Shin Da-in competes in the final round of the OK Savings Bank Eutmaen Open. (KLPGA)
Shin Da-in competes in the final round of the OK Savings Bank Eutmaen Open. (KLPGA)

The two-stroke penalty imposed on Shin Da-in at the first hole of the final round of the KLPGA's OK Savings Bank tournament offered a significant lesson. It applies to both players and referees. How should players and referees change their conduct going forward?

No visible evidence

Given my long experience as a referee, I follow media coverage of penalty cases from tournaments around the world and analyze the video footage. When a penalty call seems questionable, I sometimes replay the video dozens of times, and in most cases I conclude that the referee's ruling was correct. The Lexi Thompson case had clear, magnified evidence, and I agreed with the R&A's ruling on the two-stroke penalty that Bryson DeChambeau felt was unfair at this year's Open Championship.

But the penalty ruling against Shin was simply impossible to accept. A gallery member reported an issue at the first hole green, and referees communicated the two-stroke penalty to the player at the sixth hole. That meant the ruling took about an hour to reach. What evidence did the referee use to make that call?

That evidence was likely the same broadcast footage that ordinary viewers watched and that I myself replayed dozens of times. There was no time to find and compare other footage, and if any had existed, it would likely have been released even after the match. In my judgment, it was practically impossible to assert, based on broadcast footage alone, that there was a 1-centimeter or 3-centimeter discrepancy.

Was the ruling fair?

A penalty call this severe — one that can change the course of a tournament — normally requires a meeting among three referees. These are the zone referee assigned to the first hole, the rover referee overseeing the front nine, and the chief referee at the top of the hierarchy. Each presents their own opinion during the discussion. It remains unclear whether any referee objected to the penalty. The process behind how the ruling was reached would reveal much about the level of KLPGA referees, but no such information has been disclosed.

At the scene, gallery members are not positioned close enough to detect a difference of just a few centimeters. If a report was made, it likely alleged that Shin improperly moved her ball forward. She had been returning it from behind the marker to its original position in front of the marker. The referee then verified the report, but ultimately found a different violation than the one reported, and issued the penalty on that basis. This raises suspicion that the ruling stemmed from an investigation into an unrelated matter rather than the original complaint.

Why would referees rule a penalty against a player facing a 26-meter putt at the first hole in the final-round champion's group? She would have had no reason to intentionally cheat by moving her ball a few centimeters. A referee could argue that the intent of the player is irrelevant and that the ruling should depend solely on whether the ball was accurately replaced to its original position. But that stance is hard for golf fans watching the tournament to accept as reasonable, because it distorted the flow and outcome of the competition.

The basics for players

There was a regrettable aspect to how Shin responded on the scene when she was notified of the penalty at the sixth hole. It is understandable that she was too flustered by the sudden two-stroke penalty to consider her rights in the moment. But she should have told the referee that she disagreed with the ruling. She could have requested that a final decision be made together with her after reviewing the evidence footage once the round ended. Players and referees do not have a hierarchical relationship — they stand on equal footing, each with their own rights and obligations.

In golf, players act as their own referees while playing, so they are entitled to hold opinions that differ from a referee's ruling and to freely discuss them. Ultimately, players need rules knowledge on par with that of referees to argue their case without hesitation. Arming themselves with thorough knowledge of the rules is the most basic requirement of all.

What if I were Shin Da-in?

It is commendable that after the tournament, Shin commissioned a professional video analysis firm and produced evidence showing that the ball's position had barely changed. Although it cannot change the outcome of the competition, it was a legitimate action to restore her reputation. I hope players will consider how they would have acted had they been in Shin's position, and prepare themselves accordingly.

KLPGA referees can make mistakes too

The KLPGA should review the video evidence presented by Shin and issue an official explanation that fans can accept and that restores Shin's reputation. Referees can make mistakes too, so an apology should follow if warranted. If a player's honor is unjustly damaged, she should be willing to fight for it with everything she has. A referee who hands down a major penalty ruling should be willing to stake their own position on it.

*The author, a former golf dad, studied in the United States. He has worked as a golf historian, an international referee for the Korea Golf Association, a player sponsor and a university professor. He has written two books on golf history and previously ran a popular column titled "Park No-seung's Golf Time Leap" for 73 installments, and is currently writing its second season.


sports@heraldcorp.com