-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Failure to enforce penalty (*SPOILER ALERT WORLDS*)
- Thread starter DG_player
- Start date
Agricolae
Eagle Member
Sarcasm? Yes. I was being facetious to make a point. However, IF it is ok to not call obvious violations, at Worlds no less, why would it not be ok to bend, stretch or break other rules?
DiscAnarchy
Par Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Messages
- 162
I don't have a problem with the other players not calling it.
Ricky is going to make that 15-footer 999 times out of a thousand.
Therefore, he didn't gain an advantage by foot faulting. To make a call like this would be silly. And DQing the players for not calling it would be preposterous.
Ricky is going to make that 15-footer 999 times out of a thousand.
Therefore, he didn't gain an advantage by foot faulting. To make a call like this would be silly. And DQing the players for not calling it would be preposterous.
Quinntastic
Birdie Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2017
- Messages
- 469
To play devils advocate, there is a 1/1000 chance he would miss, giving a player that isn't maybe as prestigious as Ricky to gain a stroke. It's not so much that it ACTUALLY made a difference, but if it's not that big a deal because he will always make it since it's not that hard of a putt, how hard would it be to have him make it like the rules allow?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
DiscAnarchy
Par Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Messages
- 162
You make a fair point. I guess we'd have to ask the other players why they didn't call it.
BlazedOrangeHat
Par Member
yes, there is probably a 99.9% chance that he will make the re-putt, but there is a huge difference here between not calling it and calling it and that is......
that if he were to accidentally fault again, it would be a one stroke penalty. if it isn't called that first time and no official warning is given, he now potentially saves a stroke later in the round.
the point of calling a foot fault isn't determined on the percentage of the re-make, but rather on the fact that the official warning has been given so on the next infraction a stroke can be given.
BlazedOrangeHat
Par Member
pauldst
Double Eagle Member
Whether that is a foot fault or not looks questionable to me. His feet appeared not to go past his lie, and he (very) briefly had balance before losing it again, resulting in his hand touching the ground. Plus, the hand may not have been ahead of his lie. We don't have a completely clear view of his lie, I can't see his marker, and if that is the case, wouldn't that keep it from being a fault? Besides, the other players on the card didn't have a clear view of his feet, so can they call a violation that they couldn't clearly see?
That said, many times I have seen in video what looked to me like a foot fault, and yet I don't recall ever seeing a foot fault called. Of course, my understanding on the subject is far from perfect.
That said, many times I have seen in video what looked to me like a foot fault, and yet I don't recall ever seeing a foot fault called. Of course, my understanding on the subject is far from perfect.
First, his feet have nothing to do with anything, as it his hand that was in violation. You see him pick up the mini, so it's pretty obvious where it is, and his hand definitely came down in front of it. Frankly, it doesn't matter if we, from the camera's vantage point, can see it or not. The players in the group DID see it. In the video, McCray was looking right at him with a clear vantage point to see both the mini and the hand touching the ground. The others acknowledged that it was a falling putt (they even say so in the commentary).
The question with this isn't whether or not it was really a falling putt...everyone involved acknowledges that it was. The question is whether or not it should have been called, and the answer to that is unequivocally yes.
Similar threads
