The days of viewer call-ins could finally be numbered

A casual observer assessing the pace at which the Rules of Golf have evolved and been clarified ever since the first set in 1744 would likely call it glacial.  And that would be true, except, in actual fact, the pace has picked up in recent years, kind of matching the way glaciers are melting faster due to global warming. The Rules of Golf are being tweaked at a faster rate, it’s just that it can’t be fast enough in regards to the absurdity of TV viewers being able to affect rulings.

The announcement on Tuesday from the USGA and Royal & Ancient in the wake of the controversial Lexi Thompson ruling at the ANA Inspiration in early April should have been made decades ago, when television viewers interjecting themselves into golf events from afar first started. At the 1982 Doral Open, for instance, Andy Bean was accused by a viewer of breaking Rule 13-2, but it was determined he had not. At Doral in 1991, Paul Azinger was nailed by a Colorado viewer who called in to say ’Zinger had broken Rule 13-4c and he was ultimately disqualified. Those are just two examples of several over the years.

The Rules of Golf are supposed to make game governance fair. The game itself is based on players being impartial monitors of themselves and others. But there is nothing fair about only the players being televised being held to higher standards than those away from the camera. The PGA Tour struggled with this aspect, and for awhile had an official watching TV to check for rules violations, but the policy was rescinded and players were left to police themselves.

I don’t doubt that back when the phenomenon of viewers calling in began, those who did so thought they were being the game’s protector and were upholding its integrity. I’m sure some thought they were vicariously part of the tour for that moment. But society—and sports—are more sophisticated now, and so are the ways and reasons people watch events. As I noted in my post on the Thompson incident on April 3, to allow someone to call in with a potential rules violation and not be checked for their motive is absurd. There is no vetting process done on a caller’s background, no reason sought for their close monitoring of a golfer, and, no point-blank question: Were they calling in to deliberately try to affect the outcome? If they are checked out like that, we’ve never had the process explained.

Specifically, in Thompson’s case, was the caller someone who wanted one of the chasing players to have a chance to win once Thompson went from two ahead to two behind? To be honest, to guard against such a nefarious goal, I think it would be better to have a rule ignored than to allow someone with an ulterior motive to get their way and decide a tournament outcome. From the beginning of these calls, there should have been a transparency to the viewer’s background, such as their name, location, and other bio details. All of it should have been released for the record, rather than have them hide behind the “TV viewer calls in/emails rules infraction” phrase we’d see written in post-mortems. For sure, with such a procedure in place, anyone with a dark motive would likely have stayed away from getting involved rather than risk public exposure.

Give the USGA and R&A credit for fairly quick action in making it effective immediately that a new Decision to the Rules of Golf—Dec. 34-3/10—will hopefully put an end to horrific endings as we saw at the ANA. The USGA release on the action states:

“New Decision 34-3/10 implements two standards for Rules committees to limit the use of video: 1) when video reveals evidence that could not reasonably be seen with the ‘naked eye,’ and 2) when players use their ‘reasonable judgment’ to determine a specific location when applying the Rules.

“The first standard states, ‘the use of video technology can make it possible to identify things that could not be seen with the naked eye.’ An example includes a player who unknowingly touches a few grains of sand in taking a backswing with a club in a bunker when making a stroke.

“If the committee concludes that such facts could not reasonably have been seen with the naked eye and the player was not otherwise aware of the potential breach, the player will be deemed not to have breached the Rules, even when video technology shows otherwise. This is an extension of the provision on ball-at-rest-moved cases, which was introduced in 2014.

“The second standard applies when a player determines a spot, point, position, line, area, distance or other location in applying the Rules, and recognizes that a player should not be held to the degree of precision that can sometimes be provided by video technology. Examples include determining the nearest point of relief or replacing a lifted ball.

“So long as the player does what can reasonably be expected under the circumstances to make an accurate determination, the player’s reasonable judgment will be accepted, even if later shown to be inaccurate by the use of video evidence.

“Both of these standards have been extensively discussed as part of the Rules modernization initiative.  The USGA and The R&A have decided to enact this Decision immediately because of the many difficult issues arising from video review in televised golf.”

Bravo, and well done! Now it is up to the five organizations that were charged with forming policy on viewer call-ins (PGA Tour, European Tour, LPGA Tour, Ladies European Tour and the PGA of America) to do their thing with regulations. Let’s hope it’s faster than a glacier melting. And let’s hope that their regulations say that until every shot by every player can be seen on video, it’s not acceptable for a select group of players in front of the cameras to bear the brunt of these call-ins.