Conference 7.286::golf

    
    re: -1
    
    From yesterday's paper:
    
    Price had his caddie move a sign, he was told it was a violation of
    a local rule, had the sign replaced and took a drop and added 1.
    
    He was later informed that he still had to take a 2 stroke penalty
    for moving the sign.  His playing partner changed it on his card, but 
    price did not.  Therefore he signed an incorrect card and was
    disqualified.
    
    All that was said about Faldo is that he signed an incorrect card, they
    gave no details.
    
    Shane
    

    Langer made a mistake on Faldo's card and at the end of the round,
    Faldo didn't check it before he signed. Therefore instant
    disqualification. There weren't any 'fishy' circumstances and Faldo
    accepts it was just one of those (very expensive) things and it was his
    fault for not checking the card first.
    
    I heard Frost was disqualified because he _refused_ to sign his card
    with the penalty shot on for the violation of local rules. Sounded like
    a bit of a tantrum.
    
    Paul

    I saw the replay this past weekend while watching the Senior's event.
    
    Nick Price was in the fairway after a good tee shot and an advertising
    sign had been placed in the rough between him and the green.  As
    previously mentioned his caddy took it down and caused the 2 stroke
    penalty.  It had been classified as an immovable obstruction and Price
    should have taken relief.
    
    They showed Nick discussing the issue with the officials after the
    round and he was moderately upset.  After the discussion which got him
    nowhere, he took back his card and erased his signature
    ...disqualifying himself.  Nick was 2 shots back at the time from the
    eventual winner of 1 million dollars...David Frost
    
    Personally, I think Price did everything right including giving a piece
    of his mind to the officials except, he shouldn't have disqualified
    himself.  However, I think he did as he felt the issue was a "matter of
    principle"
    
    Keeping it Cool.....Jim 

    If a player is lying on the correct fairway, and has to take relief
    because of the placing of an advertising sign, then there is either
    something wrong with the placement of the sign, or with the local rule,
    dealing with this situation. This is a case of the rules of golf being
    twisted to the advantage of the local sponsor, and in my view is
    unforgiveable. I am glad Nick Price made this protest. I hope the
    message gets home to all tournamant organisers. I know in Europe and I
    imagine also in the U.S. this situation is covered by a 'line of sight'
    rule whereby the player is entitled to move an advertising sign if it
    interferes with his 'line of sight' to the green. I am always glad to
    see sponsors supporting golf, but they have to realise that the game of
    golf and especially the rules of golf cannot be bent to suit them.
    
    
    Norman

    Re .4 - Well said !!
    
    
    __Jack

    I also agree man made objects should definitely not be put in line of
    sight on any golf course but, this particular sign was spelled out on
    the local rules for that tournament.  Everyone had to play with the
    sign there and everyone was notified it was immovable.
    
    I can't believe the committee allowed the sign to be placed there and
    I'm sorry it came about to effect the out come of the tournament.  Nick
    made a statement and a costly one too.  He just put his principles
    ahead of his wallet.
    
    Stuart

    Kind of hard to believe that a movable, man-made obstruction would be
    exempted under the aegis of "local rules," but I guess that they can do
    whatever they want. Not much common sense there...
    
    __Jack