[Dan King]

Tomorrow the game will be even slower than it is today.

At the Samsung World Championship Michelle Wie took a drop for an unplayable lie, saved par and moved on. More than 24 hours later, rules officials came to where she took the drop, and measuring with string, determined that she was 18 inches closer to the hole. She was Dq'd and lost +$50k.

They had to use string since they could not determine it was closer visually. Had she called a rules official to watch her drop there is a reasonable chance she would have been able to drop in the same place (a good chance the rules official wouldn't have used string to determine if she was closer) and would be cashing a check for $50k.

In the future any golfer in any tournament would be a fool to proceed with any drop if they can call a rules official to give it the proper blessing. You can be sure Wie has learned her first professional lesson.

Dan King

I was pretty happy out there with what I did. If I did it again I would still do that because it looked right to me. But I learned my lesson, I'm going to call a rule official every single time.
 --Michelle Wie (on being DQ'd for dropping closer to the hole for an unplayable in the third round of the Samsung World Championship

[Ken Fry]

I've just been reading about Wie's DQ this morning.  Bamberger waits until Sunday to say something?  It couldn't have been bothering him that much.  And string is used to measure her drop?  I officiate tournaments and while I agree rules are rules, this is over the top.  In the heat of a tournament, a player will do the best possible to drop properly.  The perils of being under the microscope much like Tiger always is, now Wie will be.

Ken

[Mike_Sweeney]

The problem with these arm chair rulings is it creates inequity in the playing field. Obviously Michelle Wie and Annika have all the cameras and in this case sports writers watching them. The players in the back of the pack do not have thousands and millions of rules officials on TV watching them. The Tour needs to set up a system where the Tour official make the call on the spot, and the rest of us live with it, just like in every sport where bad calls by officials are part of the game.

[RDecker]

Shouldn't the official from saturday be the one who was fined. Wie is out there because of playing ability the official is out there because of rules know how. Yet another case of golf's governing bodies/leaders screwing things up.

[noonan]

Bullchit!

All the dykes on spikes are jealous of the contracts.

This is HAZING!

[Mike_Sweeney]

Shouldn't the official from saturday be the one who was fined. Wie is out there because of playing ability the official is out there because of rules know how. Yet another case of golf's governing bodies/leaders screwing things up.

According to the NY Times story, she did not ask for a rules official. She made the drop on her own. Thus the question is, should the Tour(s) take responsibility for all rulings and force the player to call in a rules official?

I would say yes, but this leads to Dan's premise of the 8 hour round. I believe that you have to take the TV viewers and sports writers out of the equation no matter what.

[Brent Hutto]

Michelle Wie says she learned a valuable lesson about playing at the professional level. Yes, she did. The lesson is You play way too fast, little girl. Slow down and don't ever hit a shot until everyone within shouting distance has checked, double checked and second-guessed every aspect of the situation. Start playing like a grownup...s-l-o-w-l-y.

The proper response when a TV viewer phones in a Rules complaint is to thank them very much for their input, hang up the phone and forget about it. Giving any standing to this kind of long distance buttinski was stupid in this case and it is stupid every other time it affects the outcome of a golf tournament. I've never understood why this sort of thing is given any credence at all.

If you pace it off and can't tell that it was no closer to the hole, how the hell was she supposed to tell? Should she call an official and ask him to bring string? What if it's 350 yards from the hole? Are you supposed to fly in a surveyor to certify that it's not a single inch closer to the hole?

I'm tempting to say it's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard of but that wouldn't be true. There doesn't a year go by when you don't hear of some stupidity like this. Heaven help us when the American obsessions of TV, amateur lawyering, sports and second-guessing all converge on some poor schmuck trying to play in a golf tournament.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Under the Rules,she could have asked her fellow competitor to observe the drop without calling a Rules official. She didn't.

[rgkeller]

Wie and her caddy were pushing the envelope with the spot they chose for the drop in order to give her an unobstructed swing. Even Wie knew it was close because she redropped when the first drop bounced toward the hole.

