the schwartzel
ruling
when charl schwartzel requested relief from an 11th hole sprinkler head friday at the memorial, golf grill rooms and their online
equivalent—twitter—debated the legitimacy of the masters
champion’s belief that a round plastic slab could interfere with
his through-swing. for those who could hear the television audio
(or saw a replay on youtube before the pga tour had the video
removed), golf channel announcers nick faldo and peter ooster-huis were practically aghast at any thought of giving schwartzel a
drop upon hearing official Jon brendle initially suggest schwartzel
was “not really entitled to relief.” following the round his playing
partners, phil mickelson and luke donald, endorsed schwartzel’s
request for a drop, and brendle declared that “abnormal ground
conditions” around the sprinkler head—not the obstruction
itself—ultimately led him to grant the request. what riled some—
and perhaps opened the 26-year-old south african to unfair
charges of bending the rules—was that in using his one club-length worth of relief, schwartzel was able to go from a terrible
sidehill lie in the intermediate cut to a flat stance in the pristine
fairway. he subsequently hit the par- 5 green in two, instead of
likely laying up. although schwartzel merely used the rules to his
advantage, as with so many incidents of late, the debate should
ultimately have centered around the rule itself. a club-length from
a sprinkler head is nearly always excessive and—in this case—
instead of protecting the integrity of the game, opened the player up
to unfair accusations. —Geoff Shackelford
03
scott halleran/getty images
cover // contents // 10 things // pga tour // lpga tour // champions tour // european tour // ncaa //equipment // tim rosaforte
