Opinion & Analysis
Points’ DQ rekindles debate about severity of the rules of golf
In what seems to be an accelerating rash of notable player dismissals from PGA Tour events, D.A. Points was disqualified from the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am for practicing with a training aid during the course of play. The infraction was clear — Points, who won the event in 2011, can be clearly seen on the TV replay taking practice swings with a green foam ball in his right armpit—and the penalty was absolute: immediate disqualification from the event according to Rule 14-3.
14-3. Artificial Devices, Unusual Equipment And Unusual Use Of Equipment
“…Except as provided in the Rules, during a stipulated round the player must not use any artificial device or unusual equipment (see Appendix IV for detailed specifications and interpretations), or use any equipment in an unusual manner:
a. That might assist him in making a stroke or in his play; or
b. For the purpose of gauging or measuring distance or conditions that might affect his play; or
c. That might assist him in gripping the club, except that:
(i) gloves may be worn provided that they are plain gloves;
(ii) resin, powder and drying or moisturizing agents may be used; and
(iii) a towel or handkerchief may be wrapped around the grip.
Exceptions:
1. A player is not in breach of this Rule if (a) the equipment or device is designed for or has the effect of alleviating a medical condition, (b) the player has a legitimate medical reason to use the equipment or device, and (c) theCommittee is satisfied that its use does not give the player any undue advantage over other players.
2. A player is not in breach of this Rule if he uses equipment in a traditionally accepted manner.”
To Points’ credit, he accepted full responsibility for the gaffe. He will also honor his partnership in this year’s event with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. So he is teeing it up in Saturday’s round, even though his chance at any piece of the tournament purse is now zero.
Points won the 2011 AT&T National Pro-Am and he and partner Bill Murray captured the team title. Murray is away this year and Points is not going to make it to Sunday in 2014.
Unlike some other high-profile Rules situations of the past year (e.g., Tiger Woods’ ruling at the 2013 Masters), that the penalty ultimately given out was in accordance with the Rules is in absolutely no doubt. Instead, debate has resurfaced about whether the penalty associated with this rule is more stringent than necessary.
On Morning Drive Saturday morning, hosts Charlie Rymer, Gary Williams, Damon Hack and Holly Sonders took up the issue. Rymer, the only one in the foursome who has ever been on Tour, found himself the lone supporter of a relaxed penalty in this case, likening Points’ punishment to a case of jaywalking receiving the death penalty. It is hyperbole, sure, but Rymer’s case is worth consideration due to his uncommon (in golf) experience and perspective. He played for a number of years for a great deal of money and now has a unique opportunity to reflect back on it with an analytic journalistic eye.
Damon Hack, a former writer for Sports Illustrated and The New York Times, shook his head, calling Rymer’s defense “a slippery slope” and found agreement and support from co-host Gary Williams, who had a brief stint as a golf teaching pro before embarking on a radio career that led him to his current post.
Rymer continued, “There’s too much at stake to send players home over minor Rules infractions,” to which Williams retorted that professional golfers ought to know what can and cannot get them penalized in or disqualified from a given tournament.
The Rules of Golf are notoriously long and complicated. Part of this is unavoidable — the “field of play” in golf is so large and variable one day to the next that an enormous number of possible situations need to be considered and covered. When large professional purses are at stake, it is certainly incumbent on players to navigate the course within the Rules, but the recent spate of notable transgressions raises a legitimate concern about their complexity.
Those who fancy themselves custodians of golf are on a stated mission to try to increase participation in the game. All facets, then, should be up for investigation, even the Rules. No one aims to neuter the essential challenge or traditional nature of the game, but it is understandable that there may sometimes appear a disconnect between the game played for millions of dollars and the one played for a $1 Nassau elsewhere every day. How many players are unwittingly breaking a relatively esoteric Rule right now? Some are probably doing it in competition, with no cameras around.
Completely overhauling the Rules of Golf is certainly not necessary at this time. But accepting them as immutable does not exactly mesh with the increasingly popular notion that golf needs to become more innovative in order to appeal to more players and retain relevance as a great pastime for the masses. If former players like Rymer are calling for a bit of reform, it is important to listen to their concerns rather than dismiss them out of hand.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Dennis Clark
Feb 12, 2014 at 10:09 pm
The players should have their caddies attend rules seminars, perhaps get certified. the top guys can afford tihis easily.
