The Long Putter

ForeRight

Big announcement being made tomorrow by the PGA and R&A regarding the long putter....

Almaviva

Optimism abounds, for a ban for this abomination from 2016.

Myksyk

Interested to see this announcement. Any idea when it's being made today (our time)?

Henry Ford III

Irish Times.

Golf: With a widely expected ban on anchoring long putters likely to be announced by the game’s ruling bodies today, players have expressed sharply contrasting views ahead of this week’s World Challenge in California.

While 14-times Major winner Tiger Woods and putting supremo Steve Stricker are both in favour of such putters being outlawed, 2011 PGA Championship winner Keegan Bradley says he is “not happy” about the likely rule change.

American Bradley became the first player to win a Major title using a long putter and has since been followed by compatriot Webb Simpson, at this year's US Open, and South African Ernie Els, at the British Open in July.

SnowDrifts

Here is the proposed rule change:

http://www.usga.org/news/2012/November/Proposed-Rules-Change-to-Prohibit-Anchoring/

And here is a graphical interpretation:

http://www.usga.org/rules/Proposed-Rule-14-1b-Infographic/

Was just thinking that Adam Scott may be able to get away with his long putter.. if his right top hand does not touch his chest.

BigChap1759

I'm sure his top hand does touch his chest - this is the whole point of using the long putter, ie so the top is anchored.

I also heard that Carl Petterson was planning on mounting a legal challenge - what a kn*b :rolleyes:

death1234567

Annouced LINK
Correct decision but it will have interesting consequences. I see that Matt kuchar's putting style will be legal...

BigChap1759

Incorrect - no equipment will be banned but the act of achoring the putter against your body will be prohibited.

pom pom snaz peeler

i think its a load of bollox banning this (ok not banning but the method to use or how they are used will change)..... these putters are available for years and just because this year seen 3 major winners there's outcry.... sour grapes if you ask me.... and for the record i think the look redicilous and dont use one.
ed

BigChap1759

Well people have 3 years to get used to a new putter or putting stroke so it's not the end of the world....

SnowDrifts

BigChap1759 wrote: »

I'm sure his top hand does touch his chest - this is the whole point of using the long putter, ie so the top is anchored.

I also heard that Carl Petterson was planning on mounting a legal challenge - what a kn*b :rolleyes:

Yeah, at the moment Scott's top hand does touch his chest, but if he moved it so there is no contact, it should be fine. Of course, it might not be as easy but the fundamental pendulum motion would be retained.

Also, as said, Kuchar is fine because his belly putter rests against his forearm.

charlieIRL

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Was just thinking that Adam Scott may be able to get away with his long putter.. if his right top hand does not touch his chest.

don't think he will get away, done a quick search there and there are no definitive picutes showing his left hand against his body but it looks very close. Thinking back on the way he sets up I reckon it has to be touching.



Pic from bbc website.

BigChap1759

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Yeah, at the moment Scott's top hand does touch his chest, but if he moved it so there is no contact, it should be fine. Of course, it might not be as easy but the fundamental pendulum motion would be retained.

Also, as you say, Kuchar is fine because his belly putter rests against his forearm.

The actual wording makes me think Kuchar would not be fine as he anchors the putter against his forearm - going to be some interesting interpretations of the rules over the next while!

"prohibit strokes made with the club or a hand gripping the club held directly against the player’s body, or with a forearm held against the body to establish an anchor point that indirectly anchors the club."

SnowDrifts

BigChap1759 wrote: »

The actual wording makes me think Kuchar would not be fine as he anchors the putter against his forearm - going to be some interesting interpretations of the rules over the next while!

"prohibit strokes made with the club or a hand gripping the club held directly against the player’s body, or with a forearm held against the body to establish an anchor point that indirectly anchors the club."

From here:

Putting styles such as the "claw" or "cross-handed" are still allowed. Matt Kuchar uses a belly-length putter that he rests against his arm. That would be permitted.

Like I mentioned, Kuchar is ok because the top of his putter does not anchor against the body. It just rests against his forearm.

charlieIRL

BigChap1759 wrote: »

The actual wording makes me think Kuchar would not be fine as he anchors the putter against his forearm - going to be some interesting interpretations of the rules over the next while!

