The Anchor Around the PGA Tour's Neck

The huge "event" on Tuesday changed into the PGA Tour's Player Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting at the Memorial. Why? Because they were discussing what to do about the anchored setting ban.

I determined multiple articles about it, one from Alex Miceli and one from Rex Hoggard. (I'll be quoting from these two on this post.) And even as the insurance on GC indicated that nothing have been settled -- the PAC most effective makes guidelines to the Tour Policy Board -- it seems equally clear to me that this issue isn't always going to be settled speedy.

The PAC has 16 individuals elected by way of Tour gamers to represent them. After the ninety-minute meeting they hadn't agreed on some thing; they're simply talking for now. But here are a number of the excessive points.

Miceli wrote that "According to one participant, some PAC members who were on the fence now seem to be going back to supporting the ban."

He also wrote that "[Bo] Van Pelt confirmed that some players would like to see anchoring banned at the start of the 2014 season, to get it behind them, but the list of positions on anchoring is lengthy."

According to Hoggard, Davis Love said “It’s a tough one because there’s a lot of passion.” Love's personal stance may best represent the problem the Tour faces:

“There is a sentiment to either agree with it and move on, which is what we ought to do, or let’s start making our own rules. That’s the big decision here now. Maybe there is a silver lining here. Maybe it becomes a better relationship with the USGA moving ahead.” (emphasis mine)

But given that Love also spoke to Miceli at length about the other "mistakes" made by the USGA and then said the real issue was:

?So ought to someone else be in rate, or must they be in fee? We wouldn?T have long past thru this groove component if we have been making the policies.?

clearly the desire to follow the tradition of the ruling bodies is at odds with the feeling that the ruling bodies just aren't doing that great a job. It begs the question of bifurcation -- two sets of rules. Miceli writes:

"Will the anchoring ban cause two sets of guidelines in golf? According to Love, there is a lot of sentiment for precisely that, to break faraway from the USGA guidelines and feature the gamers make their very own regulations."

That's interesting, don't you think? Finchem has already said he's not against having two sets of rules in certain cases. It appears the Tour players are seriously considering that possibility.

Two of the PAC members -- Webb Simpson and Brandon Steele -- use anchored putters and are part of the nine-participant organization possibly discussing a probable in shape against the Tour if it is of the same opinion to comply with the USGA ruling. Yet the gamers Miceli and Hoggard talked to stated the PAC wasn't too concerned about possible complaints in the course of their meeting.

Hoggard may also have summed it up first-class:

"But a looming lawsuit, or the stop of anchoring, regarded to be less of a flashpoint during Tuesday?S assembly than a essential issue over who makes the rules."

The Policy Committee doesn't meet until July. I'll be surprised if the Tour comes to any conclusions before then. But it seems to me that anchoring has touched a different nerve than any of the USGA/R&A's previous rulings...

This one simply might be the straw that broke the camel's back. We'll see.