James at Putter Lounge
Feb 12, 2014 at 2:17 pm
This is one that he should have known and he needs to know the consequence. The rules of golf need to be overarching on a topic, it is the players responsibility to know what is within the scope of the rule. It’s not realistic to have exceptions as many violations of the rules can have a valid reason why you did something wrong. Know the rules, it’s that simple. Otherwise, we have a rule book that would be over 1000 pages long.
PA PLAYA
Feb 12, 2014 at 1:37 pm
It is amazing that myself and everyone I play with on a regular basis at the club level knows and understands this rule, yet a touring professional who plays the sport for his livelihood does not. I’m guessing it was nothing more than a brainfart…
Sure, the USGA could rewrite and reword the rules for simplification, but that only helps those who take the time to study and learn them. It won’t fix carelessness and an incredible lack of attention to detail.
LY
Feb 12, 2014 at 1:25 pm
I would want my professional caddie to know some of the rules just to make sure that I would not do something stupid in the heat of the moment.
ray
Feb 12, 2014 at 12:30 pm
If D.A. used a towel under his armpit for practice during the touranament round, would it count as a violation??
Robeli
Feb 10, 2014 at 10:13 am
The PGA should start acting more like the ‘P’ in their name and not like old Tom Morris would have done. They are quick to say players should govern themselves when it comes to the rules (in the spirit of golf), but quickly like to be policemen, judge and executor. PGA has a ton of money and can do better job by assigning PGA official walking with every group.
Or, if they do want to act like old Tom Morris, next time Mr. PGA rules official, if a player violates a rule and the player do nothing, just ‘report’ the issue and let the player decide by himself what he is going to do. That will quickly sort out the ‘cheaters’ and ‘rules slackers’ you will see how quickly some players will be isolated from the rest. The players will then become more knowledgeable of the rules and will enforce more rule callings on themselves. Believe me, it works. I follow it with my weekend buddies and you quickly determine the list of golfers you like to play with and those you avoid at all cost. If I see a rule violation within my group, I just inform them in a nice manner of what happened and let the player make the decision.
Fred
Feb 15, 2014 at 4:54 pm
Obviously, D.A. should have known about such a common sense rule – I mean, a training aide on the course? But, that said, if he had had any question as to whether it was legal to do so or not, there should have been a “rules” official there on the spot that D.A. could have referred to. The officials are paid to know the rules; the caddies are not – even though many of the veterans do. That’s why they officials are there – to enforce the rules and make certain the pros adhere to them. If the guy making millions is depending on the caddie making 10% to know the rules, then he’d better up the caddy’s percentage to 20%. Either that, or start putting the bags on the shoulders of the officials. Bottom line: yes, we need officials to accompany every group.
RG
Feb 9, 2014 at 11:29 pm
Hello! Earth to Everybody! It’ 2014 not 1914! Why are professional golfers still in charge of keeping their on scores? It’s not like they’re out on the course by themselves, at least 30 million people are watching can’t some of them keep score and just let the guys play golf? Why is it also that millions is paid in prize money but nothing is paid for rules officials? Every group should have a rules official hat caries a video camera and we wouldn’t have these problems. It’s archaic, idiotic and Ludacris to continue this way. Every spectator at the event has a video camera in their pocket why don’t the officials? Why aren’t they using those tools to show the players what they did?Why are they repeatedly retroactive instead of proactive?
THE USGA PREFERS PUNISHENT TO PREVENTION!!
Fred
Feb 15, 2014 at 4:58 pm
If a spectator at a professional event is spotted with a camera, iPhone or even, yes, a video camera, they’re asked to put them away. Asked a second time, and marshals may actually take them away.
corey
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:36 pm
am i the only one that sees a big difference from dropping a ball a yard out of place and someone using a training aid. yes in the grand scheme both are rule violations. but professional golfers rely on their practice during a tournament to make money. you practice so things become routine. for a pro, one thing might not be clicking just right during a round but if he had his training aid then he could fix it. but you don’t have your training aid, you finish the round then go work on it afterwards on the range. IMO dropping 1 yard away from 100 yards out is not as severe is a pro practicing his swing on the course with the help of a training aid so he can be better on every shot after
corey
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:37 pm
sorry for all the grammar mistakes, typed fast while on the toilet
RanchoBob
Feb 10, 2014 at 6:56 pm
But Tiger freely admitted that he dropped out of place on purpose to assist his play of the shot. It wasn’t, “I accidentally dropped too far back.”