BTW, it appeared to me that the second drop was illegal because Wie had her arm below shoulder height.

She tried to take advantage.

[JohnV]

And string is used to measure her drop?

All rules officials carry string of some kind.  It is used both to measure distances and run a line between two OB stakes to see if a ball is in bounds.  Many of us carry carpenter's chalk lines on reels that can be rewound quickly.

Brent, you should really know the facts before you condemn a television viewer.  The information came from a reporter who was at the event (who should have said something on Saturday before the cards were turned in).  Television had nothing to do with it other than providing an inconclusive picture.

As for the distance, once the report was made, the exact distance had to be determined and it was found that she dropped closer to the hole.

She should call an official who will probably do what she did, estimate it.  But, he probably will do err on the safe side and even if he gets it wrong, she would be absolved from a penalty.  Same for a 350 yard distance.  Estimate it but always err on the safe side (or perhaps this is a place for those laser rangerfinders that some here hate so much.)  

It appears to me that Michelle already plays too slow.  She had better pick it up somewhat or she will have more problems with the LPGA staff who don't tolerate slow play.

Michelle made a mistake, but the person who deserves the blame is Michael Bamberger of Sports Illustrated who waited until Sunday to report the incident.  I was a spectator at an LPGA event where I saw a player violate a rule and I spoke to an official while the player was still on the course.  She was penalized but at least she wasn't DQ'ed.

[Craig Sweet]

She had her caddy standing right there...a vetern caddy. If I recall the NBC commentator said, "now she'll place the ball because she can't get a drop that is further from the green"....or something like that....

[Sean_A]

I must admit that I am often confused by dropping no closer to the hole.  Often, it is difficult to tell.  It is especially hard on GUR/animal scrapes/young trees etc. drops.  You know, the nearest point of relief no closer to the hole.  

I have seen guys standing around rabbit turds arguing about a few inches.  I usually just go with what the other guy says.  In many ways it easier just to tell the guy he can't have a drop and hit the bloody ball.

Mike & Brent are right.  There should be no such thing as a next day ruling for these matters unless for some odd reason the player does not consult with his playing partner and then takes a bad drop.  I reckon if these two/three/four are satisfied with the drop, a ruling has been made.  

It is true that all could be wrong about the drop, but I find it difficult to believe that a player will gain an advantage by a bad drop and all his playing partners will have okayed it.  If it transpires that an advantage was obviously gained and reported before the signing of cards, then fair enough, penalize the player taking the bad drop.  Otherwise, it is just one of those things.  The player has signed the card in good faith and with playing partners as witnesses.  There are always going to be mistakes in rulings, no matter who makes the ruling.  It is human to err.  But I spose this opens up the debate about signing to wrong scores.  The DeVincenzo type, signing to a higher score than actually scored.  Well, I know where I stand on this issue.  DeVincenzo was robbed because the spirit of the game was not allowed to shine through.  

Golf is a simple game, the USGA and R&A should keep it simple.  

Ciao

Sean

[Craig Sweet]

I was just watching her meeting with the press after the DQ...pretty tough thing for a 16 year old...

It looks like she estimated how far the bush was from the pin and then moved over and dropped the ball at what she thought was an equal or greater distance from the pin...thus the "triangle" she talked about in the Saturday pres conference.  

Without a sting to measure exactly, it's always a guess...and probably results in an "illegal" drop more often than people are willing to admit.

[JohnV]

I must admit that I am often confused by dropping no closer to the hole.  Often, it is difficult to tell.  It is especially hard on GUR/animal scrapes/young trees etc. drops.  You know, the nearest point of relief no closer to the hole.

Sean, It is always best to err on the safe side.  Too many people want to get that last half inch and that is where they get in trouble.  Same thing with people who go to the front of the teeing ground as if it is going to matter on a 550 yard par 5.  Tee it up a couple of inches behind the marker.  Figure out what you think is nearer the hole and then drop a few inches behind that and you probably will always be safe.  

