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