Furrowing A Failure Or Success?

Despite the negative player comments and the heated debate that CBS did their best to pretend wasn't happening by actually showing player interviews (imagine a NASCAR or NFL telecast running so timidly from an interesting controversy), it seems that the bunker furrowing at Muirfield Village brought attention to the question of whether a bunker should be a hazard.

It would also seem that most everyone who didn't vote on a rake spec while serving on the Tour policy board believes bunkers are too good and that this was a great start to restoring the hazard element.

It would also seem that furrowing wasn't the perfect way to go about it,  since it appeared fairway bunkers were treated different than greenside bunkers and there was a debate about which direction to rake in, the depth, the motivation, etc...

And there are also questions about how this little experiment will influence Green Committees across the land.

Finally, the excessive rough that has overtaken the sport would seem to make the concept seem more "unfair" than it really is.

My verdict: it was delightful to see bunkers mean something again. It was even more fun hear select players who have pushed a $elfish agenda on the distance issue--the primary culprit behind all of this setup madness--whine over something that appeared in part because of deregulation.

Your verdict?