Yes, most of us can’t see a difference between 101 yards and 100, but “these guys are good.”
They both unknowingly broke the rules and got penalized, though Tiger got a hall pass.
Martin Chuck
Feb 9, 2014 at 1:23 pm
Sorry, Professionals SHOULD know better. Stupid rule, but it pertains to everyone and everyone playing at any kind of high level should know what to do. Same as DJ’s F’up at the PGA a few years ago. They couldn’t have been more clear about the “1000 bunkers” and to treat all as such. Anyway, sad to see him DQ’d.
Scott
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:29 am
It is essentially the same as how Rickie was tucking his shirt into his armpit for feedback. The rules are too vague to be taken so strictly.
David Sefton
Feb 9, 2014 at 4:30 am
Using an artificial device has an impact on the rest of the round. Correcting a swing fault using an artificial device deserves disqualification.
Todd Dugan
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:11 am
Points was NOT disqualified for using an aid. He was disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard. That’s a BIG difference. This rule should be changed to allow for a retroactive adjustment to the score, so long as the player was not aware of the breach at the time. I think the USGA will do the right thing on this one at the next rules summit.
The bigger issue here is not that the rules of golf are too complicated, but rather, that almost nobody who plays this game has made any real effort to learn the rules. These are the same people who complain that the rules are to complicated.
Also, Points CAN still earn prize money for the team portion of the tournament.
mick
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:35 am
This is incorrect. Any violation of 14-3 results in automatic disqualification. Penalty strokes would not have applied in this situation.
Still a dumb rule.
tim
Feb 9, 2014 at 9:28 pm
You clearly did not read the article
dum dum dum dum dum dum dum dum
Wisconsin Terrapin
Feb 12, 2014 at 12:16 pm
This is the 2nd DQ for a training aid. DJ and the LPGA DQ both occurred while dealing with an excessive waits at a t-box. Standing around for 10 minutes or more waiting to play, I could lose my good presence of mind and inadvertently pull out something I always stretch with.
“While we’re young” and a 4 hour round would solve these infractions – or allow warm-up tools if left on a t-box for more than 5-8 minutes. One of these is the right answer.
paul
Feb 9, 2014 at 12:08 am
When playing with friends we just put two extra strokes on the score card for just about everything. And everything seems to work out fine. O.B. Lost to a hazard, doesn’t matter, two strokes. We don’t carry a rule book. If there is a rule that we know, we use it. But if we don’t know, two more strokes. Next shot. Speeds things up as well.
OM
Feb 9, 2014 at 2:27 am
But with millions of dollars not at stake, what you do with your friends at the bar afterwards wouldn’t have to be considered PROFESSIONAL so nobody cares what you do in this case.
Robeli
Feb 8, 2014 at 10:59 pm
Yea, Tiger violates a rule which states if you violates it your are DQ’d, but does not not because he is Tiger, but DA violates one and gets DQ’d. Nice double standards.
OM
Feb 9, 2014 at 2:27 am
Exactly.
Happyday_J
Feb 9, 2014 at 10:39 am
COMPLETELY different scenario, its getting pretty ridiculous people taking shots at tiger over this master’s ruling, and Im not even a die hard Tiger fan. People need to gain an understanding of the rules before taking shots. The rules of golf are governed by the rules, and enforced by the committee (at tournaments). It says in the rule book that any decision by the committee is absolute.
What happened with tiger is that the committee reviewed the tape of tigers drop at the masters prior to signing his scorecard. This was done so he would not be disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard by not having the 2 stroke penalty. The committee ruled that he did not do anything wrong and thus no 2 shot penalty, tiger than signed his scorecard, that is a ruling the committee made it was what stood. After the interview tiger did, the COMMITTEE realized that they were the one who made the mistake, tiger did break the rule, which they had deemed was okay. Had the committee realized it prior to signing the card, it would of been a 2 shot penalty added, and no issues. But because the committee goofed it up, and had to reimplement a 2 shot penalty, why should tiger be penalized for signing an incorrect scorecard, thus disqualified, when the committee said is was okay originally? So the committee gave a ruling of a 2 shot penalty as the infraction required, but no disqualification for signing an incorrect scorecard.
Completely two different situations and I really wish people would let this whole tiger thing go, as someone who has taken and passed the rules of golf module, ppl should look things up and understand it before throwing accusations around. This isnt a shot at you, so dont take it personally, this an explanation to all those of similar mindset, so I apologize if this seem like a pot shot at you, as it wasnt but this has got to go.
