Backstopping

[RickyBobby_PR]

I don’t see any issue here and the chances of executing that and hitting ariya’s ball on purpose aren’t real high. Both were off the green and ready to play. 

[GolfSpy MPR]

It's never about whether there is intent to hit the ball: obviously, she'd rather it go in the hole. The key is that by having the ball there, there is a potential advantage. The rule is breached at that point. In this case, that advantage was realized.

By the rules, they clearly should have been assessed two shots each. I wouldn't be opposed to their being DQ'd.

[palvord]

This was a bad look for both the players and the tour. 

I can understand this being no big deal if it is a round among friends and they decided to not mark the ball to help speed up play.

In the case of a professional event, I think you have to mark the ball in order to be fair to yourself and fellow competitors.  The optics of this situation appear to be a clear case of backstopping, and a penalty should have been enforced.

[Kwoodfield]

#BackstoppingGate2019


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[gaussman1]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gaussman1]

It's never about whether there is intent to hit the ball: obviously, she'd rather it go in the hole. The key is that by having the ball there, there is a potential advantage. The rule is breached at that point. In this case, that advantage was realized.
By the rules, they clearly should have been assessed two shots each. I wouldn't be opposed to their being DQ'd.

I sort of disagree but for the same reason that you've posted. The rule has no language regarding potential. It says agree to leave a ball in place to help a player. Is that what happened here? It looked to me as if Ariya was attempting to mark and was waved off by Amy. That did not look like Ariya agreeing to help. I think there's a stronger argument to be made that Amy intentionally had her NOT mark in order to gain assistance but that would be a penalty only on Amy instead of both of them.
And tbh as bad as it looks if the entire incident actually was completely accidental then their body language afterward looks spot on.
More than anything I think it puts a spotlight on yet another poorly worded rule that's almost impossible to apply. Would be better to mark no balls until all players are on the green and let the bounces fall where they may. You can't go the other way and mark all balls that could assist in any way because then how far away do you stop?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[GB13]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

It's never about whether there is intent to hit the ball: obviously, she'd rather it go in the hole. The key is that by having the ball there, there is a potential advantage. The rule is breached at that point. In this case, that advantage was realized.

By the rules, they clearly should have been assessed two shots each. I wouldn't be opposed to their being DQ'd.

I kind of disagree too. I think that the rule says that the ball is left in place with the intent to help. It sounds as though the ball was left in place for pace of play, not for the purpose of backstopping. The wording that makes me think it isn't a breach is, "...agree to leave a ball in place on the putting green to help any player..." It doesn't seem like that was the case. 

 

Also, I agree with @gaussman1 that this is another poorly worded rule, open for interpretation. 

[dhartmann34]

It's never about whether there is intent to hit the ball: obviously, she'd rather it go in the hole. The key is that by having the ball there, there is a potential advantage. The rule is breached at that point. In this case, that advantage was realized.
By the rules, they clearly should have been assessed two shots each. I wouldn't be opposed to their being DQ'd.

It says they agree to "leave the ball to help a player".... Whereas I thought they left a ball to speed up play. They can't prove the intent of that ball left there was to "help a player".

I highly doubt any players talk before the round about backstopping for each other during the round... Which is why I think the whole point is mute.... Unless there's actual conversation of "yeah, leave it there to stop my ball", how can they be penalized? It doesn't happen often. I can't remember the last time I saw or heard about it happening in a tournament. I love golf on TV. I can't stand some of the folks watching it. Thankfully callers have been muted.... But the controversial issues continue in other manners.





Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Kenny B]

Clearly, Amy wanted the ball to stay on the green.  Anyone would, as it doesn't hurt and has potential to help.  It's Ariya's duty to protect the field by not providing assistance to Amy, even if not intentional. By not marking her ball, she gave tacit approval.  She should not have asked and marked her ball, and the pace of play reason is weak.  How long does it take to walk 50 feet?  She could have done that while Amy was taking her practice swings.

I agree that the rule could be better worded, but it seems a violation to me.  If Amy had said, "Just leave the ball there, I can use it."  How is that any different?

