 |
| Browse by Sport |
|
|
| Find us on |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 13, 2008
COLOGNE, GERMANY
Q. It was a one shot penalty in the end for Robert Karlsson, just explain that please?
ANDY McFEE: On the second green Robert called over to get a ruling because the ball moved as he was about to tap it into the hole. He told the referee at that moment in time that he didn't think he had grounded the club and hadn't addressed the ball or caused it to move in any way so the referee gave the right ruling, ie that there was no penalty, and he played the ball from the new position. But we got a call and I took a look at it on the screen and when I saw it on the screen I thought that I would let Robert take a look at that because I felt that once he saw that, he felt that he might want to review whether or not he had grounded the club and the instant he looked at it he said to me, 'I think I did ground the club'. The issue is once the club has been grounded then the ball has been addressed or he has caused the ball to move, one or the other. In this case the grounding of the club looked like it was pretty close to the ball and I think the ball has been addressed, therefore it is a penalty of one stroke and it would be two if he didn't replace it. What Robert did there was that he remarked the ball and as the movement of the ball is absolutely fractional, what we do in those instances is that we insist that the player goes through the process of marking the ball and that is good enough for replacing it. What we are talking about here is the line moving ever so slightly, so as long as he goes through the act of replacing it, it is a one stroke penalty rather than two. If he hadn't done that, he would have got both.
End of FastScripts
|
|