Robeli
Feb 9, 2014 at 2:23 pm
Different scenario, yes, but same principle. I bet you, if this was Tiger and not DA, Tiger would have been ‘slapped’ with only 2 strokes and not DG’d and carried on playing the weekend.
Happyday_J
Feb 9, 2014 at 6:47 pm
Nope…. because the rules infraction that tiger broke was a 2 shot penalty. DAs infraction is automatic disqualification. Two different rules with two different punishments. They would not of changed the punishments for two different players, come on. I know there are people that are sick and tired of the treatment that tiger gets, but remember, its from the media, not the people within the tour.
RanchoBob
Feb 10, 2014 at 7:02 pm
The thing about the Tiger drop that won’t go away is that the committee decided that his drop was within range of error and decided not to approach him about it. That suggests that in the committee’s mind it was not a deliberate effort to not drop in the same spot.
After the round and after signing his scorecard, Tiger freely admitted that he did it on purpose and subsequently got slapped with a two stroke penalty.
Should the committee have gone and asked him, “Hey, did you deliberately not drop as close as possible to the spot of the previous shot?” Yeah, maybe they should have.
But it’s not like it’s a difficult or ambiguous rule. There are plenty of places where the rules are somewhat esoteric and subject to interpretation and that’s what the Decisions book is for. But “as near as possible” is pretty definitive and hard to screw up unless you like to play fast and loose with the rules.
Happyday_J
Feb 11, 2014 at 10:20 am
And I completely agree with you, the committee decided that the drop was okay. So they made the mistake and were forced to back peddle and make it right. Did tiger break the rule, no doubt, did he knowingly, clearly not based on his interview afterwards, he mistaken the point the ball last crossed the hazard.
He went under the option of taking the point where the ball crossed the hazard going back as far as he’d like keeping the flag stick in line, but because the ball hit the flag stick and bounced back the point of entry was on the left side of the green. He proceeded under how it would of been had the ball gone in the hazard on the line he was hitting on, not factoring in the ball hitting the flagstick and going in on a different line, and in the heat of the moment, a mistake we all could of made.
Happyday_J
Feb 11, 2014 at 10:23 am
So with the committee clearing him, and then realizing they made a mistake upon hearing what he said in his interview, they needed to back peddle to make it right. Well had they just implemented the rule, tiger would of been disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard, which would of been ludicrous, b.c the committee had originally told him he was okay.
So the manner in which they did it, 2 stroke penalty, no disqualification was the right call, and people need to stop throwing stones at tiger (and this is coming from a non die hard tiger fan), because it was the committee that made the major error and needed to make it right.
Robeli
Feb 11, 2014 at 6:19 pm
You are correct on your analysis, but as Faldo and Chamblee said that next morning, taking all this info into consideration and as the rules said ‘in the spirit of golf’, Tiger should have been a man and realized the committee screw it up for him and in essence, he (Tiger), should have dq’d himself as the rule states. That is the bottom line. Tiger showed he has no integrity and trust.
Happyday_J
Feb 11, 2014 at 9:12 pm
I disagree with what faldo and chamblee said, and I will quote what nicklaus said as I feel he said it best:
“People say, `Should Tiger have withdrawn himself?’ I don’t think so at all,” Nicklaus said. “If Tiger did that, he’d be putting himself in a position of saying, `I’m above the rules.’ You accept the ruling whether it’s good or bad for you.”
Read more: http://www.golf.com/ap-news/nicklaus-ruling-correct-woods-augusta#ixzz2t4NCDu50
Had he of done that, people would of made the claim, the he undermined the committee and is above the rules. Its just like a speeding ticket, you get your ticket accept your punishment and move on. The ruling bodies issued his penalty and hes to accept it, that if anything shows more integrity as he took all that on the nose and moved on, amongst the noise such as your point, where as withdrawing and leaving would of been the easy way out.
The Tufted Puffin
Feb 12, 2014 at 11:37 am
I do not see a double standard. DA broke a rule that mandates immediate and automatic DQ. Tiger made a bad drop which called for a 2 stroke penalty, not an automatic DQ. The Rules Committee reviewed the drop and stupidly determined it was ok without first gathering the facts by both reviewing the video AND taking to the player. The Committee screwed up which saved Tiger. He got the 2 stroke penalty but the Committee couldn’t DQ him for their mistake.
roger
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:45 pm
I think a 2 stroke penalty for 1st violation in a round DQ for 2nd would be a better penalty. What I wonder is putting a towel or head cover under his arm, would this be “use any equipment in an unusual manner”.
