But in the brave new world of men’s professional golf, nothing is that simple anymore.

Cam Smith’s next-day penalty in Memphis at the weekend would have been great social media fodder a couple of years ago with opinions on all sides about who did what and when.

Now, there is an added element of why.

What should have been a lively debate about the complexity of the rules instead morphed into a series of conspiracy theories connecting the ruling and subsequent penalty to rumours Smith is defecting to the rival LIV Tour.

Which is a shame on many levels (not the least being the possibility that the accusation has some truth) because there are some genuinely interesting issues raised by what happened.

For those who missed it, Smith took a drop from a water hazard (annoyingly known as a ‘penalty area’ these days) on the par-3 4th hole during Saturday’s third round.

The rules incident involving Lexi Thompson at the 2017 ANA Inspiration was supposed to end rules controversies. PHOTO: David Cannon/Getty Images.

It was a straightforward situation, the sort any professional golfer might encounter dozens of times over the course of a career.

The rules clearly state that when taking relief in such a situation the player must take ‘complete relief’.

That is, when the drop is taken the ball must lie completely outside the hazard, including any lines marking the boundary of said hazard.

When Smith dropped on Saturday his ball came to rest on the red line marking the hazard, quite clearly not ‘complete relief’.

But here is where it gets interesting. In the aftermath of perhaps the greatest rules debacle of them all (when Lexi Thompson was reported by a TV viewer for an infraction the previous day and penalised four strokes on the 12th hole Sunday at a major), authorities said they had solved the problem.

"The Smith ruling, right or wrong, has only added fuel to the fire, a problem magnified by the fact it was completely avoidable. Another black eye for the game at a time when it can least afford it." - Rod Morri.

No longer would a call-in from a member of the public be investigated because tournament rules staff would instead be assigned to watch the broadcast and act on any potential issues.

In the Smith case, PGA Tour officials admitted they saw the drop on TV and thought the ball was close to the line. But according to PGA Tour Chief rules referee Gary Young:

“We felt very comfortable at the time that he (Smith) was familiar with the rule, and … it was such a quick view that we had at that time, we decided it wasn’t worth following up on.”

Turns out, that was a big mistake. Having not bothered to ask Smith about the incident before he signed his card on the Saturday they instead asked him Sunday morning when he readily admitted the ball was touching the line.

To be clear, Smith is at fault here for not knowing the rule and he accepted the two penalty strokes without argument.

But the Tour is also at fault, perhaps in an even worse way, for their poor handling of the situation.

What is the point of rules officials watching the broadcast if they fail to act on situations they later admit had some kind of question mark hanging over them?

It’s not as though there would have been any difficulty asking Smith the question at the end of the third round. As happened the next day, he would have readily admitted he (unknowingly) breached the rule.

It’s not only a bad look for the Tour but suggests a level of incompetence or system failure that is difficult to comprehend. In that scenario, conspiracy theories thrive.

It’s difficult to remember a time when golf has felt as openly divided and bitter as it does right now and for all who love the game that is more than just disappointing, it’s painful.

The Smith ruling, right or wrong, has only added fuel to the fire, a problem magnified by the fact it was completely avoidable.

Another black eye for the game at a time when it can least afford it.