Quantcast
Jason Day gets “favorable” ruling on Hole 16 during final round of the WGC Bridgestone Invitational

Jason Day gets “favorable” ruling on Hole 16 during final round of the WGC Bridgestone Invitational

 

RULINGS

Day gets “favorable” ruling on Hole 16 during final round of the WGC Bridgestone Invitational

Stephen Cox, PGRA Member

4 July 2016

Although I’m led to believe CBS Golf Analyst Peter Kostis did a nice job filling in the gaps, I still received a few comments on my “favorable” ruling yesterday with Jason Day on hole 16 during the final round of the WGC Bridgestone Invitational. As a result, below is a full explanation of the ruling.

On approaching the ruling I was made aware by a reliable source that Jason’s ball (his 2nd stroke) had been deliberately stopped whilst in motion by a young child.

Firestone-CC-HoleFirestone Country Club – Hole 16, Par 5

“it was clear that the ball would not have come to rest directly behind the large tree trunk…”

Fortunately for Jason, a good number of spectators had witnessed exactly what had happened and without too much trouble or delay I quickly established where approximately the ball would have come to rest had the child not stopped the ball. From the evidence gained, it was clear that the ball would not have come to rest directly behind the large tree trunk, which is where the child had dropped the ball.

Jason-Day

I explained to Jason that in this situation (as detailed in the Note under Rule 19-1) as the ball was deliberately deflected or stopped by an outside agency we must estimate where the ball would have come to rest, which in his case was another 3 to 4 paces forward and to the right.

Jason then dropped his ball at the estimated that spot, but it rolled nearer the hole than this spot so he was required to re-drop (under Rule 20-2c iiv). The same happened again, so he placed his ball where it first struck part of the course when re-dropped.

5 Comments

  • Phyllis crawford Posted July 5, 2016 1:34 am

    They,say rules are supposed to help us!

  • Eric Zedd Posted July 5, 2016 3:45 am

    Who put quotation marks around “favorable” in the headline? Is it so rare that a player is helped and not penalized by a ruling that the word can’t be used properly? Jason Day gets fair ruling would be better.
    Btw, the Dustin Johnson ruling and handling of the situation was among the worst in golf history.

    • Stephen Cox Posted July 5, 2016 12:49 pm

      Thanks for visiting the site Eric. I was being slightly facetious in response to media comments suggesting that I had given Jason a “favorable” ruling. Hence, why I felt it necessary to clarify exactly what had happened. As you correctly stated, Jason’s ruling was fair.

  • Ian Wrigley Posted July 5, 2016 4:37 pm

    And I thought the italics were because of the spelling! Great ruling by a great rules official.

  • Bobby S. Posted July 8, 2016 4:05 pm

    Great site!!!!! This website will be weekly reading for me. The explanation of the rules by an official in plain language makes it so much easier to understand. Always fun to read the how and why.

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *