[V. Kmetz]

But in this case the video shows that his actions "more than likely" caused his ball to move...

I hope DJ leads by 2 prior to entering the scoring tent to talk to Craig Winters

I disagree that it does show that...


cheers
vk

[jeffwarne]

But in this case the video shows that his actions "more than likely" caused his ball to move...

I hope DJ leads by 2 prior to entering the scoring tent to talk to Craig Winters

I disagree that it does show that...


cheers
vk

the video shows nothing.
I get there's a precedent/previous decision, and that they had made up their mind to implement it.
Just call it--then.


and get control of the equipment-anyone watching this rain softened course might think that the recent study on distance being static was absolute bs also

[Bruce Katona]

I typed this once and it went into the great abyss.


I saw the "infraction" life on TV.  DJ calls over the walking Rules guy; they talk, no penalty is assessed; play on.


2 hours later on #12 TV some idiot from the USGA says they are reviewing this and "we"ll get back to you'. Hello - since when do we have video review almost 2 hours later what the player and the walking referee have determined there is not penalty.  Can you imagine waiting this long in the Super Bowl and then having to go back and replay the down?


The USGA made the last 9 holes of their marquis event on international TV about them, not the participants actually playing. The blue blazers were pissed they didn't defend par well enough and someone overpowered their course set-up to win at -4 (-5 before the "penalty").  In any other sport, there is no going back over an hour later to review something AND CHANGE/ALTER THE OUTCOME!!!


Thankfully Paulina remembered to wear knickers on 18 green after this was all done; if she didn't; DJ would have been DQ'ed; the blazers would have all keeled over.


Shame Shame Shame USGA.




[size=78%] [/size]

[Jason Connor]

I just shake my head because this perfectly illustrates why people aren't playing golf.


People who might be interested in giving the game a shot perceive there is some stodgy old man looking over their shoulder waiting to tell them what they're doing wrong.


That's no fun, so they never even give it a shot.


Turns out they weren't paranoid -- they were right.

[Joe Hancock]

Pretty hard to promote the game as honorable when you refuse to take a man for his word.

[Wade Whitehead]

So, the USGA now uses video replay.  If you're playing well (and one camera), watch out.  If you aren't, you have nothing to worry about.

Such a strange (and sad) precedent.

WW

[Wade Whitehead]

The USGA says "Did you cause your ball to move?"

The player says no.

The USGA penalizes anyway.

My question: If the player's response doesn't matter, why even ask?

Perhaps the USGA should release a list of the players they don't trust, unless they don't trust any of us.

I'm not, incidentally, arguing that Johnson is trustworthy.

WW

[JHoulihan]

I have been watching television for hours, and like most feel there was no infraction that took place on the 5th green.

My question is what is the policy or next action that occurs when a player disagrees with a walking official or rules committee? DJ said during his press conference that he did not agree with the committe ruling but it did not effect the outcome of the championship (his score changed but it did not change his order amongst the group). What if would have? Would the USGA rules committe make the final decision no matter what the player has to say?

[Bruce Katona]

Maybe we can have the NBA go back and look to take away a basket or two from the Cavs now that they've won?....someone must have traveled at some point in making 93 points?

[Wade Whitehead]

I have been watching television for hours, and like most feel there was no infraction that took place on the 5th green.

My question is what is the policy or next action that occurs when a player disagrees with a walking official or rules committee? DJ said during his press conference that he did not agree with the committe ruling but it did not effect the outcome of the championship (his score changed but it did not change his order amongst the group). What if would have? Would the USGA rules committe make the final decision no matter what the player has to say?

If Johnson disagrees, then he signed an incorrect scorecard.  Right?

WW

[Bruce Katona]

JHoulihan: DJ may have been scre#ed.  Who does he protest to?  Like the USGA is going to over rule itself? LOL!!!!


Presidential Pardon & Clemency or appeal to the US Supreme Court maybe.

[JHoulihan]

Wade,

That was where I was split. He agrees to the penalty changing his scorecard and thus not disqualified. (Even if he does NOT agree with it emotionally). As long as player and committe agree to said ruling outcome before the signature then both know it is official and cannot be revisited.
Justin

[JHoulihan]

Bruce,

That just bring up more questions about the USGA. Who makes the final call on such a scenario? Mike Davis Executive Director, or does he give up that responsibility to the rules committe members shown post round (Jeff Hall and Thomas Pagel).

Justin

[Wade Whitehead]

Wade,

That was where I was split. He agrees to the penalty changing his scorecard and thus not disqualified. (Even if he does NOT agree with it emotionally). As long as player and committe agree to said ruling outcome before the signature then both know it is official and cannot be revisited.
Justin

Does anyone actually believe Johnson would have agreed to the penalty if doing so would have cost him the championship?  The ethics of the entire situation are obscured by the fact that it didn't.

The USGA is saying "Our winner is a liar" and he's fine with it.  They won.

What credibility does he possibly have moving forward (unless, as it appears, he had none to begin with)?

WW

[David Lott]

So, Jim A....