Mike & Brent are right.  There should be no such thing as a next day ruling for these matters unless for some odd reason the player does not consult with his playing partner and then takes a bad drop.  I reckon if these two/three/four are satisfied with the drop, a ruling has been made.  

The last person I would assume has enough rules knowledge to make a good ruling is another player on the PGA or LPGA tour.

But I spose this opens up the debate about signing to wrong scores.  The DeVincenzo type, signing to a higher score than actually scored.  Well, I know where I stand on this issue.  DeVincenzo was robbed because the spirit of the game was not allowed to shine through.  

Golf is a simple game, the USGA and R&A should keep it simple.  

Speaking of scoring, there are many who have argued that a player shouldn't have to keep score for another one and the player shouldn't have to make sure all is correct because there are walking scorers and plenty of others who "know" what the player shot.  On the final hole yesterday, Annika took an unplayable, the walking scorer didn't see it.  She reported that Annika made a bogey and that went out to the world.  Annika knew she made a double and signed for it so a correction was later made on the electronic scoring.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Michelle made a mistake, but the person who deserves the blame is Michael Bamberger of Sports Illustrated who waited until Sunday to report the incident.  I was a spectator at an LPGA event where I saw a player violate a rule and I spoke to an official while the player was still on the course.  She was penalized but at least she wasn't DQ'ed.

John,

I don't think either of you should have any input into either event. Bamberger may or may not have been trying to create a story. You may or may not have been trying to get a specific competitor disqualified. The LPGA and Tours need to take away these outside inputs. They have no ability to qualify yours or Bamberger's knowledge of the rules. The fact that you were both correct is not the issue, it is having inconsistent outside influences shape outcomes of tournaments.

Are referees at the Super Bowl going to listen to a college referee sitting in the endzone with a New England Patriots jersey on?

PS. I know you were not trying anything, it is just an example put forth by yourself.

[rgkeller]

For the conspiracy theorists out there...

Was this all a set-up so that her legend grows right from day one?

Let me get back to writing my mystery novel.....

No, this is a case of a golfer trying to push the rules to gain advantage over the field who got caught and properly penalized.

[Ken Fry]

And string is used to measure her drop?

All rules officials carry string of some kind.  It is used both to measure distances and run a line between two OB stakes to see if a ball is in bounds.  Many of us carry carpenter's chalk lines on reels that can be rewound quickly.

John,

I have string, a stopwatch, rules book, etc. in my bag too.  I was using the fact that they needed string to determine her distance as a little over the top.  She was inches, not yards.

As I mentioned, rules need to be followed but common sense also plays a roll.

Ken

[JohnV]

John,

I don't think either of you should have any input into either event. Bamberger may or may not have been trying to create a story. You may or may not have been trying to get a specific competitor disqualified. The LPGA and Tours need to take away these outside inputs. They have no ability to qualify yours or Bamberger's knowledge of the rules. The fact that you were both correct is not the issue, it is having inconsistent outside influences shape outcomes of tournaments.

Are referees at the Super Bowl going to listen to a college referee sitting in the endzone with a New England Patriots jersey on?

PS. I know you were not trying anything, it is just an example put forth by yourself.

Unlike all other sports, there are not officials with every group watching everything.  Players are very good at policing themselves (see Kevin Stadler yesterday), but there are times that they get the rules wrong or cheat (I'm not accusing anyone).  At times like witnesses of all sorts are the only way that things can be caught.

I certainly don't believe that anyone should have the right to call a penalty on a player, but I do believe that they have the right to report what they saw to an official and let the official determine the facts.  It should be pointed out that in most of the cases where things are reported there is no penalty assessed, either because nothing was done that was wrong or the facts were not there to support a penalty.  Officials try very hard not to penalize players, but when things are reported to them, they are duty-bound to investigate them.

