Bamberger/Wei

[Rick Shefchik]

Although, I'm sure Bamberger will be very popular with the players in the press tent from here on

Forget the press tent, I bet the players will be more upset if he is following their group !!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which gets us back to the question of what Bamberger's motivations are. He's got to be savvy enough to know he wasn't going to be popular with anyone after turning in Wie the following day. Even his editors probably didn't want the attention.

We'll never know why he belatedly became an informer. In my view, he needed to make up his mind what to do before he left the golf course Saturday, and then live with it. He chose to do something else -- and he's now something of a pariah.

Poetic justice, perhaps, but not at all unforseeable. Bad judgement is not necessarily self-serving.

[TEPaul]

JVB:

Looks like my cart was about 2 1/2 minutes faster than your cart on Decision 33-7/4.5.  

[Dennis_Harwood]

Was it really worth disqualification, as it was obviously unintentional and did not give her any advantage..we are talking about 6 inches closer to the hole..perhaps.

BUT, this is not about 6 inches and it is about gaining an advantage-- Its about placing the ball rather than accepting the lie a drop would give you--

To do that MW has to follow a risky procedure-- There were huge areas in which she could have dropped the ball and played it there after the drop and there would have been no question of a "wrong place", but she chose to follow a different course of action-- To drop "on the line" in the hopes that she would get to place the ball (in what would likely be a better lie)--

When taking relief under Rule 28c that is a very, very rare course of action (Under Rules 24 and 25 yes, but rarely under 28)-- WIthin the Rules? yes, but a risky course of action and one that most Rules Officials I know would review every time if it was brought to their attention (that the ball was lifted and placed rather than played after a Rule 28 relief drop, they would want to see the site)--

[TEPaul]

Dennis:

I moved this over from that other thread;

Dennis:

I'm not sure but it almost seems that you have some moral problem with players who do what you seem to be calling 'pushing the envelope'.

As far as I'm concerned I view this technique of a player trying to get two bad drops and then a place as a player simply using the entire latitude of what the Rules require and allow. What you seem most concerned about is that players may be so lax in this technique that in the process they'll violate Rule 18-2 or 20-7.

If I'm watching a player do something like that I might ask him to use tees to establish some exact points so there will be little guessowork and estimating but if a player wants to go through all that I sure don't have any moral problem with it. He's simply using the maximum latitude and the maximum procedure the Rules of Golf clearly allow.

I try to keep things pretty black and white out there--either a player does things right within the Rules or he doesn't somehow. I do realize that some rules officials seem to get into some moral question of the intent of a player but if a player follows the Rules and their procedures properly I don't give a damn what kind of envelope he's pushing as long as he stays within the allowable boundaries and procedures of the Rules.

[Mike Hendren]

EVERYBODY GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED FOR HOLDING THE TOURNAMENT ON A DESERT GOLF COURSE!  IT AIN'T GOLF!

Mike

[George Pazin]

I'm sorry, Bamberger might be a very good writer (though I personally didn't find To The Linksland all that special, more of a missed opportunity and that's his work, isn't it?), but what kind of idiot thinks it's better to wait than to report it to Wie or an official before the death penalty comes down? That's either downright stupid or downright scummy, take your pick. I see no honor whatsoever in his actions, only stupidity or questionable motives.

[Bill_Spellman]

I think that the main problem here is the ability of an "outside agency" has been allowed to intervene on a rules call.
 
1. I don't think that any other sport allows this.

2. We all play and therefore have some knowledge of the rules, giving us the false impression that we can now be rules officials. Also, it is easier for golfers to relate to "the stars" because we can sometimes hit shots as well as they do, and some of us can play very well.  

 Scenario 1:An unknown player unwittingly and unknowingly breaks the rules on Friday and makes the cut on the number.
he is followed by no one and his playing partners are unaware of any infraction. The chances of anything happening are remote. Wie is a "phenom" and is followed wherever she goes by fans and reporters alike.

Scenario 2: Same as 1 except that the player is the 60th player in the U.S. Open, alone in last place to make the cut. All 60 players are within 6 shots of the lead. 15 players tied at 61st, 7 shots back. The infraction is reported on Saturday night and the player is disqualified. 15 players have now been cut, that should be in the event, only 7 shots back. I can see a sharp attorney getting involved using grounds of restraint of trade. It could happen.

I am not condoning a rules change, only a reporting change especially when the infraction is reported the next day by someone other than a player, caddy, or rules official.

I also realize that had Wie won the event, and had not been disqualified, other players would have been denied the chance to win or place higher.



Comments-

 

[Dan Kelly]

I think Bamberger's an ass for what he did

I think you speak for about 99.44% of all the people who will ever hear about this incident.

And I think Bamberger must have known that.

Which is why I think, while bungling it terribly, he had no self-serving motivation.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Dennis:

I moved this over from that other thread;

Dennis:

I'm not sure but it almost seems that you have some moral problem with players who do what you seem to be calling 'pushing the envelope'.