.....if I ground my club and take some practice swings a yard or two away from the ball, and then lift my club and the ball moves a yard or two away, I am causing the ball to move?  What if I am taking those practice swings a few inches from the ball?  Are the Rules officials at the USGA Physics graduates?  I'm married to a Physics graduate and she thinks that the USGA officials are idiots.  I agree with her.


Rich

Rich, if you can look at decision 18-2/0.5 it is a rather long decision for me to type out...this one decision took approximately an hour for Craig Winters of USGA rules to explain at recent USGA/PGA Rules class in Tacoma...

all evidence should be reviewed and if weight of evidence is that it is more than likely that the player caused the ball to move than the penalty must be assessed...if you take your practice strokes away from the ball, the weight of evidence would not suggest that the player caused the ball to move...

But in this case the video shows that his actions "more than likely" caused his ball to move...

I hope DJ leads by 2 prior to entering the scoring tent to talk to Craig Winters

Which means it's either a bad rule or a bad decision.


If a rooster crows just an instant before the sun comes up, the USGA would say that the rooster caused the sun to rise.

[Garland Bayley]

... Are the Rules officials at the USGA Physics graduates?  I'm married to a Physics graduate and she thinks that the USGA officials are idiots.  I agree with her.


Rich

I concur. To many lawyers in the world, not enough scientists.
Especially at the USGA!

[Garland Bayley]

But in this case the video shows that his actions "more than likely" caused his ball to move...

I disagree. There was space between his putter and the ball, both to the side, and behind.

If no contact, then it's just speculation as to what caused the ball to move.

Gravity and lack of friction on the 14 stip greens most likely caused the ball to move. Most trumps more than!

[Jim Nugent]

The USGA is saying "Our winner is a liar..."

Not really.  The USGA is saying he was wrong.  That does not have to mean he is lying. 

If the USGA based its decision strictly on that video, seems totally absurd to me. 

[Michael Felton]

Rich, if you can look at decision 18-2/0.5 it is a rather long decision for me to type out...this one decision took approximately an hour for Craig Winters of USGA rules to explain at recent USGA/PGA Rules class in Tacoma...

The vast majority of the application of the rules of golf happen on weekends all over the world. When I'm playing next weekend, I am expected to apply this rule (if the situation comes up) accurately. If that one decision took a rules expert an hour to explain to a room full of other rules experts, what does that tell you about the rule itself? It tells me that it's a dreadful one. The rules are supposed to be equally applied to everyone in the field. If it's a judgement call about whether the player or something else caused the ball to move, how can that be equally applied unless it's the same person making the judgement for everyone. That might be practical among the leaders of a televised golf event, but it's not amongst the millions of people playing the game among themselves.

[Mark McKeever]

I'm certainly glad I didnt send my $20 to those USGA clowns yet this year. 

[Andrew Buck]

I really can't see any reason for this rule, when on the greens.  Simply if it moves on the green, replace the ball no penalty.  I can understand the rule "through the green", but if the rule should be at one extreme or the other, always a penalty, or never a penalty, and I vote for the latter.

[Tom_Doak]

DJ said during his press conference that he did not agree with the committe ruling but it did not effect the outcome of the championship (his score changed but it did not change his order amongst the group).

If Johnson disagrees, then he signed an incorrect scorecard.  Right?

Wrong.  Up until now, at least, the player's score was the the number he signed for on the scorecard.  If he signs for a lower score than he is deemed to have had, he's disqualified ... but if he signs for a higher score, the higher score becomes official.  So signing for the higher score and accepting the penalty [even if he feels he didn't do it] makes it all hunky-dory.  /sarc   


[Incidentally that is how Roberto De Vicenzo lost The Masters in 1968 ... he was really tied, but signed for a 4 on a hole where he made a 3, so he was deemed to have lost by a stroke.]


DJ could have refused to sign the scorecard at all, on principle, but there are not many players in the world who would risk disqualification, right after winning their first major championship.  Maybe Tom Watson.

[Phil McDade]

DJ could have refused to sign the scorecard at all, on principle, but there are not many players in the world who would risk disqualification, right after winning their first major championship.  Maybe Tom Watson.

I was thinking similarly -- the USGA really put him in a tough spot. Sign your scorecard, that you truly believe is wrong, and win the U.S. Open (and your first major), or refuse to sign an "incorrect" card, and throw the championship away. The first name that I thought who might do that was Bobby Jones.

[Tom_Doak]

The first name that I thought who might do that was Bobby Jones.

Yes, who might win the Bob Jones Award for Sportsmanship based on this year's Open?


Jeff Hall ?

[Bill_McBride]

"I hope DJ leads by 2 prior to entering the scoring tent to talk to Craig Winters"

the USGA should get no pass on this

I hope DJ birdies 18 and wins by 4 so his win is less controversial.


I agree that the USGA destroyed this championship and they should not get a pass.

You must be clairvoyant, Clair!


The group official interviewed DJ and said no penalty.  Why would the blazers change this?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()