Is this in our out?

[JC17393]

From a professional stand point or a #growthesport.... Wouldn't the ability to use photo or video evidence be a good move? PGA players can get penalties based on what is seen on video.

From a fairness standpoint. PGA players have dozens of cameras recording every shot on the course. More importantly, they're not the ones who would be taking the photos/videos themselves in the case of a dispute. They also have the benefit of numerous tournament officials/marshalls on the course who can come out and view the situation in person to make a ruling.

Even at our biggest events that have the most media coverage, it's only the top groups who have cameras pointed at them at all, let alone on every shot from multiple angles the way a PGA player does at any given tour event. That would provide extra scrutiny (and potentially extra advantage if a call goes their way) to top players like McBeth and Wysocki while Joe Schmo on the 7th or 8th card gets no such scrutiny or benefit.

The same debate happens with the PGA. The question of whether some players are unfairly at the mercy of the home viewer call in penalties because their shots are televised more than other players. With the Masters this weekend, I'm reminded of a penalty that Tiger was called on a couple years ago because home viewers called in and pointed out he made an illegal drop. Some other player who doesn't warrant the attention or drive ratings the way Tiger does probably would have gotten away with doing the same thing Tiger did because it probably would never have been televised. Fair or no?

As with a lot of things, we're way too much in our infancy as a sport to try to compare ourselves to more established sports. When we have saturation media coverage all over the course, I could see rekindling the media as evidence in rulings debate. Now though? Just not worth it.

 

[jjpitt29]

From a fairness standpoint. PGA players have dozens of cameras recording every shot on the course. More importantly, they're not the ones who would be taking the photos/videos themselves in the case of a dispute. They also have the benefit of numerous tournament officials/marshalls on the course who can come out and view the situation in person to make a ruling.

Even at our biggest events that have the most media coverage, it's only the top groups who have cameras pointed at them at all, let alone on every shot from multiple angles the way a PGA player does at any given tour event. That would provide extra scrutiny (and potentially extra advantage if a call goes their way) to top players like McBeth and Wysocki while Joe Schmo on the 7th or 8th card gets no such scrutiny or benefit.

The same debate happens with the PGA. The question of whether some players are unfairly at the mercy of the home viewer call in penalties because their shots are televised more than other players. With the Masters this weekend, I'm reminded of a penalty that Tiger was called on a couple years ago because home viewers called in and pointed out he made an illegal drop. Some other player who doesn't warrant the attention or drive ratings the way Tiger does probably would have gotten away with doing the same thing Tiger did because it probably would never have been televised. Fair or no?

As with a lot of things, we're way too much in our infancy as a sport to try to compare ourselves to more established sports. When we have saturation media coverage all over the course, I could see rekindling the media as evidence in rulings debate. Now though? Just not worth it.

Very valid points. I was actually thinking of the Tiger incident. For PGA it's even worse. On masters.com they have replays of players on certain holes. Even more of a chance for someone to see something now.

I don't think we should even attempt allowing video footage now, due to all the things you said. There are very few instances where a photo would help either. But there might be some. Again, those OB calls like posted above, should never make it to the TD. That's a decision made by the group.

 

[araytx]

Right.

You can't determine exactly WHERE that is way up in a tree with leaves-- is my point.

You would need a spotter under or up in the tree it seems to be able to make that determination if we are going to get as specific as to a few blades of grass or tiny string line lol.

My point is we do that all the time -- you can't really justify why a tree is different.

Example:
There's a 500-ft hole with 400 ft of OB down the right hand side, I throw a long RHBH anny and somewhere between 375' and 400' it goes over the OB (still in the air) and as it S's back it never gets back in bounds. How do you tell exactly where my OB spot is? Is it at 375', 385', 395' ??? You can't ... but the group makes a call based on their best judgment and the consensus of the group IS where it was out. Same on your situation. Just because you can't tell exactly, doesn't mean anything. Ask for a group consensus. But the mere fact that you hit the tree is inconsequential. You can't use the rule to try and say because the tree is rooted inbounds all parts of the tree are inbounds. A tree is not a playing surface. You have to hit/touch a part of the tree that is over inbounds to be IB -- and that's the group's call.