Ethics: Spirit of the Game

Well, often, the head pro is part of the "committee" or head of it, and if he's not, he at least knows what the rules are.

 

I sent a copy of our original post to a USGA rules official who just finished working the NCAA ladies championship in New Mexico.

To help others — or confuse us even more — here is what she wrote:

----------

I think anyone who sees a violation should question it. Which you did with [the caddy].

What is disappointing is the fact that the other players were aware of the situation and chose not to say anything. They are the ones who have an obligation to protect the rest of the field. Stephen incurred a 2 stroke penalty for practicing when is was not permitted and in fact should have be DQ'd for signing for an incorrect score on hole 13 ( penalty applies to the next hole). His Marker ( the player keeping his score) knowing he should have been penalized would have also be DQ'd.

Did you know that the other players were not going to say anything before Stephen signed his card?? How do you think they would have felt if he had won the Championship knowing he incurred the penalty and should not have won. How would you have felt??

I definitely think you should have made a Rules Official aware of what you had witnessed and then he could have questioned Stephen and the other players before he signed his scorecard---especially since you knew they were also aware of what happened. Then he could have taken it from there. The Rules Official would not have had to say who questioned it---just that a spectator had questioned it.

I understand as a reporter it puts you in a tough situation. I'll be interested in knowing what the other reporters think. If you are interested the Local Rule is on page 518 of the Decisions Book.

----------

She points out that it is up the players to protect the field, but later says I should have spoken with a tournament Rules official and stepped aside. So I'm not sure that a USGA rules official has a clear answer to this ethical dilemma.

[My hoops reference makes little sense. I tried to convey the fact that covering the competition of other sports leaves much less grey area for a reporter. I think comparisons to other sports are for a different thread.]

Thanks,
Hwy

 

I can't imagine a scenario in which this rule would be changed by the head pro as a local rule change. The understood stipulation in that rule is that you don't hold up play to practice putting on the previous green. I've seen it done at the US Open. Lord knows there is not a day of golf when time is more of a factor than the first two days of the Open.

 

Hwy,

I don't think her response means anything. Because how she looks at it is for the keeping of the rules. Her USGA ethics have NOTHING to do with journalistic ethics.

You observe. You do not come into play. The end.

 

Why didn't the other golfers and caddies rat him out? Why were the USGA rules suspended? And what does the USGA think of that?

 

I definitely wouldn't say anything. It's tough, but I think it's always in our best interest to avoid becoming the story. I cringe when I see writers become the story.

 

No whistle blowing during the event. Not your call, not your business.

If his chicanery helped him get into a playoff, even if he lost that playoff, you write about the chicanery. As a neutral observer, with quotes from someone in the group, and from the main rules official.

 

First, you have to determine what the rules in this event permit. Someone said it earlier; just because the head pro says practice putting was not allowed doesn't mean he's correct.

But, if it's a case where you've seen the rules being broken, yes, you should have said something to an official. Then the official can check with the players to determine what action needs to be taken. The game permits others to help enforce the rules and that includes you, even as a reporter.

As a reporter, it also would have been your responsibility to ask the other players or caddies in this group, those who might have seen this, and ask them why they didn't show concern over what appeared to be someone breaking the rules. The responses you might have gotten could have been very interesting.

Sorry, you bogeyed this one.

 

Fair enough. Apply your ethics to this situation.

You're a college beat reporter. You witness the men's basketball coach allowing his office to be used so foreign players can call their parents without having to incur the charges. What's more, you see him slipping one of the better (but poorer) players $20 bills from time to time. What's more, maybe he buys this kid a new pair of shoes from time to time. Or pays for a foreign kid's flight home.

You know it. You've seen it. Do you:

a. Ignore it

b. try to corroborate it with other witnesses

c. hope somebody calls you one day about it so you can pursue the story

d. tell another reporter on your staff so they can pursue it with your details?

 

Apple and orange.

You are not at a sporting event anymore. It's a different scenario.

 

Here's an apples to apples, Alma.

I see a coach make an illegal substitution. I don't call the ref over and tell him. But I sure do ask the coaches about it after the game.

 

Ethics are situational, then? I missed the day that there were specific rules for ethics within a sporting contest and ethics in how a team is run off the field. The high-low cut blocks of the Denver Broncos are more devastating, competitively and ethically, than, say, the Broncos' massage of the salary cap in the late 1990s. Are they governed by different rules?

Specifically to your situation above: Are you suggesting you would have went up to the golfer and asked him why he illegally putted on that green when he was told not to?