Where would you draw the line?  Can a player who is in the same group report a violation he thought he saw?  Can a player who is in the competition but playing in another group?  Can either of those players do it after the round is over and the cards returned (like the incident with Marco Dawson and Esteban Toledo at Disney last year)?  Can the player, himself, report the violation the next day when he realizes that might have done something wrong (ala Jeff Sluman at Bay Hill a couple of years ago)?  Can an official who overhears a player telling someone else about an incident that happened to him investigate it?

The rules of golf have a statue of limitations for penalties that a player was not aware of and it is the end of the competition.  Until then, all reports are investigated.

I have no problem with that being the limit, as I feel that getting it right is better than not and if we can do that we should.  As I said above, the only time I have a problem is when someone waits until our only option is disqualification to tell us about something they saw.

[Jerry Kluger]

I'm glad for TV that you guys have the patience to watch Wie play but not me.  She is so slow that it is painful. You watch kids play sports and they can't wait for their turn to play but not so in golf and it is getting worse.  They are trying to emulate the tour players and it is disgusting to watch and Wie is not helping the situation. Is this what Ledbetter teaches at his school?  

[Brent Hutto]

...She is so slow that it is painful. You watch kids play sports and they can't wait for their turn to play but not so in golf and it is getting worse....Is this what Ledbetter teaches at his school?  

I rather suspect so. Everyone teaches this style of careful, when in doubt start over, consider all the factors golf. It's a form of tragedy of the commons. The fact of the matter is that for an individual player there may be an advantage to all these preshot rituals and double-checks and it is certainly true that if you step up to the ball and aren't lined up correctly you need to fix it instead of going ahead and making a bad swing. I say "may be" because most of those rituals are designed to avoid errors or problems that ought to be exceedingly rare in a good player. And that's the problem.

So the result of all this is that one of the skills you need to be a top-level player nowadays is the ability to tolerate extremely slow play by the entire field. If your personal sense of pace and patience can't be adjusted to the glacial pace of the field you get selected right out of the pool of good players, starting right in high school and junior golf. So they learn to ignore everyone else's slow way of playing and they expect everyone else to ignore their time wasting and the entire game is slowly ruined.

I don't see any way out of it. There is absolutely zero incentive for a golfer to streamline his or her rituals when everyone else is taking all day. The only incentive they perceive is that since you're going to be out there all day anyhow you darned sure better be careful to dot every i and cross every t before swinging your own club. The game can no longer be played at the highest levels with any sense of flow or pace or continous movement. If that's how you need to play in order to perform your best you've got a big handicap in trying to take your game to an AJGA or professional tournament.

[ForkaB]

...She is so slow that it is painful. You watch kids play sports and they can't wait for their turn to play but not so in golf and it is getting worse....Is this what Ledbetter teaches at his school?  

So the result of all this is that one of the skills you need to be a top-level player nowadays is the ability to tolerate extremely slow play by the entire field.

Just watch any of the pros, particularly the young ones, and they look as if they are on Prozac, or maybe Ritalin......

.......or, as Dr. McCoy used to say:

"It's golf, Spock, but not as WE know it!"

[TEPaul]

There're some good points made on this thread.

Should the Rules of Golf allow this kind of spectator information regarding the outcome of rulings? That's a very good question. Do the Rules of Golf allow this kind of spectator information to be considered now? Yes, obviously they do as we've seen for some years now probably beginning with the infamous "Stadler ruling" (knelling on a towel only to be discovered later as a result of a TV spectator after the fact).

The way the actual Rules work right now they do allow spectator information to have an influence on the outcome of some of these rulings, probably as a result of Decision 6-6d/5 that's been around as long as I can remember. That decision has to do with the allowance of consideration of spectator information on a mistake in scoring. A part of the answer to the question in that decision about spectator information states (the probably now ominous) "....and also take into account the testimony of other witnesses."

