Why do I know....

[TEPaul]

....there will very shortly be another rules question, discussion and debate emanating out of the Fedex Tour Championship?  

[Jim_Kennedy]

27,430  

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tom, I hope not.  We keep saying that golf is a gentleman's game.  If so then we should be gentlemen and believe Woody Austin, if that is what you are referring to.

[TEPaul]

TommyW:

I couldn't agree with you more.

However, I'm just wondering if Woody needs to have the definition within the Rules of Golf of a STROKE read or explained to him. If not it will be fairly interesting to hear him explain what he thinks it was he did there.  

[Adam Clayman]

Tom, Did you think he intended to stroke the ball prior to when he did strike the ball?

[KBanks]

....there will very shortly be another rules question, discussion and debate emanating out of the Fedex Tour Championship?  

Because you just watched Woody Austin play #15 at East Lake.

Ken

[Tom Jefferson]

Ok.........for the benefit of those of us who didn't watch the golf, what occurred?

Thanks,
Tom

[Dan Kelly]

Ok.........for the benefit of those of us who didn't watch the golf, what occurred?

Thanks,
Tom

Woody Austin missed a makable birdie putt on 15, the short par-5.

He walked in quickly behind the miss, which was about 4 inches right of the cup, and, within milliseconds of the ball's stopping, stabbed the ground with his putter just behind the ball ... then proceeded, without further delay, to tap it in.

Was he attempting a stroke when he stabbed the ground?

Only he, of course, can say for sure.

Oh, and Johnny Miller can, and did.

Austin will play the rest of his career under a cloud.

[TEPaul]

"Tom, Did you think he intended to stroke the ball prior to when he did strike the ball?"

Adam:

I guess I'd have to say that.

Let me put it to you this way---it surely didn't look to me (or Miller or the others who immediately commented on it on TV) like he intended to hit the ground first without striking at and moving the ball and then to take the club back again and tap the ball into the hole.

I think TommyW in the post above is right that the committee (officials) should at first question Austin about it and get his take on it. But this thing is quite clear on tape.

I can only tell you that if I were Austin I don't think I would try to claim that the first forward motion of the club was something other than an intention to strike at and move the golf ball. If it was, what in the hell did he do that for?  

I don't have any idea what the outcome of this was before Austin signed his card and left the scoring area but I would be pretty surprised, if, after he saw that tape that he would try to claim that hitting the ground with the forward movement of his club was not an intention to strike at and move the golf ball.

[Mike_Cirba]

Austin will play the rest of his career under a cloud.

That's too bad.   He really has the "everyman" thing going on and his gutty performance at the PGA was very inspiring.

[Steve Pozaric]

for those of us who didn't see it:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gifW57c6X34

[TEPaul]

Well, it looks like a par was recorded on Austin's card and he signed his card.

I guess Austin and the tournament committee on further review decided the first forward motion of the club that hit the ground just behind the ball was a practice swing or something.  

I fully support the philosophy outlined in the Decisions that essentially gives the player in question the benefit of the doubt in rules situations. But that philosophy should be reserved for situations where there really is a sufficient degree of doubt.

This incident was clearly caught on national television and probably a couple of million people saw it very clearly.

In my opinion, the question becomes--if Austin did not intend to strike at and move the ball when the first forward movement of his club hit the ground just behind the ball without striking the ball then what in the world did he do that for?

If ANYONE is in some doubt whether Austin took the club back again and made another forward movement with the club and then struck the ball I would be completely surprised. There was no doubt in my mind when I first saw it and then saw it again a bunch of times that he took the club back again after striking the ground and made a second forward motion that struck the golf ball.

[Dan Kelly]

In my opinion, the question becomes--if Austin did not intend to strike at and move the ball when the first forward movement of his club hit the ground just behind the ball without striking the ball then what in the world did he do that for?

Maybe he did that, Tom, because in the middle of that first forward movement, he suddenly became concerned that the ball had not yet come to rest.

Just speculation on my part. Apparently he didn't stop to answer questions.

If my speculation were correct, and he did in fact intend NOT to hit the ball, but, rather, to stop the stroke short of the possibly still moving ball, what's the ruling?

[PThomas]

for those of us who didn't see it:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gifW57c6X34

thanks Steve

certainly a curious incident...

[Tim Gavrich]

I think that if he really did miss the ball with the first little stab, his body movement would have been a bit more hesitant than it was in the clip.  Knowing his tendency to exhibit displeasure as he does, I really think he was just releasing his anger by tapping the ground behind the ball with his putter.

