[HungryBear]

That's just it. If the rule had said "all sandy areas are considered bunkers", I'd be with you 100%.

Given the area was completely covered with people, there were no rakes, and the rule only talked about 'areas designed as bunkers', I just don't see a clear way players could determine what was and wasn't considered a bunker.

No markers, no rakes, a large crowd, foot prints.

And a young player trying to focus and win after a tough finish in the U.S. Open.

How many of those who watched it looked at his lie and said to themselves "hey, he's in a bunker"?

Not many I'd bet, since you couldn't see his surroundings much with all the people.

What would a reasonable person assume based on what you saw on tv before he finished 18 and learned about the ruling?

I understand the rule, and I understand the ruling, but I don't think it was reasonable at all and I think Dustin got screwed.

But for the fact that he directed a "spectator(s)" to block the sun, Which is another rule he clearly violated , and was not called on it. I MIGHT agree some. But it evened out or worked to his advantage.

The Bear