[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Lou Stagner (Golf Stat Pro) [@LouStagner](/creator/twitter/LouStagner) on x 195.4K followers Created: 2025-07-19 01:27:02 UTC Shane Lowry, a Two-Shot Penalty, and the Absurdity of Golf’s Rules Today we all know that Shane Lowry received a two-shot penalty. His ball moved ever so slightly after he took a practice swing in the rough. It didn’t roll forward. It didn’t come to rest in a better position. It didn’t offer any kind of advantage. But because the rules say movement equals penalty, the officials had no choice. By the strict definition of the rule, the call was correct. But this is where golf's rules become divorced from common sense. What happened to Lowry should not be a penalty. There needs to be space in the rulebook for judgment. If the movement of the ball gave no benefit, there should be no consequence. The "No Subjectivity" Defense Some people will argue that subjectivity cannot be allowed. They will say players will cheat if given the chance. That argument falls apart pretty quickly. Golf already includes plenty of subjective moments. Players make judgment calls all the time. For example, when a ball crosses into a penalty area, the player must decide exactly where it last crossed the margin. That is hard to know precisely. But somehow, we live with those gray areas and keep playing. The game survives. Golf also takes enormous pride in its culture of honesty. Players are trusted to call penalties on themselves. We hear this all the time. Golfers are different, they say. Golfers play with integrity, they say. But then we are told that we cannot trust a player or an official to decide if a one-millimeter oscillation in deep rough had any effect on the shot? That logic doesn’t hold. The “Gotcha” Culture Too often, the rules feel less like guardrails and more like traps. It is as if there is always a USGA or R&A official hiding behind a tree, just waiting to jump out and yell, “Gotcha!” The rules can be so technical and inflexible that they lose sight of what really matters. The deeper problem is structural. The USGA and R&A are self-appointed governing bodies. They have no competition. They can operate however they choose. That is the nature of a monopoly. When there is no pressure to evolve, the result is rules like the one that penalized Lowry. No competitive gain. No intent to cheat. Still, two shots added to the card. A Better Way Forward To be clear, I am not hoping for more division in professional golf. I am not cheering for chaos. While I am not a fan of how LIV fractured the sport, I do think there is room for change elsewhere. I would support the creation of a new governing body. One that understands the difference between a technical infraction and a meaningful one. One that can bring a modern, thoughtful approach to the rules. One that follows science. What happened to Shane Lowry should not be a penalty. Any reasonable observer can see that. The game deserves rules that reflect the way it is actually played. This is not about weakening standards. It is about applying fairness and logic. Because what happened today was not fair. It was just foolish.  XXXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [shane lowry](/topic/shane-lowry) [Post Link](https://x.com/LouStagner/status/1946381234134724644)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Lou Stagner (Golf Stat Pro) @LouStagner on x 195.4K followers
Created: 2025-07-19 01:27:02 UTC
Shane Lowry, a Two-Shot Penalty, and the Absurdity of Golf’s Rules
Today we all know that Shane Lowry received a two-shot penalty. His ball moved ever so slightly after he took a practice swing in the rough. It didn’t roll forward. It didn’t come to rest in a better position. It didn’t offer any kind of advantage. But because the rules say movement equals penalty, the officials had no choice.
By the strict definition of the rule, the call was correct. But this is where golf's rules become divorced from common sense. What happened to Lowry should not be a penalty. There needs to be space in the rulebook for judgment. If the movement of the ball gave no benefit, there should be no consequence.
The "No Subjectivity" Defense
Some people will argue that subjectivity cannot be allowed. They will say players will cheat if given the chance. That argument falls apart pretty quickly.
Golf already includes plenty of subjective moments. Players make judgment calls all the time. For example, when a ball crosses into a penalty area, the player must decide exactly where it last crossed the margin. That is hard to know precisely. But somehow, we live with those gray areas and keep playing. The game survives.
Golf also takes enormous pride in its culture of honesty. Players are trusted to call penalties on themselves. We hear this all the time. Golfers are different, they say. Golfers play with integrity, they say. But then we are told that we cannot trust a player or an official to decide if a one-millimeter oscillation in deep rough had any effect on the shot? That logic doesn’t hold.
The “Gotcha” Culture
Too often, the rules feel less like guardrails and more like traps. It is as if there is always a USGA or R&A official hiding behind a tree, just waiting to jump out and yell, “Gotcha!” The rules can be so technical and inflexible that they lose sight of what really matters.
The deeper problem is structural. The USGA and R&A are self-appointed governing bodies. They have no competition. They can operate however they choose. That is the nature of a monopoly.
When there is no pressure to evolve, the result is rules like the one that penalized Lowry. No competitive gain. No intent to cheat. Still, two shots added to the card.
A Better Way Forward
To be clear, I am not hoping for more division in professional golf. I am not cheering for chaos. While I am not a fan of how LIV fractured the sport, I do think there is room for change elsewhere.
I would support the creation of a new governing body. One that understands the difference between a technical infraction and a meaningful one. One that can bring a modern, thoughtful approach to the rules. One that follows science. What happened to Shane Lowry should not be a penalty. Any reasonable observer can see that.
The game deserves rules that reflect the way it is actually played. This is not about weakening standards. It is about applying fairness and logic.
Because what happened today was not fair.
It was just foolish.
XXXXXX engagements
Related Topics shane lowry