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