Jon Rahm, Hole 18, and the “Free Drop” That Broke Golf Twitter: What Really Happened in Adelaide

The scene: one bad swing, one grandstand, and an eagle that felt illegal

Golf fans love a miracle—right up until the miracle comes with a rules official.

On the 18th at LIV Golf Adelaide, Jon Rahm hit a drive that wasn’t just “a little left.” It was dead left—so far left it ended up on the 10th teeing area, tangled up in the kind of tree trouble that usually turns “closing birdie chance” into “please just make par and get out of here.”

Then the plot twist: Rahm didn’t have a clean shot because agrandstand was sitting right where his low, punchy escape needed to go. He called for relief, got it, dropped in a spot that looked suspiciously perfect, and then—because golf has a sense of humor—holed a wedge for eagle from about 60+ meters to tie Bryson DeChambeau.

If you were watching live, you probably had the same expression Bryson did: Wait… he can do that?

What actually happened (and why the internet lost it)

Here’s the part that matters: Rahm didn’t ask for relief because he didn’t like his lie. He asked for relief because an obstruction (the grandstand) interfered with the shot he was entitled to attempt.

According to reporting from Ten Golf, Rahm’s ball finished on the 10th tee in nearly the same area as the day before—meaning he already knew the situation and the relief option. The grandstand to the left of 18 blocked the line for the only “natural” recovery shot: a low one toward the green or bunker. Rahm requested relief for an obstruction and was granted it.

That’s why it felt like a cheat code: the worse the miss, the more likely the grandstand becomes “in play,” and suddenly a disaster drive turns into a clean wedge number.

The rule, in detail: when you get free relief (and when you don’t)

Let’s talk about the rule without the fluff.

1) What kind of relief was this?

This is relief from an obstruction, specifically what pros often call TIO: Temporary Immovable Obstruction(grandstands, scoreboards, hospitality structures).

TIO relief is typically handled via a Local Rule used in pro events. It’s designed because tournaments build temporary structures that aren’t part of the course’s normal design.

2) What counts as “interference”?

Under standard obstruction relief principles, you get free relief when the obstruction interferes with:

TIO Local Rules can also provide relief for line of playinterference in certain situations (this is the part that varies by event and is why fans get confused).

In Rahm’s case, the argument wasn’t “my feet are on the grandstand.” It was essentially: the grandstand blocks the shot I’m trying to play.

3) The procedure: “nearest point of complete relief” (aka the least sexy phrase in sports)

When free relief is granted, the player must find the Nearest Point of Complete Relief (NPCR).

Important: Nearest doesn’t mean “best.” It means the closest spot where the obstruction no longer interferes with the lie/stance/swing (or line, if the Local Rule allows it).

Then the player drops within the relief area:

If the ball rolls outside the relief area after the drop, the player must re-drop (and then place if it won’t stay).

4) The “reasonable shot” test (where controversies are born)

Relief isn’t supposed to reward fantasy golf.

If the only way the obstruction “interferes” is because the player is claiming a clearly unreasonable stance or shot, officials can deny relief.

So the key question in any controversy is:

Based on Ten Golf’s description, it was: surrounded by trees, low shot is the natural play.

So was it legal?

From what’s described: yes—Rahm used the rules exactly as they’re written and exactly as they’re applied in pro events.

Even Bryson basically admitted the same thing after the initial shock:

That’s the tell. Players don’t usually “move on” when they think someone just stole a tournament.

The real villain: not Rahm, not the ref—the setup

If you want a spicy take that’s still fair, it’s this:

The course setup created a bailout lane for a bad drive.

On a short par-4 where guys are sending driver full throttle, placing grandstands where they can block recovery lines makes it more likely that:

Ten Golf argues the same: the mistake was putting grandstands in a position where a wild tee shot can be rewarded with a clean drop.

That’s not Rahm “manufacturing” anything. That’s Rahm being the only guy calm enough to see the loophole in real time.

Why the eagle still matters (and why the outrage is a little lazy)

Here’s what gets lost in the “free drop” discourse:

Even if you hand someone a perfect wedge number, you don’t hand them a hole-out eagle.

Rahm still had to:

That’s not rules. That’s skill.

The relief created the opportunity. The eagle created the moment.

Petey Par’s verdict

If you’re mad at Rahm, you’re mad at the wrong thing.

Rahm did what elite competitors do: he knew the rules, stayed cool, and took the best option available. The official did what officials do: applied the Local Rule.

The only thing that deserves side-eye is the tournament build.

Because golf is already hard enough without turning “hit it into the trees” into “congrats, here’s a clean wedge and a hero finish.”

And if you’re wondering whether Rahm feels guilty?

He basically said the quiet part out loud: he saw it happen and stayed calm because he already knew he was getting relief.

That’s not controversy. That’s preparation.