TheRULES
Movement Settlement
on Loose Impediments
May I touch that? The Rules provide clarity as to the
relocation of certain objects | by MARK WILSON
CRAIG JONES/GETTY IMAGES
T
his year marks the 15th
anniversary of one of
the most noteworthy
rulings in the history
of championship
golf. During the final
round of the 1999 Phoenix Open at TPC
Scottsdale, Tiger Woods’ tee shot on
the par-5 13th hole came to rest near a
now-infamous boulder. The boulder was
directly between Tiger’s ball and the hole
and it prevented him from playing toward
the green.
PGA T Referee Orlando Pope correctly
our
ruled that this large stone was a loose
impediment, and that Tiger was permitted to
receive assistance in its removal. The ruling
was based not only on the definition of loose
impediments, but on two Decisions from the
Loose Impediment Rule, which predated
this incident by many years. The Rules of
Golf describe loose impediments as “natural
objects” such as a stone. Leaves, twigs and
branches are also loose impediments because
they are natural. Small objects that are manmade, such as a pencil or a cigarette butt,
are movable obstructions and are covered
Tiger Woods received assistance from
spectators who rolled away a large loose
impediment at the 1999 Phoenix Open.
in a different Rule. If the natural object
is fixed, growing solidly embedded in the
ground or if it is adhering to the ball, it is
no t considered a loose impediment. The
boulder in the Tiger incident was natural and
was not embedded. Decision 23-1/2 explains
that stones of any size (including boulders)
that are not solidly embedded are considered
loose impediments. Decision 23-1/3 provides
that spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors
and others may assist a player in removing
such a large loose impediment.
The ruling certainly created its share of
controversy and there were many calls for the
Rule to be changed. However, to this day, the
Rule and Decisions remain essentially the same.
Trying to legislatively eliminate “assistance” in
removing loose impediments may have led to
some unintended consequences. In making
changes to the Rules, not only do the U.S.
Golf Association and The Royal and Ancient
Golf Club of St. Andrews, Scotland, need to
consider the many non-English translations
of the Rules and Decisions, but practical
matters as well.
For example, a player may have a short
approach shot to the green. Now let’s say the
player requests that an opponent or fellowcompetitor standing near the hole remove
a small stick on the player’s line of play,
thereby saving the player a 40-yard walk.
That player received “assistance” in removing
a loose impediment. Or, envision this turn of
events: It is late in the day on a Sunday and
the local club tournament has been delayed
by an afternoon storm. The golf course
superintendent and staff have departed for
the day, but there is debris from the storm that
has fallen onto the course. Prior to resuming
play, a player needs assistance in removing a
large tree branch near his or her ball and, if
other players wish to assist, they may help.
Golf’s ruling bodies are deliberative for
many reasons, and the Tiger ruling is an
excellent illustration of their thorough
approach.
Author Mark Wilson is the player development
coordinator for the PGA Golf Management
Program at Ferris State University in Big
Rapids, Mich., and is a member and past chairman of the PGA of America Rules Committee.
One Pay, Two Play. Unlimited Golf. We call this “Tee for Two.”
Starting from $320, escape for an overnight stay of epic golf. For the price of one player, two can experience luxury
accommodations and 45-holes of unlimited championship golf on courses designed by Robert Trent Jones, II and Greg Norman.
Call 888-541-4757 or visit LansdowneResort.com. Promo Code: VSGA14
44050 Woodridge Parkway, Leesburg, VA 20176 30 miles west of Washington, D.C.
w w w. v s g a . o r g
*
Some restrictions may apply.
J U LY / A U G U S T 2 0 1 4 | V I R G I N I A G O L F E R
7