This rather old decision seems to contemplate information on strokes taken before a card is signed (although it doesn't exactly say that).

Why do the Rules allow such information from spectators? Probably because the Rules and the Committee are only trying to determine exactly what the "facts" were.

But obviously now that some of this information is coming in after the fact (after a card has been signed) more ominious results are occuring---eg disqualification. The reason for that is simply that a player in stroke play is responsible for the correctness of his hole scores and also ignorance of how to apply the rules correctly is no excuse for a rules violation (Dec. 33-7/4.5) even if he was not aware of a rules violation.

Also under Rule 34-1b the procedure for the "close of competition" are spelled out. Before the "close of competition" facts can still be considered by the "Committee".

Perhaps this should be changed somewhat in light of witnesses (spectators) reporting these facts "after the fact" (after a competitor has "officially" signed his card).

Someone on here suggested that all groups should have a rules official with them and all rules situations should be dealt with by rules officials. In golf that is a virtual impossiblity, even in high level golf. I sure hope tournament golf on any level has to come to that.

Matter of fact, the fact that that is a virtual impossibiliy is part of the entire philosophy of golf's idea of "equity" that "like situations shall be treated alike". The reason for that is frankly because there never can be a referee to monitor every single group in golf and as Richard Tufts explained (golf's own version of "equity");

"The only practical answer, therefore, is to disregard the attendant circumstances and deal with similar situations in the same way."

Tufts goes on to say (in how a player should look at golf's version of "equity");

"The approach is not whether "this particular situation in unfair to me", but rather whether "others in a similar situation and I in mine are treated alike under the Rules"".

As to what Dan King says about 8 hour rounds if players keep calling on rules officials to basically inure themselves from incorrect or faulty rulings (Dec. 34-3/3), I agree that's a very potentially ominous situation on Tour today (or anywhere else). Obviously smart tour players understand this wrinkle and technique of how to protect themselves from potential penalty from proceeding under an incorrect ruling.

It seems that one of the Tours good guys, Ernie Els, has figured out how to almost make a science or procedure out of this technique.        

   

[Jerry Kluger]

TEP: It was suggested that you should ask your playing partner if you are proceeding correctly under the rules and if he/she agrees with your actions and you are both wrong you are not penalized - is that correct?

The suggestion of asking for an official in all circumstances is outrageous and will really ruin the game.  I was watching a PGA tour event on a Thursday a couple of years ago and Rich Beem hit one in the trees and had a sprinkler box perhaps 10 feet in front of him on the line toward the pin.  He waited for a rules official so he could get line of sight relief which he clearly knew he wasn't entitled to and was told so immediately by the rules official so he wasted 10 minutes and then let out a few expletives which he should have been fined for.  

[Mike Benham]

This was a small field, 10 twosomes, why wasn't there a rules official assigned to each group from the first round on?

[Brent Hutto]

Rich,

It's not Prozac, it's a behavioral technique that anyone can learn. If the payoff is big enough, anyone except those with pathological issues (e.g. John Daly) can learn how to slow down their physiology, distract their mind, refuse to give in to impatience or urgency and go about their business in that sort of mildly distracted, zoned-out manner that you're describing. Unless you are naturally slow and laid back it's hard work but when the payday is potentially a million dollar winner's check you deal with it the same as you would a rainy day or a difficult course. It's almost a form of acting except you're not trying to fool an audience, you're trying to fool your body and mind into believing you're having a good time when in fact it's more like water torture.

Tom,

You are dead on with Ernie Els. I was going to bring him up in this thread myself. He almost never proceeds with anything but a trivial procedure without requesting a Rules official's presence. If he doesn't like a ruling he will always escalate up the chain of officials as far as humanly possible. He will request any drop that there's even a remote chance of getting. I must admit I somewhat hold that against him as the only way in which he's less than admirable on the golf course. That's unfair of me, of course, since in fact he has simply perfected a skill that's just important at his level as being able to hit a high, soft draw to a front left pin.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()