[DaveP043]

13 minutes ago, Kenny B said:

Clearly, Amy wanted the ball to stay on the green.  Anyone would, as it doesn't hurt and has potential to help.  It's Ariya's duty to protect the field by not providing assistance to Amy, even if not intentional. By not marking her ball, she gave tacit approval.  She should not have asked and marked her ball, and the pace of play reason is weak.  How long does it take to walk 50 feet?  She could have done that while Amy was taking her practice swings.

I agree that the rule could be better worded, but it seems a violation to me.  If Amy had said, "Just leave the ball there, I can use it."  How is that any different?

I agree with all of this.  It is inconceivable to me that either player could NOT see that the ball in place could help Amy.  Ariya SHOULD have protected the field by insisting that she lift her ball.  Assuming Amy has ANY integrity, she should have asked Ariya to lift her ball.  Neither happened, both are at fault.  And if they were playing in a threeball, the third player was just as much at fault for not requiring Ariya to lift her ball.

Based on what I've seen and read, the Tour players don't understand the rule, and don't care to apply it to each other.  I think its time for the fans to start shouting "Mark it, mark it!" whenever a ball comes to rest that close.

[tony@CIC]

Here's Olson's response; 

“We had waited on 18th tee, for 10 minutes in 18th fairway and Michelle (Wie) was waiting for a ruling,” Olson wrote. “To help pace of play, Ariya and I went before Michelle even though she was out. Ariya’s ball was not in my intended line and to help move things along, I told her it was fine. I had never even heard of the back-stopping issue as I don’t really watch PGA golf that much and it hasn’t been an issue on the LPGA. My intention was to help pace of play. Obviously with everything that has gone down I think we all (especially me) will be more conscious of it and I will have EVERYONE mark anything remotely close to the hole now.”

Olson reached out to the LPGA first thing Saturday morning (in Thailand) and was told there would be no penalty.

 

[DaveP043]

8 minutes ago, tony@CIC said:

Here's Olson's response; 

“We had waited on 18th tee, for 10 minutes in 18th fairway and Michelle (Wie) was waiting for a ruling,” Olson wrote. “To help pace of play, Ariya and I went before Michelle even though she was out. Ariya’s ball was not in my intended line and to help move things along, I told her it was fine. I had never even heard of the back-stopping issue as I don’t really watch PGA golf that much and it hasn’t been an issue on the LPGA. My intention was to help pace of play. Obviously with everything that has gone down I think we all (especially me) will be more conscious of it and I will have EVERYONE mark anything remotely close to the hole now.”

Olson reached out to the LPGA first thing Saturday morning (in Thailand) and was told there would be no penalty.

I find it hard to believe that neither player had any concept of protecting the field, and both were unaware of the issue from the Jimmy Walker interview last summer, but I'm not going to label her a liar.  It is NOT hard to believe that professional golfers are unaware of the rules, that is pretty common.  At least she says she will be sure it doesn't happen going forward, which is more than anyone else has said so far.

[Kenny B]

If it had been on the PGA Tour and involved Rickie Fowler, there would be a penalty.  

[DaveP043]

30 minutes ago, Kenny B said:

If it had been on the PGA Tour and involved Rickie Fowler, there would be a penalty.  

Nah, the men have this act perfected.  They don't look at each other, so there's "obviously" no agreement.  The mistake Ariya made was to look at Amy, gesture, and then stop.  If she just leaves the ball there and turns to her caddie, while Amy plays, we'd have a much harder time claiming they agreed.  

[Kenny B]

52 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Nah, the men have this act perfected.  They don't look at each other, so there's "obviously" no agreement.  The mistake Ariya made was to look at Amy, gesture, and then stop.  If she just leaves the ball there and turns to her caddie, while Amy plays, we'd have a much harder time claiming they agreed.  

  I was referring to Rickie's recent "luck" with rules.  

[tony@CIC]

9 minutes ago, Kenny B said:

  I was referring to Rickie's recent "luck" with rules.  