Rich
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:37 pm
The rules of golf do not need overhalling or examination. None of the rules infractions referred to in this article or notable others from 2013 were “complex” in nature. Golf Pro’s need to learn the rules. It’s as simple as that. Don’t want to learn the rules, don’t complain when you get disqualified or penalised, or don’t play golf.
Chuck
Feb 8, 2014 at 5:08 pm
So my understanding is that a violation of Rule 14-3 is two strokes. Not disqualification.
The reason that D.A. Points was disqualified was that he had signed an incorrect card, as a result of his not knowing/not being informed promptly of the rules violation involving the device.
So, no, people; this was not an unreasonably drastic penalty by the book. It should have been a 2-stroke penalty. It’s too bad that there wasn’t a quicker and easier way for a knowledgeable golf observer to get word to the tournament officials earlier, before Points signed an incorrect card.
And it is a rule that Points should have known; I know it.
One lesson is simply to leave all of the swing-improvement and teaching gizmos out of the bag when you are on the course playing a tournament round.
Had Points left the sponge-ball back in his locker, and instead used his hat or a glove tucked under his right arm to do what he did, he’d have been okay.
gr8slice
Feb 8, 2014 at 5:17 pm
Chuck, PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 14-3:
Disqualification.
Chuck
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:13 pm
I was looking at the 14-2 penalty right above Rule 14-3 in my Decsions book by mistake.
My bad; I thank you for the correction.
I was hunting for an applicable Decision on what Points could legally have done. Decision 14-3/6.5 seems to be the one. Points could have used a golf ball tucked under his arm pit. Or, I think, any item of apparel. I suspect a towel could be used but I am not sure.
gr8slice
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:50 pm
14-3/10 applies better than 14-3/6.5 but reallly 14-3 is the rule and applies by itself without a decison needed. He could have used ball, towel, headcover, club any piece of normal golf equipment and wouldn’t have had any issues.
Cef
Feb 8, 2014 at 7:35 pm
Wow, how could such a knowledgeable guy like you err such a simple golf rule? Maybe you misinterpreted the rule book, or maybe you didn’t have the benefit of the Decisions book? Oh, wait…maybe the rules are not so simple after all.
Barry
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:09 pm
Chuck,
You’re a misinformed blow-hard.
Jason Sobal
Feb 8, 2014 at 4:47 pm
So we should change the rules? Wouldn’t that lead to more confusion and slow the game down even more. Every time a tour player calls an official over the game slows down more and more. I can never understand why a professional golfer with a caddy needs a rules official to figure out a drop off a cart path.
If the problem of slow play were addressed D.A. probably would not have had the time to break the rule. I’m guessing he was bored after playing a 5+ hour round and had a brief mental lapse.
I did not realize there was an accelerating rash of notable player dismissals. I have noticed an accelerating rash of media/journalists covering the game. Why do I care what Damon Hack and Gary Williams think? The Golf Channel has evolved into a channel with more analysts than actual stories.
gr8slice
Feb 8, 2014 at 4:52 pm
They do it mainly because they don’t want some idiot calling in questioning them about the drop. The slow play on tour is a huge issue and the only way for them to correct it, is to start giving out shots and continue to give out shots. And everyone is a rules officail now a days lol.
gr8slice
Feb 8, 2014 at 4:37 pm
The penalty DA got was absurd, he could have used his towel, headcover, ball and no big deal but a green nerf ball and he’s gone. That is overkill, if anything 1 or 2 shots is enough for that ruling. Hence why the rules need to be revamped. There are many things you can do with equipment on hand but not with training aids that do the exact same thing. Alignment sticks vs club for alignment looks, but use the sticks and you’re gone. And most have them in their bag on the course. Just dumb!!!
The rules of golf have 28 rules of golf, 4 for other forms of play and 2 for administration for a total of 34 rules with 90 sub sections for a total of 124 basic rules with a few more variations. Now throw in 1253 or so decisions you have a total of 1377 plus variations. And they say the rules are simple. The rules of golf need to be overhauled to make the game fun and simple for people to play. Very few sports have the same set of rules for all levels of play. The rules need to be changed for the masses and for tournament golf whether it is a different set for the USGA and R & A vs the PGA and the PGA Tour is something each group needs to decide and make.