"prohibit strokes made with the club or a hand gripping the club held directly against the player’s body, or with a forearm held against the body to establish an anchor point that indirectly anchors the club."

they have a pic on one of the links there with the putter resting against the players forearm and its is allowed.

SnowDrifts

Ian Poulter just linked the following video which covers everything..

PARlance

There'll be some number of golfers in country clubs around the states looking into a good diet program.

It's these lads with overhanging bellies that rest on a standard size putter that I feel for

fullstop

charlieIRL wrote: »

don't think he will get away, done a quick search there and there are no definitive picutes showing his left hand against his body but it looks very close. Thinking back on the way he sets up I reckon it has to be touching.



Pic from bbc website.

Doesn't matter if it touches his chest or not, his left hand is acting as an anchor.

Almaviva

fullstop wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it touches his chest or not, his left hand is acting as an anchor.

As I read it, it does matter. You can anchor, but not with the forearm in contact with any point of your body.

So OK if it doesnt touch his chest. Not OK if it does.

SnowDrifts

fullstop wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it touches his chest or not, his left hand is acting as an anchor.

As Almaviva states, that is not the way it works. Look at the second link a posted up above.

GreeBo

i think they haven't gone far enough.
clubs should touch your hands only, no anchoring anything anywhere.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

i think they haven't gone far enough.
clubs should touch your hands only, no anchoring anything anywhere.

Agreed, this rule change will be fine for pros comps with tv coverage etc available to monitor this. Plus the fact that a Pro should be able to perfect a new way of using a belly putter in a legal way.

Where it's going to cause a mess is at an ametuer level.

They should have just ripped off the plaster!

Almaviva

I feel it probably does sort out the problem really (although I would have liked a maximum putter length ammendment).
While the long putters are still legal and you can seperate your hands and rotate them in the 'broomhandle' fashion, without the anchor point, it makes the stroke even more difficult than a conventional one. I cant see long putter merchants persevering with their general action but only modifying it to remove the anchor. It makes it counter productive. And they should revert to a normal stroke, or one of the odd (left hand below right, shaft gripped to the forearm etc) if they really have a mental block on the normal stroke.
I can see no golfer having genuine success with a modified comforming broomhandle type club/stroke, that he would not equal or better be reverting to a conventional one.
The focus on the stroke is good from two aspects: it emphasises the tradional stroke of golf, and, by not dealing with the implements themselves, avoids any legal problems with the manufacturers.

SnowDrifts

ajcurry123 wrote: »

They should have just ripped off the plaster!

Agree. That would include not waiting until 2016 also IMO. "We want to ban anchoring the putter stoke because we we think it is wrong... but sure continue as you were for another few years - tis grand"

Also... a note to my playing partners... if you take out the broom putter to measure relief.. I am going to jump on it until it snaps and suggest you use a driver like everyone else.

PARlance

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Agree. That would include not waiting until 2016 also IMO

I would have thought 12-18 months would have been plenty of time.

charlieIRL

ajcurry123 wrote: »

I would have thought 12-18 months would have been plenty of time.

AFAIK changes are made in a 4 year cycle. they missed the boat this year.

PARlance

charlieIRL wrote: »

AFAIK changes are made in a 4 year cycle. they missed the boat this year.

Wasn't aware of the 4 year cycle Charlie.
But that in a sense is a bit daft isn't it, if it's not right then they should bring it in as soon as possible (allowing a reasonable time for players to adjust)

Fair enough if you want to wait 4 years for minor rule changes/adjustment but this is a major change.
The way is see it panning out is that a lot of golfers will pay no heed to this change until 2014/2015 as it stands.

Stand up there and I'll shoot you Mr. Messenger

charlieIRL

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Wasn't aware of the 4 year cycle Charlie.
But that in a sense is a bit daft isn't it, if it's not right then they should bring it in as soon as possible (allowing a reasonable time for players to adjust)

Fair enough if you want to wait 4 years for minor rule changes/adjustment but this is a major change.
The way is see it panning out is that a lot of golfers will pay no heed to this change until 2014/2015 as it stands.

Stand up there and I'll shoot you Mr. Messenger

I'd be 99.9% sure there is, but if not i'm sure someone will be along to correct me shortly!!

