golfrewind.com

Tiger has been involved in controversy in two different events surrounding movable/immovable objects. Here are the two different controversies:

1. In the 1999 Phoenix Open, a huge boulder (approximately 1000 lbs) blocked a line for Tiger to take a shot near the green. The gallery was able to move it without penalty.

2. In the 2005 Wachovia Open, Tiger's ball was near a fence. The gallery broke the fence, so that Tiger could have a better second shot. He was assessed a two shot penalty.

In both cases, the gallery was moving an obstruction from Tiger. Is it really fair for the gallery to be involed, since that would favor or hurt players like Tiger?

My opinion, is that only rules officials, players, and caddies should move obstructions.

Thoughts?

The rules are CLEAR on this in the decisions:

23-1/2 Large Stone Removable Only with Much Effort

Q. A player’s ball lies in the rough directly behind a loose stone the size of a watermelon. The stone can be removed only with much effort. Is it a loose impediment which may be removed?
A. Yes. Stones of any size (not solidly embedded) are loose impediments and may be removed, provided removal does not unduly delay play (Rule 6-7).
23-1/3 Assistance in Removing Large Loose Impediment

Q. May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc., assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?
A. Yes

I don't think a Rules Official should be able to move anything but it should fall on the Player or Caddie (or both) to move things. Currently, the rules allow for it and until they change or the PGA TOUR initiates a Condition of the Competition that doesn't allow anyone to help, it will continue to be done.

The fence is a little different as it was an immovable obstruction for this event where it is a MOVEABLE obstruction at most events. It IS the player's responsibility to know the rules at each event but unless he instructed the gallery to move the fence, I am not sure I agree with the penalty. I didn't see it but from reading the accounts, he tested the fence to see if it was fixed (he would have received relief from it) and then the gallery destroyed it.

For this rule to be fair to everyone, the gallery should not be allowed to assist in moving an object. That is what I had a problem with in the 1999 Phoenix Open. Could you see someone like Danny Briggs or Jason Allred having the gallery assist them with a large boulder?

I agree, and obviously that is a major problem with the rule. The big names will get help from the gallery but unlikely that the unknowns will. Hopefully the USGA will review this rule and change it.

I agree, the same should happen with tv viewers calling in penalties on the phone. Of the 70+ players competing on the weekend how many of them are shown on tv so "fans" can call a penalty on them. In one instance being in the lead and/or popular may help a player, in another it may hurt them.

That is a good point NJPhil! I assume the large gallery could do the same, but highly unlikely since they are following their favorite.

I've seen the gallery do some amazing things for ANY player. The one thing that DOESN'T happen to the lesser known players has to do with OUTSIDE AGENCIES...

I wonder if it is illegal to pay some gallery members to move loose impedments.

The rules don't say anything about paying the people that move the impediment so I suppose it would be legal. Keep in mind that once the player authorizes people to act on his/her behalf in moving a loose impediment or a moveable obstruction, if the ball moves as a result of their actions, the penalty is his alone.