Solheim Cup Rules Controversy is Signal That Rules of Golf Need Another Update

Saturday's bizarre and unfortunate ruling marred the competition. Here are two ways golf can prevent this from ever happening again.

TOLEDO, Ohio – Recently the Rules of Golf went through a major rewrite, and the updates went into effect in 2019.

The R&A and USGA wanted to modernize the rules. The organizations saw it as a opportunity to do more good for the game.

In many ways that is exactly what they did, as the game is better because of the changes – but as it goes with these things, you can’t always think of everything.

After watching the rules incident in the Saturday afternoon four-balls at the Solheim Cup, Rule 13.3 Ball Overhanging Hole needs a closer look.

Nelly Korda of Team USA hit an eagle putt on the par-5 13th that swung right-to-left and stopped so close to the hole that it was not immediately clear if part of the ball was overhanging the cup.

Europe’s Madelene Sagstrom walked up to the ball, relatively quickly, scooped it up and tossed it back to Korda, who was sprawled on the green with emotion thinking the putt was going to go in.

Under Rule 13.3, if a ball is overhanging a hole, the player is allowed a reasonable time to reach the hole, plus an additional 10 seconds, before the ball must be putted into the hole.

Related: 2021 Solheim Cup TV Times, Schedule, Past Results

Also, according to the rules, in match play, if an opponent moves an overhanging ball prior before the necessary time, the putt is deemed to be holed.

Using what can only be described as a grainy picture from television (once zoomed in, the image of the ball appeared pixilated), it was determined that Korda's ball was overhanging the hole. Her putt was deemed holed and the Americans went on to win a tight match 1 up.

Afterwards Sagstrom was adamant that she did not move a ball that had a chance to go in, and at no time during the incident did either Korda or her playing partner Ally Ewing suggest that the ball was overhanging the hole. The rules review was initiated by an official following the match.

Rules often have distinct penalties for stroke play and match play. Stroke-play rules protect the field, while match-play rules are applicable for head-to-head competition.

Given what happened on Saturday, I suggest a couple of changes.

First, a request for a ruling should be initiated by the players in the match rather than an official. If a player believes a rule has been violated, the player should bring it to the official’s attention.

Beyond eliminating any potential bias, it puts the onus on the player, who should of course know the rules.

Another suggested change for match play: allow players to ignore a rules violation. Golf is supposed to emphasized integrity, and this change would allow a player to demonstrate competitiveness and compassion at the same time.

Under these suggested changes, Saturday's rules controversy would have never happened, since neither American player was aware of an issue.

Once the rules official initiated the review, numerous times American players said they couldn't do anything about it, because they couldn't ignore the rule. 

But what if you could?

What if a player could say, "What happened is not an issue for me."

Think about the action of Jack Nicklaus, when he picked up Tony Jacklin’s 2 ½ foot putt on the 18th hole at the 1969 Ryder Cup at Royal Birkdale, sealing a tie.

Many would have made Jacklin make the putt, but in match play the players have discretion to give putts. So why not expand that discretion to other parts of the game?