Re: My previous comment as follows:
"As to the question of the need for a change to Rule 1-2, I think it would be a very simple matter to include in the ‘new rules’ a section which provides the ‘Committee’ with the power to, in addition to specific provisions within the rules, impose a penalty of disqualification on any player whose contravention of the Rules is deemed to have been prejudicial to the interest of the game. I am not aware as to whether this is already included in the draft rules on Committee powers and responsibilities. My main interest has just been on the provision of consistent, clear and concise rules for the players."
In the draft 'new' rules (which I had not read since their publication) the following statement was included in Rule 1.2.a:
The Committee may disqualify you for serious misconduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game.
You may have noted the following provision in the approved 'new' rules (which I have only just read):
1.2 Standards of Player Conducta. Conduct Expected of All Players
All players are expected to play in the spirit of the game by:
- Acting with integrity – for example, by following the Rules, applying all penalties, and being honest in all aspects of play.
- Showing consideration to others – for example, by playing at a prompt pace, looking out for the safety of others, and not distracting the play of another player.
- Taking good care of the course – for example, by replacing divots, smoothing bunkers, repairing ball-marks, and not causing unnecessary damage to the course.
There is no penalty under the Rules for failing to act in this way, except that the Committee may disqualify a player for acting contrary to the spirit of the game if it finds that the player has committed serious misconduct.
Penalties other than disqualification may be imposed for player misconduct only if those penalties are adopted as part of a Code of Conduct under Rule 1.2b.
One would have thought that this would cover the PM situation nicely.
Anyone who deliberately breached the rules (and had considered doing so several times previously) and bragged publicly about how smart this had been, would clearly be in contravention of the requirement to act with integrity and could summarily be dealt with by disqualification.