[TEPaul]

Dan, I hope for everyone's sake he did think the ball was still moving and he intentionally stopped that first stroke before hitting the ball.



"If my speculation were correct, and he did in fact intend NOT to hit the ball, but, rather, to stop the stroke short of the possibly still moving ball, what's the ruling?"


Under Rule 14 it would not be a stoke. The operative analogy in that case would most likely be Decision 14/1.5


One of the interesting ironies of this situation, Dandy Dan, is yesterday Miller and Company were going on and on about the fact that Austin has a reputation on Tour for having perhaps the best hand/eye coordination of anyone out there.

If that stunt he pulled on #15 actually was intentionally stopping the club and stroke at the ground because he thought the ball might still be moving then I guess I'd have to agree that he most certainly does have some otherworldly hand/eye coordination!  

[Dan Kelly]

I think that if he really did miss the ball with the first little stab, his body movement would have been a bit more hesitant than it was in the clip.  Knowing his tendency to exhibit displeasure as he does, I really think he was just releasing his anger by tapping the ground behind the ball with his putter.

I don't know what he was doing, but I don't think there's irrefutable evidence that he was trying to hit the ball. Shouldn't there have to be such evidence, to destroy a man's reputation?

[TEPaul]

Dan:

I hope noone is insinuating that incident should destroy Austin's reputation. To me the situation is simply a very interesting question of fact.

Tim, above, makes an interesting point in suggesting that perhaps Austin thought the ball might still be moving and intentionally stopped his stroke by hitting the ground before striking the ball. That might indeed be the case but most players i've seen about to make a stroke at a ball and almost simultaneously come to believe the ball might still be moving don't hit the ball about a tenth of a second later.  

Most all I've seen in that situation take some time to be sure the ball actually has come to rest.

[Dan Kelly]

Dan:

I hope noone is insinuating that incident should destroy Austin's reputation. To me the situation is simply a very interesting question of fact.

Tim, above, makes an interesting point in suggesting that perhaps Austin thought the ball might still be moving and intentionally stopped his stroke by hitting the ground before striking the ball.

No. That was I who was making that "interesting point." Fact!

[TEPaul]

This has nothing to do with this particular incident, only to do with watching this tournament throughout most of its coverage today.

Austin has gained a reputation as a sort of all-expressive "everyman" golfer and has apparently become popular because of that. I felt that way too---until today. Watching him throughout most of that round today, however, I think he's probably a bit more of a uncontrolled hotdog. I don't really see much appealing about the guy in an everyman way or any other way.

[Dan Kelly]

This has nothing to do with this particular incident, only to do with watching this tournament throughout most of its coverage today.

Austin has gained a reputation as a sort of all-expressive "everyman" golfer and has apparently become popular because of that. I felt that way too---until today. Watching him throughout most of that round today, however, I think he's probably a bit more of a uncontrolled hotdog. I don't really see much appealing about the guy in an everyman way or any other way.

I think he's more of a goofball than a hotdog.

But here's his best Everyman bit: http://youtube.com/watch?v=kzm2KcpzRm4&mode=related&search=

[rboyce]

sometimes players including Tiger will make a playfully aggressive swat at the ball and then start over and tap in. this might have been a hyper aggressive version of that, but it doesn't seem likely.

the one thing he has going for him is that he did not do a double take or hitch of any kind after the first motion. if he had attempted to make the putt on the first motion and failed he would have been surprised and at least flinched a fraction. since he didn't, i'm willing to take him at his word.

the unexplainable part for me is how close the the ball he came on the first motion - at least from the camera angle that we've all seen.

[TEPaul]

"I think he's more of a goofball than a hotdog."

I think you are wrong, wrong, wrong, Daniel. To me he looks like a perfect 50/50 split between a hotball and a goofdog.

[David Lott]

He put the club down very close to the ball with a vertical motion, and then he tapped the ball in. He was taking a risk that he might hit the ball when the club went down, but the motion was downward, not parallel to the ground. Then the tap towards the hole.

To me based on the visual evidence the first motion was not a stroke.

And since the test is intent, I think you have to trust Woody.

It's a gentlemen's game and we will be gentlemen by not declaring him guilty on this flimsy evidence.

[Willie_Dow]

Yes, David:  That vertical motion was a support for his next move.  To make his tap in.

But there are too many tap in moves developing on the tour which will make this type of exhibit more difficult to judge in the future.  Eg. are you behind the ball when you make the stroke ?  

Let's ask Sam Snead for a comment !