BoardsMember

GreeBo wrote: »

i think they haven't gone far enough.
clubs should touch your hands only, no anchoring anything anywhere.

I'd agree completely, they have not got it right, nor been consistent - either you can anchor or you cant. The point of the rule change was to stop anchoring.

This is how people are going to re-learn putting: having the left hand lower (right handed golfer), with the handled nestled up the left forearm, and the right hand towards the top of the putter grip, holding club and arm. Check out the example at 3.50 in the posted video, it's allowed and shouldn't be.

Almaviva

BoardsMember wrote: »

Check out the example at 3.50 in the posted video, it's allowed and shouldn't be.

Am very strongly against the longputter/anchoring technique being allowed in golf, so delighted its on the way out. But I also think that example is fine. The club is not rotating about a fixed point on the club, but all of it is moving position i.e. swinging around the golfer which is the essence of a golf 'swing' as we play the other clubs, and not a pivot which is where it moves away from a golf stroke.
I think the nub here is whether any golfer is going to benefit from using a long putter within the future rules. I dont think they are. Their hand forming the pivot now cannot be supported. So is vulnerable to moving and the benfit of this technique - the simple circular rotation of the club about the pivot - cannot be relied upon because the pivot itself cannot be stabilised against the chin/beerbelly/whatever as heretofore.

SnowDrifts

Was just watching the Sky Sports summary of the rule change and they highlighted what I said above that Adam Scott might easily modify his swing if the top hand is not touching his chest. Yes, he loses the anchor point, but the pendulum motion is still there and they noted that it still feels like a good way to putt.


Also, it must be mentally difficult for the likes of Bradley and Simpson to put in hours and hours of practicing with their belly putters knowing that they will have to change in a few years. Motivation might lack so for that reason, surely it would be better to change sooner rather than later.

GreeBo

Was just thinking about this today...so if I am allowed anchor the ball to my arm...whats to stop me using a Sam Torrence style putter thats anchored all the way up my left arm...into my armpit...it would be impossible for anyone to prove thats its anchored in my armpit as it would only be anchored when my arm is down and then my arm/body would obscure it...

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

Was just thinking about this today...so if I am allowed anchor the ball to my arm...whats to stop me using a Sam Torrence style putter thats anchored all the way up my left arm...into my armpit...it would be impossible for anyone to prove thats its anchored in my armpit as it would only be anchored when my arm is down and then my arm/body would obscure it...

The grip can only make contact with the forearm.. so anything from the elbow up, would be deemed anchoring. The following quote is from the link I posted above.

The club is anchored “directly” when the player intentionally holds the club or a gripping hand in contact with any part of his body, except that the player may hold the club or a gripping hand against a hand or forearm.

GreeBo

^
Ah ok cool.
I still think it would have been far easier to say :
"Your putter has one grip and only your hands touch the grip"

Simple.

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

^
Ah ok cool.
I still think it would have been far easier to say :
"Your putter has one grip and only your hands touch the grip"

Simple.

That would still allow for a broom putter using the pendulum stroke. If they added a putter length restriction along what you suggest... that might do it.

It will be fun trying to watch your average Sunday golfers determine what is anchoring under the R&A and USGA's current suggestion. Too many permutations and too complex.

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

That would still allow for a broom putter using the pendulum stroke. If they added a putter length restriction along what you suggest... that might do it.

How though? If only your hands are touching the putter and it only has one grip...?


Actually the wording of the rule also means you can do a a broom handle stroke like you say, just rest your wrist/forearm instead of your hand against your chin...


Yeah, I can see this being silly for us amateurs.

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

How though? If only your hands are touching the putter and it only has one grip...?


Actually the wording of the rule also means you can do a a broom handle stroke like you say, just rest your wrist/forearm instead of your hand against your chin...


Yeah, I can see this being silly for us amateurs.

Because all the broom handle putters would be fitted with 30 inch grips!

The proposed rule change makes the forearm an extension of your hand and therefore your forearm can't make contact with any part of your body to form an anchor.

alxmorgan

Is this also being banned in same time frame for amateurs ?
I met two older gents on Saturday who said they would not be playing any more but for long putters
As they got on in years they suffered but the long putter helped.
Interesting to see if it causes some amateurs to walk away from the game

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Because all the broom handle putters would be fitted with 30 inch grips!

