Myreader.co.uk  
uk news, chat and community
   home   |   control panel login   |   archive   |  
 
sport
athletics
baseball
betting
cricket
football
football....bradford-city
football...celtic
football...leeds-united
football...liverpool
football...man-city
football...newcast..united
football...rangers
football...southampton
football...sunderland
football...west-ham
football.american
football.scottish
golf
horseracing
ice-hockey
misc
orienteering
speedway
squash
swimming
  
 
date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:04:58 -0700,    group: uk.sport.golf        back       
Re: Small rules question   
On 3 Nov, 03:15, david s-a  wrote:
> John Laird wrote:
> > On 2 Nov, 09:29, "M L Wadsworth"
> >  wrote:
>
> >> BTAIM, most golfers don't even know a new edition of the Rules is imminent.
> >> I still come across golfers who think they can declare a ball lost and
> >> others who think you have to face the hole when dropping.
> >> For those still dropping over their shoulder, the world is passing them by.
>
> > Talking of what golfers do and don't know about the rules, what do you
> > make of the incident involving Padraig Harrington as reported by
> > Lewine Mair in the Torygraph today:
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml;?xml=/sport/2007/11/02/sg...
>
> > My reading is that Harrington was penalised for accidentally moving
> > the ball after address, while in the act of making his customary
> > practice strokes.  What I don't understand is the comment that he
> > subsequently had a less difficult line, suggesting the ball was not
> > replaced.  Surely the ball could only have been played from its new
> > position if he had been deemed to have made a stroke (that is, one
> > with the intention of striking the ball).  It would then have counted
> > as a stroke, not a penalty.  Any penalty situation would have demanded
> > replacement, or further penalties strokes should have been applied.
> > Maybe I'm missing something ?
>
> John,
>
> It is not clear that he actually addressed the ball, _which must include
> taking his stance_ as well as grounding his club. He evidently had not
> taken his stance. It would however seem to be a fact that he played the
> ball from its new position, ie. he did not replace it after it had
> moved. This would suggest that he had not caused the ball to move, he
> had not completed the address at the ball, and it had moved of its own
> accord. He was however penalised, which would have been the case if he
> had actually touched the ball with his practice stroke in its new
> position, _without moving it_. This would consequently be a penalty
> imposed for touching his ball in play...1-stroke under R18-2a.

Harrington has an unusual technique.  He takes his stance with the
putter grounded just inside the ball, takes a couple of practice
swings, and then (without moving his feet), leans over and moves the
putter head behind the ball, and then putts.  I'm sure the match
official would have familiar with this.

> Otherwise the reporter has it wrong, or Harrington 'forgot' to include
> the extra penalty for not replacing his ball!
>
> Hang him I say!

After the infamous d/q incident just before the final round of a
tournament which he was leading, when it was discovered he'd not
signed his first-round card, I suspect Harrington is ultra careful.
Most likely the reporter received a confused story.
date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:04:58 -0700   author:   John Laird

Google
 
Web myreader.co.uk


    COPYRIGHT 2007, YARDI TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, ALL RIGHT RESERVE  |   contact us