For the masses get rid of stroke and distance rules, the one club or two club drop, let them ground their club in a bunker etc. things to make it simple and easy for all to play and grow the game, It’s just time for a change, make a different set of rules for all levels of play. Thoughts?
Ryan Bolin
Feb 8, 2014 at 4:23 pm
There should be two rules that matter when considering disqualification. 1. Play it as it lies, and (2) Count every stroke. This is just silly.
Birdman
Feb 8, 2014 at 3:53 pm
Amazing, most of the comments on here show a fundamental lack of knowledge of the game of golf. Why is getting more idiots playing golf good for the game?
JHM
Feb 8, 2014 at 6:35 pm
because without them you non idiots would have to pay $500 green fees to cover the cost f runnig a course.
Ken
Feb 9, 2014 at 8:11 am
It’s not so much that people are as ignorant as you think, it’s that this game and its rules have been tweaked for hundreds of years. Some rules just seem over the top harsh. Years ago center shafted putters were illegal because Walter Travis was putting lights out…not now! Several players have mentioned the unfairness of having to play a shot out of a divot. That seems unfair to tournament leaders on a Sunday afternoon when those same divots weren’t around earlier. Criticize everyone else, but rules have changed … More will change.
D Louis
Feb 8, 2014 at 3:43 pm
Another nail in the coffin of golf
Ken
Feb 8, 2014 at 3:07 pm
This seems more like a one stroke penalty than total DQ! A couple of years ago, Fuzzy showed a journalist how to hit a shot between holes … Penalized. This stuff seems like minutia. The USGA and the R & A are tougher than OJ’s jury.
Randy R
Feb 8, 2014 at 2:53 pm
Golf is the only sport I know that rulings are changed after the fact. Many, many times you see incorrect calls or bad calls and the outcome isn’t changed.
Steve Gregg
Feb 8, 2014 at 2:46 pm
Great article, but less obvious effort to impress your audience with your grammar would be in your best interest. Not to mention making for a far easier read. Analytic journalistic? Spate of notable transgressions? An esoteric rule? First rule of journalism: Create a favorable atmosphere for your readers! Who you trying to impress? Your writing is more of a rules infraction than what was committed by Mr. Points!!
Daniel Bailey
Feb 8, 2014 at 2:31 pm
And…. this is why Golf is on the decline! The rules of golf MUST be simplified, and less become less complex. The fact he was DQ’d for what he did is simply ridiculous. The PGA should ashamed of themselves.
Mizzy
Feb 8, 2014 at 5:18 pm
This would not rank in the top 5 reasons golf is on the decline. Calling someone on this infraction during a Sunday game with friends would be completely excessive.
However, calling a professional on this during a match with a multi-million dollar purse, is completely justified. Imagine if a police officer forgot to Mirandize his suspect? There would be a mistrial and the culprit would walk regardless of innocence or guilt.
Act like a professional and know the rules. If the penalty for the infraction changes, then so be it, but a player not knowing the rules at the highest level is negligence.
Cef
Feb 8, 2014 at 7:42 pm
We all want to play the game of golf by the rules. If you feel it excessive amongst friends but not with professionals, do you then favor bifurcation? Excessive applies to all, including my enemies ;-).
Ponjo
Feb 11, 2014 at 5:38 pm
Worst rule in golf is having to take a penalty drop from a bunker that is totally flooded.
ski_co
Feb 12, 2014 at 11:18 am
As a professional if you do not know the rules you can ask for a rules official at any time. Rules may seem dumb now but most likely when the rule was created it clarified something that was being abused.
Bruce
Feb 12, 2014 at 11:57 am
Well said. If I possessed the skills to play for $1 million + every week, you can bet BOTH my caddy and I would also KNOW the rules of the game. The players have the responsibility to know the game AND they have a caddy for an assistant. If they cannot learn the rules, then select a caddy who does know.
Bill
Feb 24, 2014 at 6:21 pm
The DQ for what Points did seem excessive to me. A two stroke penalty if the infraction is caught at the time seems appropriate. If it’s not, then move on and correct him post round. I hate that fans can call in and the infraction can be applied later. This isn’t about Points or Tiger…Tigers infraction seems far more serious, an attempt to circumvent the rules intentionally. Knowing the rules is important. Having officials available to consult is important. But the infraction needs to be brought to the officials attention by the players opponent or the official watching that group, not Joe Sixpack in his recliner.