Hmm, I really should have thought of that

SnowDrifts wrote: »

The proposed rule change makes the forearm an extension of your hand

LOL.
"its not that our rules are wrong, its just the definition of parts of the human body that we need to change..." :rolleyes:
Thats actually quite sad.

stockdam

I really don't see the reason for the change and what the fuss was about.

Nobody was cheating and every pro had the opportunity to use the long putter if they wanted to so nobody was gaining any advantage. Nobody complained when the size of drivers heads increased dramatically; the "trampoline" face ones were banned in order to try to limit the length of drives.

The long putter isn't an advantage for most players otherwise they would be using it. It does help those who have the yips and for that reason I would have preferred to let it stay as it was.

onlyfinewine

Seems to me that the broom-handle putter can still be used like a fulcrum by just keeping the upper hand still, slightly away from the body, and allowing the lower hand to swing like a pendulum. The belly putter which can no longer be anchored in the belly, suffers by comparison and I don't see how it can be used unless like a shorter version of the broom-handle?

rrpc

stockdam wrote: »

I really don't see the reason for the change and what the fuss was about.

Nobody was cheating and every pro had the opportunity to use the long putter if they wanted to so nobody was gaining any advantage. Nobody complained when the size of drivers heads increased dramatically; the "trampoline" face ones were banned in order to try to limit the length of drives.

The long putter isn't an advantage for most players otherwise they would be using it. It does help those who have the yips and for that reason I would have preferred to let it stay as it was.

The yips are part of the game of golf. Players have to overcome them the same as they do shanks or slices or hooks or just plain headspace.

I heard Tiger Woods talking about it yesterday and he put it very well: That both ends of the club should be free to move as in all golf strokes.

Technical innovations such as trampoline faces don't alter the way the game is played, just the outcome of the stroke. The anchored putter turns putting into something more like a snooker shot thann a golf shot, that's why it had to go.

Tiger also mentioned Langer who overcame the yips by using a broom handled putter, but with both ends free. He was perfectly happy that it could continue to be used that way.

stockdam

rrpc wrote: »

The yips are part of the game of golf. Players have to overcome them the same as they do shanks or slices or hooks or just plain headspace.

Not all is mental for all people. Deterioration of the muscle and nervous system can cause it especially in older people...........you may be glad of any help you can to enjoy the game when you are retired.

rrpc wrote: »

I heard Tiger Woods talking about it yesterday and he put it very well: That both ends of the club should be free to move as in all golf strokes.

Sorry but I don't buy this. If it gave people an advantage then Woods would have been jumping on the bandwagon. If a new ball came along that helped then he'd be using it etc. It's a business and he would use any advantage he could within the laws of the game.

Like the claw grip it works for some but not for all. If there was one "best" putting method then all professionals would be using it.

rrpc

stockdam wrote: »

Not all is mental for all people. Deterioration of the muscle and nervous system can cause it especially in older people...........you may be glad of any help you can to enjoy the game when you are retired.

And that wouldn't affect any other stroke you play? This to me is a red herring, if your muscles or nervous system are deteriorated to the extent that you can't putt with a regular putter, you can't do much else either. Anyway, all the other doddery players I'll be playing with will be in the same boat

Sorry but I don't buy this. If it gave people an advantage then Woods would have been jumping on the bandwagon. If a new ball came along that helped then he'd be using it etc. It's a business and he would use any advantage he could within the laws of the game.

This one has been trotted out by the proponents of the anchored putter since the writing appeared on the wall. I'm not going to speak for Woods since he's spoken for himself and said he doesn't agree with using it, but McIroy also said in a tweet that he doesn't use it because he doesn't need it. There's also a danger with taking up a new putting method which has already attracted controversy and being forced to move back when or if it gets banned. The percentage approach is to avoid it if you don't feel you need it.

Webb Simpson changed to the belly putter in 2004 and said that it made him more consistent even while trying to argue that it wasn't an advantage: "I just became a more consistent putter. I don't get hot quite as much, I don't get cold quite as much".

Changing a ball does not affect the way you play the game, I already pointed this out wrt the trampoline faced drivers.

Like the claw grip it works for some but not for all. If there was one "best" putting method then all professionals would be using it.

