This past weekend’s PGA tournament was marked by an unexpected and controversial equipment mishap involving Matt Fitzpatrick. The incident occurred during the final round of the BMW Championship at Castle Pines, adding a dramatic twist to the competition.
On the eighth tee, Fitzpatrick noticed a crack in the face of his Titleist TSi3 driver. Recognizing the potential impact on his performance, he immediately called for a ruling under the USGA’s Model Local Rule G-9, which allows for the replacement of a club if it is significantly damaged.. However, the ruling did not go in his favor. The officials determined that the crack did not meet the threshold of “significantly damaged” and therefore, Fitzpatrick was not permitted to replace his driver.
Fitzpatrick expressed his frustration, calling the ruling a “disgrace” and “outrageous.” He argued that the crack, although not causing a complete separation of the clubface, was significant enough to affect his play. Despite having two additional driver heads in his locker, he was forced to continue with the damaged club.
The decision sparked a debate among fans and analysts about the interpretation of the rules and the consistency of their application. The PGA Tour’s Chief Referee, Stephen Cox, explained that while the crack was acknowledged, it did not meet the criteria for significant damage as outlined in the rules.
Fitzpatrick’s performance was undoubtedly affected by the incident. Although he managed to make five birdies in the first 14 holes, he also bogeyed the par-5 eighth hole and double-bogeyed the par-4 10th, ultimately finishing outside the top 30 needed to advance to the TOUR Championship.
This equipment mishap serves as a reminder of the fine margins in professional golf and the critical role that equipment plays in a player’s performance. The inherent danger presented by Fitzpatrick’s equipment mishap could've put fans in harm's way which was a point Scottie Scheffler tried to make on behalf of his playing partner.
As the golfing community reflects on this incident, it will likely prompt discussions about potential rule adjustments to better address such situations in the future.
