Don,

As a matter of reasonable probability, and therefore IMO of purpose, how can one possibly claim that the movement of the ball may not have been influenced when it was prevented from coming into contact with the club-face?

Hands up - I didn't read the "face" part to Michael's question. Nevertheless I think the answer is found in D4-2/0.5.

That leaves the question, "Is it a breach of the rules to play with a club that has had some sort of protection applied to its face for the purpose of protection?" This is a question that Michael says has been discussed before but I don't remeber this so it was perhaps before I found this site - and now I shall never know what you all said at the time.

Paul & DC,
R4-2b prohibits foriegn material being aplied to the club face for the "purpose" of influencing the movement of the ball. If a foriegn material is applied for any other "purpose" ie protecting the face, then R4-2b does not apply. I can think of no rule that prevents adding a foriegn material for "purposes" other than this!
It all boils down to the word "purpose".
Don

Where do you play golf Pennard

Don, maybe you're right.

But sometimes purpose boils down to the result of the action. As in 1-2/3.8.

Paul, the result of doing something does not always, if ever, follow as a direct consequense of the purpose of doing something!!
In any case, in the matter under discussion we have to judge matters soley on the players intention (purpose) of applying the tape, as the rule only covers the Intended outcome.
Don

Where do you play golf Pennard

Don,

Results and intentions? I think I agree with you there.

But in the original case, what about Appendix II 4(a) (ii)?

The stuff was not applied for decorative or structural purposes, and perhaps its degree of transparency is not particularly relevant.

Just an addition to my last post!
Otherwise the rule would be worded something like:-
" R14-2b Foreign Material
Foreign material must not be applied to the club face that results in influencing the movement of the ball"
Would it not?
Don

Where do you play golf Pennard

So Paul.
Are you saying that transparent sellotape is a breach of appendix 4a(ii), but that brown sticky tape is not?
I think I will have to agree!
Ureaka!! I think we have found a loophole!
Don

Where do you play golf Pennard

Don,

The Rules are transparent, at least as long as I'm the referee!

Sorry if that's not spelt correctly!

Where do you play golf Pennard

Paul in an earlier post you quoted dec 1-2/4. It seems to me that this is quite the opposite of what we are discussing here. in this dec the player intends a certain action, but the results of his intentions do not happen. Therefore no penalty, it still comes down to if he intends it to happen and it does, then a penalty. If he intends it to happen and it doesn't, no penalty. And (in the case in question)if he does not intend it to happen but it does, still no penalty!
Don

Where do you play golf Pennard

Don,

Actually I cited 1-2/3.8 - where (to be very blunt) the player tries to cheat but fails, and is ruled no penalty.

It's a decision that puzzles me. When English says, "must not take any action to influence", I cannot usually help but read "to" as meaning "in order to", like the Latin "ut".

But in this decision we are instructed to read "to" as meaning "with the result that does".

I have no problem with the authority of the Revered Bodies, but when they muck with the language, they muck with my mind. So I'd prefer them to fix the words rather than twist the interpretation of them.

Hi all,

I raised the question last September after exactly the same thing happened to a member of my club.
The general consensus on the LS was that as long as the reason to add protective tape to the club was to stop it from being scratched, the player had not done anything to influence the movement of the ball.

But then one member with access to someone in authority from the R&A asked him, and he said that it was not allowed to play with such a club.

Yet in another publication by the R&A it says that as long as it isn't done to influence the movement of the ball, it is "probably" OK.

However, on the USGA website in their Rules section it says it has become an illegal club, and playing with it is against the Rules.
All very confusing so lets hope the RB's are going to make a Decision about it next time the book is revised.

Johanna

Where do you play golf Toxandria, Netherlands