There's a big difference between the method you use with a regular putting stroke and an anchored putting stroke.

stockdam

rrpc wrote: »

And that wouldn't affect any other stroke you play? This to me is a red herring, if your muscles or nervous system are deteriorated to the extent that you can't putt with a regular putter, you can't do much else either. Anyway, all the other doddery players I'll be playing with will be in the same boat

That's not the way it works. Neural deterioration affects the smaller movements and the finer motor skills. That's why a person afflicted can drive or walk but cannot hold a cup of tea steady or grasp a small object.

That will show up much more in putting which uses a light grip and small movements with no real body movement. The longer game relies more on turning and large movement.

Anyway that's not an issue that affects the majority but it is something that should be considered in the amateur game. I'd like to see as much help as possible to those who suffer from physical ailments especially the elderly.

rrpc wrote: »

..........McIroy also said in a tweet that he doesn't use it because he doesn't need it. There's also a danger with taking up a new putting method which has already attracted controversy and being forced to move back when or if it gets banned. The percentage approach is to avoid it if you don't feel you need it.

Which is exactly the point. The majority of professionals do not see any advantage. If they did then they would jump on the bandwagon.........I don't think any are that noble that they would let their game suffer for many years in the hope that anchoring will be banned........they'd be playing on the trilby tour if they did that.

The debate became more prominent after Els won the Open. Hmm.......what were his putting stats? He was joint 71st of the 83 players who made the cut. Adam Scott who missed out by one shot was only two putts better than Els. So it was hardly Els' putting that won him the Open.

Yes Els' putting has improved but he's at the age where he needs some help; it doesn't make him the best putter in the world but it does stop him being at a huge disadvantage.

rrpc wrote: »

Changing a ball does not affect the way you play the game, I already pointed this out wrt the trampoline faced drivers.

Oh but it does as well as the advantages gained with the "new" drivers. I'd like to see how you would fair with 1970s balls and clubs. All pros have dropped their older equipment because it would be such a disadvantage to use it.........none of them clung on in the hope that the new balls etc would be banned.


Personally I don't really care in one way as I don't use anything other than a standard length putter but I also do not want to see the anchored putting style banned as it prolongs the career of some of the older pros.

GreeBo

stockdam wrote: »

Yes Els' putting has improved but he's at the age where he needs some help; it doesn't make him the best putter in the world but it does stop him being at a huge disadvantage.

So clearly you think that it does give an advantage? Whether or not thats an unfair advantage or not I guess is the question.

I just think it should be banned because its not a golf stroke.

rrpc

stockdam wrote: »

Anyway that's not an issue that affects the majority but it is something that should be considered in the amateur game. I'd like to see as much help as possible to those who suffer from physical ailments especially the elderly.

And like trampoline drivers, there's no problem using these things outside competition. So as long as me and my coterie of doddering old duffers agree that we can belly putt in our weekly game of golf, there's no problem.

Which is exactly the point. The majority of professionals do not see any advantage. If they did then they would jump on the bandwagon.........I don't think any are that noble that they would let their game suffer for many years in the hope that anchoring will be banned........they'd be playing on the trilby tour if they did that.

It's actually not the point. These guys don't need to use it because their putting is so good. Changing things could only bring about at the very least an interim disimprovement until the new stroke was assimilated. And why would they do it? Luke Donald is number 3 on the PGA tour in strokes gained putting, Tiger Woods is 35th and McIroy is 82nd.

Of the notable anchored putter users, Carl Petterson is 21st, Keegan Bradley 27th and Webb Simpson 54th. Apparently one third of the starters in the PGA championship were using anchored putters, which gives the lie to the contention that it's not an advantage and not many are using them.

The debate became more prominent after Els won the Open. Hmm.......what were his putting stats? He was joint 71st of the 83 players who made the cut. Adam Scott who missed out by one shot was only two putts better than Els. So it was hardly Els' putting that won him the Open.

Yes Els' putting has improved but he's at the age where he needs some help; it doesn't make him the best putter in the world but it does stop him being at a huge disadvantage.

Yet Els and Adam Scott are ahead of Graeme McDowell in the PGA tour putts gained rankings, so they're not that bad.

Oh but it does as well as the advantages gained with the "new" drivers. I'd like to see how you would fair with 1970s balls and clubs. All pros have dropped their older equipment because it would be such a disadvantage to use it.........none of them clung on in the hope that the new balls etc would be banned.