Maybe Rickie flunked Anatomy in school and got his bones confused .....shoulder...knee. etc. 

[PlaidJacket]

Very few tour players exhibit much knowledge of the rules. Even the most basic it seems. Personally, I think it was an innocent act with Amy and the other player and at the same time perhaps their ignorance of the rules or a thought of field protection. I don't think Amy was looking to back-stop it. And what are the odds that even if that was her 'intent" that she'd pull it off? There wasn't any "collusion". LOL

But what about approach shots? Yeah I know that's a stretch. But I've personally hit approaches from the fairway and hit someone's ball or vice versa. I've seen it work out good and bad. I've seen it on TV before several times too. Hell, the pros hit a ton of less than full wedges, etc all the time with balls in close proximity of the hole. I rarely have seen them ask for a ball to be marked. Are they planning on a backstop? No.

[Charli]

Pretty simple. If a ball is close and your playing partner is around the green it should be marked. If they don’t change the rule what’s it matter if they use the “backstop” or not. 

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, PlaidJacket said:

Very few tour players exhibit much knowledge of the rules. Even the most basic it seems. Personally, I think it was an innocent act with Amy and the other player and at the same time perhaps their ignorance of the rules or a thought of field protection. I don't think Amy was looking to back-stop it. And what are the odds that even if that was her 'intent" that she'd pull it off? There wasn't any "collusion". LOL

But what about approach shots? Yeah I know that's a stretch. But I've personally hit approaches from the fairway and hit someone's ball or vice versa. I've seen it work out good and bad. I've seen it on TV before several times too. Hell, the pros hit a ton of less than full wedges, etc all the time with balls in close proximity of the hole. I rarely have seen them ask for a ball to be marked. Are they planning on a backstop? No.

In my view, the LPGA did what it had to do, they followed the letter of the rule.  To do anything else, they would have to say that both women were lying about their reason for leaving the ball there.  Whether we call it collusion, I don't know, but they appeared to communicate, and to agree to leave ti in place.  As I said in another post, last year the rule only required that the ball be in that position, and an agreement to leave it there, no matter the reason for the agreement.  That, and the penalty was DQ.

I think the idea of a ball being in position to help a player has to do with the position of both balls.  In this case, I'd bet that 80% or more of Amy's efforts from that spot would be within 2 feet of the hole, some left, some right.  Based on that, there was a realistic possibility that her shot would hit Ariya's ball.  Their motivation COULD have been to allow the possibility that Amy would get that help.  If the second player is even 40 or 50 yards away, or further, the probability of hitting the ball that close to the intended line is much lower, so the probability of getting "help" becomes a minor factor.  This is one of those concepts that defy a detailed definition in the rules.

I'll be interested to see what commentary we hear from the R&A (who has jurisdiction in Asia, I think).  The rule was changed, and now a penalty hinges on the reason for the agreement.  If that is what they intended, they should say so.  If not, they should reword the rule, or issue a clarification.

[RickyBobby_PR]

22 hours ago, Kenny B said:

Clearly, Amy wanted the ball to stay on the green.  Anyone would, as it doesn't hurt and has potential to help.  It's Ariya's duty to protect the field by not providing assistance to Amy, even if not intentional. By not marking her ball, she gave tacit approval.  She should not have asked and marked her ball, and the pace of play reason is weak.  How long does it take to walk 50 feet?  She could have done that while Amy was taking her practice swings.

I agree that the rule could be better worded, but it seems a violation to me.  If Amy had said, "Just leave the ball there, I can use it."  How is that any different?

Her interview yesterday she stated they waited 5 minutes on the tee, 10 minutes in the fairway on 18 so pace of play imo is valid because the group(s) behind them are then having to wait. 

She mentioned she didn’t hit a good chip and also had no idea about backstopping.

if amy had made that comment then the intent is there but since she didn’t it’s not a violation and it wasn’t in her intended line so she didn’t think it would play a role 

[silver & black]

Maybe I'm just dumb, but why would anyone want to help another competitor out with "backstopping"? What am I missing?