Why aren't the rules simpler?
Posted 29 July 2012 - 10:41 PM
Posted 29 July 2012 - 11:06 PM
Barely changed? Are you aware that those 13 original rules did not cover stroke play - the introduction of the 'Special Rules for Stroke Play' near the end of the 19th century was the largest complication of the Rules of Golf. As for the average player's hope - he could read the book once a year and ask questions when he comes across something that he doesn't understand.
A game which has barely changed in its nature, at one time took 430 words and 13 rules to regulate.
What hope does the average player have to follow the rules?
Posted 29 July 2012 - 11:35 PM
Posted 29 July 2012 - 11:48 PM
Then he shouldn't be surprised at how little he knows about the rules. Now, why should we expect that he'll make the effort to read a simplified set of rules?
The average player would never have read the rule book
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:03 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:06 AM
You should get to work writing them then. Best of luck.
As a generic statement people that play golf have integrity and would like to play by the rules.
Go to your average club on a Saturday morning and witness some of the astonishing relief taken unwittingly by the ignorant.
Simpler relief rules would be read, understood and followed.
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:07 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:25 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:37 AM
You told me that the average golfer hasn't read the book -- I agree with you. I think that fact is the primary (by FAR) reason why golfers do not have adequate rules knowledge. You disagree. I don't have any sympathy for someone who is unfamiliar with the contents of a book that he hasn't bothered to read; and, I don't place any blame for that ignorance on the book.
I won’t be writing them, that is the RA’s job, the trouble with golf is it has become a “lawyers picnic.”
You seem to be reinforcing the notion the rules work. When the generic users of the rules don’t undertand most of them you have a problem.
The RA have done very little of a positive note in years in regards to the rules.
eg it would have been simple to regulate the distance the ball goes and let the club manufacturers do what they like and thus not make great courses obsolete without stupid tiger tees
The long putter, give me a break if that is in the spirit of the game.
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:43 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:47 AM
I don’t have any sympathy for someone who is unfamiliar with the contents of a book that he hasn’t bothered to read; and, I don’t place any blame for that ignorance on the book.RG, the problem is that the book is not an easy read, unless you're into law, accountancy (tax law), etc. Many people find the tediousness of the detail such a distraction that it becomes incomprehensible to them.
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:50 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:58 AM
Posted 30 July 2012 - 01:26 AM
I understand your assertion - I disagree with it. I've seen the amount of effort that is requried to gain a reasonable amount of rules knowledge. I'm embarrassed for the golfer who is too (lazy|frightened) to make that effort. If the game is 'dumbed down' in the hopes of enticing golfers to read and understand the dumbed-down version of the rules, it will be a real shame if they still can't be bothered.
You told me that the average golfer hasn’t read the book—I agree with you.
I think that fact is the primary (by FAR) reason why golfers do not have adequate rules knowledge. You disagree.
I don’t disagree with you, you have missed the point.
The exception will read the 168,000 words of legal mumbo jumbo.
The majority would read and UNDERSTAND a simple set of rules and abide by them.
Posted 30 July 2012 - 01:38 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users