I keep saying this and you keep ignoring it. Having a club or a ball that drives farther does not intrinsically change the way you play your stroke. You still swing and strike the ball the same way.

PARlance

I'm picturing Ernie in his retirement home right now, rocking back and fort, dreul dripping down his chin....

Elite sport should be played by elite athletes!
It's nice to be nice and all that but the arguement that we should assist players whose health deteriorates is a slippery slope...

What about the 90 year old ex pro that is in a wheel chair?
Can we attach a mechanical device to wheel chair so this device will recreate his swing of old for him?

If we're being nice, then surely it's better to let an old pro, with 30-40years of tournament earnings, fall into the seniors tour (if his standard falls below what is requires to compete at highest level) and let him be replaced by a younger pro who is trying to earn his living.

stockdam

rrpc wrote: »

I keep saying this and you keep ignoring it. Having a club or a ball that drives farther does not intrinsically change the way you play your stroke. You still swing and strike the ball the same way.

And you keep on missing the point. I pointed out that anything that gives a clear advantage will be adopted by all pros like a new ball etc.

That hasn't happened for the anchored putting stroke. If it was a better stroke then all pros would be using it.

It's a different way to putt and the statistics do not indicate that it is better. it helps some people but not others.

This is not the biggest problem in golf........the fact that tees are moved back and back is where the problem is as many good courses are becoming a drive and a flick for a lot of players.

rrpc

stockdam wrote: »

And you keep on missing the point. I pointed out that anything that gives a clear advantage will be adopted by all pros like a new ball etc.

Without changing anything about their stroke or playing style. That's the point. I've already said this.

That hasn't happened for the anchored putting stroke. If it was a better stroke then all pros would be using it.

It's a different way to putt and the statistics do not indicate that it is better. it helps some people but not others.

The statistics are that it's increasing in use amongst pros from something less than 3% to almost one third of the field at the PGA championships. Carl Petterson, Keegan Bradley and Webb Simpson are all higher in the strokes gained from putting stats than the world number one. Many pros have come out and said that it's a definite advantage and want it banned. Padraig Harrington being one of the more outspoken critics of it. Are you saying he's not using one because he actually believes the opposite of what he's saying?

This is not the biggest problem in golf........the fact that tees are moved back and back is where the problem is as many good courses are becoming a drive and a flick for a lot of players.

That's a different matter and nothing to do with this discussion.

Almaviva

There seems to be a mixing of two clearly different arguments against the long putters going on here:

1) the long putter style is aesthetically, physically, technically, and in tradition, not what is considered a golf stroke.

2) the long putter gives an advantage to some or all golfers.

Each point can be argued on its own and one or both are used to make the case for and against by different people. But dont counter one with the other.

Observations:
- It is clear that R&A/USGA only acted due to the rising profile of them in the hands of elite golfers or major winners. We have seen them in use for 20(?) years and no action was taken. Some golfers and officials would have objected to them, but there was no concerted campaign or movement for their banning.

- the putting stroke has already been regulated in the direction of the conventional stroke: no mallets, no croquet style, no snooker cue. The intention was clear - a putt is a stroke made as 99.9% of golfers traditionally make it. I can only guess that there was no previous action due to the long putter being seen as only the last resort of the desperate whose golf is on the wane (from whatever original level), were still a very rare exception despite widespread knowledge of them, and the stroke was a very close relation to the standard stroke and so not as clear cut as the croquet/snooker or wilder variants.

- but the more recent high profile of world class golfers in their prime choosing them and winning with them raised them from a niche curiosity of the senior golfer to at least opening the question of whether or not they offer an advantage.

- whether they offer an advantage we will never know for sure. And it really doesnt matter. But the possibility that they are, is now a clear question. World class golfers winning majors raised the question that they possibly could be. And that question alone, meant that they could no longer be indulged. Regulation to nudge the allowable swings back towards the conventional one had to be implemented.
Debating whether they are an advantage, of advantage to some only, or were available to all etc are irrelevant.

In short, in the past, the stroke had strayed beyond what many were comfortable with, but could be tolerated. Its success and increasing profile has now prompted the authorities to draw a line where they would like it to have been anyway.