TE: I certainly don't have a moral problem with players taking advantage of the Rules.  In fact I applaud the player who, knowing the Rules, uses them to his advantage. (Advising clients on Tax Laws is part of my practice and I certainly follow that philosophy in my profession)--

What I do believe however is that where a player choses not to follow the clear "safe relief" procedure, but opts to attempt to use the Rules to their advantage bears the burden of illustrating that they have clearly complied with the Rules-- And where a placing is involved in a relatvely level lie I think officials have a duty to review the procedure--

Once you have both the burden and permit review by an official after the fact you are in a risk situation and the player better be aware of that risk if he has not had official supervision of the relief procedure--

BTW, when officiating I will not use the Rules to somehow punish a player who is "pushing the envelope"(my words), but if for example I believe a player is attempting to place a ball on a supervised drop I am going to need clear and convincing evidence that the ball is closer before I permit a lift and place and to protect the field will err on the side of "good drop" rather than "lift and place here"--

[Tommy_Naccarato]

EVERYBODY GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED FOR HOLDING THE TOURNAMENT ON A DESERT GOLF COURSE!  IT AIN'T GOLF!

Mike

Mike,
I find some desert sites to be some of the most conducive natural places for golf--other then pure sandy links or dunes. Some of them are huge missed opportunities. In fact, I once saw what I think would be the site of a unbelievable site for golf--that unfortunately will never happen. Right smack dab on the shores of dry lake bed of Edwards Air Force base. Some of us would shudder to see just how beautiful it is out there, as well as the canvas that could be utilized for great golf. We're talking about some native plants and joshua trees that would really be cool to work with--if I was a course architect--which I'm not.

[Steve Wilson]

I don't think Bamburger is an ass for what he did, I think he's an ass for when he did it.

I think he was right to notice this "pushing the envelope."  I think he was right to bring it up with Michelle Wie, right to bring it to the attention of the officials.

But once he had allowed the situation to escalate from a two shot penalty--which would certainly have been an object lesson to all involved--into a DQ he lost some of his  "mora purity."

Whistleblowing is as much about when as why.
 
Witness the difference in receptions a current employee receives in contrast to former employee who reports wrongdoing on the part of his superiors.

Nor do I question the penalty. Once it was reported and once it was determined she had placed the ball nearer the hole,  disqualification was the only course.

I have this vision of Bamberger missing his cue at the wedding and showing up in tne middle of the honeymoon to reply to the minister's injunction to "Speak now or ever hold your peace."  

[Jim Nugent]

This after-the-fact use of video is one-sided.  Officials only use it to punish golfers.  Until mistakes in the other direction can be corrected -- ala de Vicenzo -- it should be dropped.  

[Russell Lo]

Somewhat overlooked in the skewing of Bamberger is that the game of Golf wins. Michelle Wie, whom I've played with about a dozen times absolutely stood up and took it like a man, er, 16 year old girl. No excuses, just acceptance. I am so proud of her for that.

Michael Bamberger is getting nailed for doing the right thing. In the future everyone will be more cognizant of the rules even though the impetus could not have come at a more inopportune time. Could you imagine if this happened when Michelle had just qualified for the Masters or just finished 8 strokes ahead of the field at the US Women's Open.

As unfortunate as this incident was, in the future Golf, Michelle and Michael Bamberger will be better off because of it.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Russell

Bamberger is NOT "... getting nailed for doing the right thing."

He's getting nailed for not doing the right thing at the right time;i.e., before Wie signed her card. His reasons for not doing so, as stated in Joe Logan's article, are inane.

Steve

[Mike Hendren]

I find some desert sites to be some of the most conducive natural places for golf--other then pure sandy links or dunes. Some of them are huge missed opportunities.

I don't disagree.  All too often, however, these courses have the equivalent of OB down both sides hole after hole after hole.

Admittedly, I need to play better so I don't have a bias against running out of real estate.

Be well.

Mike

[Phil_the_Author]

To quote and badly apply it from the movie, The Natural, "Welcome to the Big Leagues (Professional Ranks) Ms. Wie!"

[Craig Sweet]

Dan Kelly said...

"Golf should try to be as different as possible."

It is different...isn't golf the ONLY game/sport where a total non-participant can literally make a ruling?  A member of the gallery, a tv viewer, a person selling hotdogs from a vendor tent...anyone can say they saw, or thought they saw, an infraction ??

If so, that's ridiculous.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Now that Michelle is under the "spotlight",let us ask the opposite question--

Just Suppose:

She placed her ball, was able to make par on a par 5 hole (actually a birdie, plus a penalty shot) and suppose she wins her first pro event by one stroke--

Then the SI reporter comes out in the Thursday edition of SI and comments that she placed her ball in a wrong place and made up that stroke with a Rules violation (although unintentional) and then the Golf Channel gets out the video and confirms the breach--

Do you think Tiger and the Dreaded Rock incident got more press than this would bring?

I think MW's PR firm is ever so happy she got DQed rather than putting the spin on how she won her first pro event through a Rules infraction.

