillespie (12th) who has returned from oblivion and is looking like the player of a few years ago when he was a Tour winner and a contender every time he teed it up. Behind that group there’s a whole bucketful of Canadians making cuts, earning cheques and playing some good golf. These players have excellent role models currently on the Nationwide Tour – players like Jon Mills, David Hearn, Brad Fritsch, Chris Baryla and of course Mike Weir and Ian Leggatt on the PGA Tour. The path to success for Canadian golfers has been well charted and this next crop of players looks to be stepping up. It’s also gratifying to see that the Canadian Tour under Rick Janes and Dan Halldorson has even more events at home which will ease the burden on the pocketbook for these young players and also showcase the Tour to more aspiring Canadian professionals. More Canadian events, more Canadians playing well on the Canadian Tour – it wasn’t alway the case.
Peter Mumford is the Editor and Publisher of Fairways Magazine in Toronto. Fairways is intended for avid golfers and this blog site is an extension of that same philosophy - we don't dumb it down for the uninformed!