Using the rules’ grey areas have fans seeing red

GOLF is making itself a hard sport to love at the moment.

Unpleasantness surrounding Saudi Arabia, Sergio Garcia and slow play have all been in this column over the past few weeks.

This week it’s rules being manipulated to suit pros who risk the integrity of the field and the spirit of the game in their pursuit of success.

Bryson DeChambeau made a fool of himself again when his short fuse ignited in front of a live TV audience, thudding a putter into the practice green in a temper tantrum. If only his pace of play was as quick as his temper.

Dustin Johnson’s success at the WGC Mexico was not without controversy. Leading Rory McIlroy by three on the fifth hole, DJ’s wayward tee shot to the foot of a tree should have presented a chance for the Irishman to give his rival – and the viewing public – something to think about.

But the American successfully argued his proximity to a cart path entitled him to a free drop because he couldn’t take a stance without stepping on the concrete.

By the letter of the law he was correct. But his feet were suspiciously wide when demonstrating his stance to the match referee. The official could have argued Johnson could comfortably narrow his stance to play a short chip sideways towards the fairway.

Instead he got his drop, opening a direct line to the green and he was able to save par.

The irony of McIlroy (rightly) being denied a free drop in similar circumstances at the next hole only made the Johnson incident even more unseemly.

Too often of late the rules have been put under the microscope thanks to people like Johnson thriving within its grey areas. But that was nothing compared to the scenes witnessed on day two of the LPGA Honda Thailand event.

Amy Olson and Ariya Jutanugarn both faced short pitches, with the Thai first to knock her’s to a couple of feet. As she walked towards the green to mark her ball she halted, seemingly in a reaction to a gesture from her playing partner not to bother as she was going to play her shot straight away.

The result? Olson’s chip struck Jutanugarn’s unmarked ball and stopped dead, leaving her a tap-in for birdie.

A classic example of back-stopping – the collusion of players who leave a ball unmarked to aid the other’s approach to the pin. Others would

Olsen came up with an explanation that can’t be proved without a clairvoyant

simply call it cheating. Both players escaped punishment because Olson argued her partner’s ball was not on her intended line, an explanation that conveniently cannot be disproved without the help of a clairvoyant.

Instead, she claimed, uppermost in her thoughts was pace of play. All very plausible until you see ask why Olson felt compelled to fist-bump her playing partner immediately after her “lucky” break.

By the strict letter of the law she could successfully argue no wrongdoing. But the kangaroo court of public opinion has proved less open to explanation or, as many believe was the intention, manipulation. OUR TOP WRITERS GIVE THEIR FEARLESS VERDICTS EVERY DAY IN RECORD SPORT