[Carlyle Rood]

Sorry Carlyle, but there is no leeway here.  Decision 33-7/4.5 says:

Q. A competitor returns his score card and the score on one hole is lower than actually taken due to failure to include a penalty of two strokes which he did not know he incurred.  The error is discovered before the competition is closed.

Would the Committee be justified, under Rule 33-7, in waiving or   modifying the penalty of disqualification prescribed in Rule 6-6d?

A. No.  It is the responsibility of the competitor to know the Rules.

Baloney.  She understood the rule.  She didn't perceive that she was closer to the hole.  She thought she was dropping in accordance with the rules.  Her intent was to follow the rules.  She behaved properly.

She just didn't recognize that the ball was closer to the hole.  Had she recognized that she was closer, or had she been alerted to it, then she would not have hesitated to drop again.

Fundamentally, her illegal drop did not afford her any advantage.  Either drop would have the same character of lie and stance and would require the same skill to execute properly.  Therefore, the field was not compromised by the illegal drop.

The committee would have been justified to overturn the disqualification (after assessing a two-stroke penalty).

[rgkeller]

>>Fundamentally, her illegal drop did not afford her any advantage.  Either drop would have the same character of lie and stance and would require the same skill to execute properly.  Therefore, the field was not compromised by the illegal drop.<<

Not according to the Rules Official who went to the scene, made the measurements and made the ruling.

[JohnV]

Baloney.  She understood the rule.  She didn't perceive that she was closer to the hole.  She thought she was dropping in accordance with the rules.  Her intent was to follow the rules.  She behaved properly.

She just didn't recognize that the ball was closer to the hole.  Had she recognized that she was closer, or had she been alerted to it, then she would not have hesitated to drop again.

Fundamentally, her illegal drop did not afford her any advantage.  Either drop would have the same character of lie and stance and would require the same skill to execute properly.  Therefore, the field was not compromised by the illegal drop.

The committee would have been justified to overturn the disqualification (after assessing a two-stroke penalty).

There is a big difference between following the rules and writing your own.  You want the Committee to write its own rules rather than follow those that everyone plays by.

The decision I quoted is black and white.  A Committee can't do that.  If the LPGA Rules Committee did that, they would be torn apart by those who know and respect the rules and also those who think they are playing favorites with a big star.  Fortunately they wouldn't even consider it.

I didn't see where she was supposed to drop, but there are people who have said that in dropping where she did, she got a break because she didn't have a bush in her backswing and she was on grass rather than on dirt.  It doesn't matter to me if she got a break or not, she broke the rule and the rules say she must be penalized in the way she was, no choice.  If Bamberger had spoken up on Saturday she would have received the ruling you want, but he didn't.  Don't blame the rules, blame the two people responsible for this, Wie and Bamberger.

[Steve Lang]

Having thought about all this for a day or so (and like Joe Logan did in his article in the Philadelphia Inquirer on this Wie/Bamberger issue) first I should say---Full Disclosure: Bamberger is a friend of mine.

.. Not to mention the fact that Bamberger is perhaps more "purist" or more "moral" on golf (and its Rules) than anyone on this website.

TEP.. everyone seems to have let you slide on that quote.. Pretty wide coverage you painted with those words!

=============================================
From the video on TGC it appeared to me that MW started correctly.. measuring the first club length away from the ball's resting place no closer, but when "flipping the club over", took it at a favorable angle, which ultimately sealed her fate.   Bad girl..  

She'll undoubtably now truly understand that the camera never blinks..  This may very well stir some fire next time out.. should be interesting

[TEPaul]

"TEP.. everyone seems to have let you slide on that quote.. Pretty wide coverage you painted with those words!"

SteveL:

I just wanted to see if they were still awake.

[Bob_Huntley]

Tommy,

re high desert golf. I used to love playing Crystal Aire at Llano. Looking across to Edwards was a treat..

Cannot we all agree that Bamberger was a jerk for not calling on his concerns sooner. The guy has an agenda and frankly, if I was a player about to be interviewed by him I would decline with thanks. As I mentioned to Dan Kelly in an earler response, he doesn't report on the topic at hand but massages the answers to his own ends.

[Carlyle Rood]

There is a big difference between following the rules and writing your own.  You want the Committee to write its own rules rather than follow those that everyone plays by.

The decision I quoted is black and white.  

A. If the rules of golf were black and white, then they wouldn't require a littany of decisions to clarify them.

B. Publishing a decision on a rule of golf doesn't validate the reasoning behind it.  It merely documents the flaw.

C. The rules of golf (and the corresponding decisions) evolve.  The ruling bodies regularly amend, edit, and eliminate those rules.  It seems both practical and responsible to permit committees to determine what is fair and equitable.

The committee should be allowed to use its discretion whenever it's in the best interest of the game.  Wie didn't benefit from the illegal drop.  The field wasn't compromised.  A two-stroke penalty would have been sufficient.  Disqualification should have been rescinded.