We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Wyndham Clark - Rules Violation?

Canadan

Canadan

LGND
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
149,775
Reaction score
110,695
Location
Ohio
Handicap
**
Curious as to whether you guys think Clark should have been assessed a penalty here. Not the first time he's done some interesting things in the rough this year.

Testing the ground?
Improving the lie?



1710251377267.png
 
In his interview he said he didnt intend to cause movement, no intention, no violation.

Zach Johnson agrees.
 
Should be penalized. You’re in the rough and have to face the outcome of those results, patting the grass down to reduce the chance of interference is cheating. If he sat it down once no issue personally but to keep patting it down he was looking to create an advantage and cheated the other players in the field.
 
to me, this was a pretty clear violation of the rules with intent
 
It was so obvious he was tamping the grass down. There is no need to smash the club down 4-5 times like that.
 
I hate that I agree with Brandel. The eye test is obvious that it moved. Without slow motion and super zoomed in it moved. I don't think he got any benefit from it but it still moved. Should of been a penalty.
 
Yes. To me, there is no other reason to do what he did. And done with intent.
 
Where’s @usegolffacts when you need a beacon of truth and justice 🤣
 
Canadan said:
what I find so interesting about this is how loose the Tour is on players patting down the area behind the ball. They CONSTANTLY do this.
Click to expand...
I agree. When I played in junior events, I was always so careful not to place the club behind the ball to cause accidental movement. I would hover the club when I thought placing the club behind the ball would cause it to move.
 
It’s definitely cheating but quite frankly I feel like I see this all the time with tour players.

Same thing as when they take a practice swing right next to the ball and essentially mow down half the grass just left of the ball.

I’ve seen Rory do the same thing often. Feels too widespread to try and start enforcing this now which I’m sure is ultimately why they went to the “naked eye” rule
 
This isn't a rule violation on tour. Bifurcation and all..
 
the ball moved so it's a penalty Imo. You typically see the pros test the ground away from the ball to make sure they don't move it. This is no different than trying to move a rock or leaf from around the ball without moving it. The ball moved so penalty should have been assessed.
 
I don’t think so. I won’t do any justice with my explanation, but I like the thing they do in soccer when the ref alternates his hands up and down when there’s an offside or something, but it doesn’t factor into the play. I think they refer to it as “no advantage”. He might have moved it, but did it really improve his situation that much?
 
Should the rule be you can't ground your club at all going forward? You see this kind of stuff all of the time, based upon the previous conversation that was had if it doesn't count for some it doesn't count for any. Even in those thread people have said intent and no intent so the rule needs to be more clear apparently.
 
intent or not that should have been a penalty
 
I think it was the right ruling given the current rules because the ball from the naked eye would have been near impossible to see the ball actually moved it's position. However, right now forcefully grounding the club is legal, but questionable. All the tour pros push the club behind the ball a lot to get a feel for the lie and I'd bet that the USGA might discuss that in the future.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #20
frontTsociety said:
I don’t think so. I won’t do any justice with my explanation, but I like the thing they do in soccer when the ref alternates his hands up and down when there’s an offside or something, but it doesn’t factor into the play. I think they refer to it as “no advantage”. He might have moved it, but did it really improve his situation that much?
Click to expand...
taking a floating lie and lowering it would most certainly create potential advantage, would it not?
 
I dont think he intended to move the ball or improve his lie. I think the rule needs to be more specific and not so muddy when referring to intent. He shouldnt even be trying to ground the club that close to the ball. He can "get a feel" for the lie a foot to the left or right.
 
I didn’t intend to is like when your kid has a tummy ache on the day there’s a math test. You can’t prove it, but you know they’re lying. There’s no reason to forcefully ground your club and then repeat closer to the ball unless you’re trying to improve your lie or conditions. To me this is just as bad as when Phil putted a moving ball because they both knew they were breaking the rules and did it to gain an advantage.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #23
PhillyV said:
I dont think he intended to move the ball or improve his lie. I think the rule needs to be more specific and not so muddy when referring to intent. He shouldnt even be trying to ground the club that close to the ball. He can "get a feel" for the lie a foot to the left or right.
Click to expand...
so it's interesting you say this, because this is the second time his actions in the rough in 2024 have been called into question. At what point does it become a trend and/or at what point does intent become obvious?
 
Canadan said:
so it's interesting you say this, because this is the second time his actions in the rough in 2024 have been called into question. At what point does it become a trend and/or at what point does intent become obvious?
Click to expand...
It will stop once he is penalized for it. I think his intent is obvious but the easy way out is say no penalty because he might not of intended to do it
 
I would definitely have penalized him. I can buy perhaps they didn't see the movement with the naked eye, but I definitely would have penalized him for the force with which he grounded his club.

FYI, the commenters are incorrect in saying there is no penalty if you cause the ball to move while addressing the ball. There's no penalty if you accidentally touch the ball with your club, if the ball does not move.

Also saying "I didn't intend to move the ball" doesn't work except on the putting green and when taking a swing on the tee. If you accidentally move the ball on the tee without the intent to make a stroke, there is no penalty. But if you cause a ball in the general area to move, it's a penalty (with some exceptions like searching).

It is ironic some of the very same commentators who have railed against the "ridiculous USGA" and all it's unnecessary and restrictive rules are now arguing with a straight face the rules are too permissive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top