Sick of TV influence

[Sean Leary]

I think that there are times where the player knows or wonders, but I don't think this was one of them. Don't think it was possible to feel that infinitesimal amount of sand. But only she knows.

[MCirba]

Is it true that the last group needed 5 hours 45 minutes to play?

If I were King of the World, anyone playing in more than 4 hours would be immediately disqualified.

[Andrew Buck]

    Why is golf the only sport that allows a ruling to be changed after play has continued?  Every other sport (with the exception of tennis, which technology has solved) allows the game to continue after television later reveals a bad call.
    In golf, the players police themselves unless an official happens to be on the scene or is called onto the scene before play continues.  What's wrong with that?  If a player intentionally violates a rule and gets away it, then shame on him or her, shame on the other players playing along, and shame on the official on the scene who screwed up.  Soccer players takes dives; basketball players take dives; baseball players pretend not to trap balls; football players hold on pretty much every play; and calls are missed in every sport.  If a golfer gets caught cheating, his or her penalty will be on reputation.  And golfing authorities can deal with cheaters after the fact with fines and suspensions.  Football and hockey do that all the time, even when no penalty is called in the game.  And if the violation is inadvertent, that happens in every other sport too.
    Did Norquist know she grounded her club?  We'll never know.  I kind of think she did, not because two grains of sand moved, but because she created a channel in the sand behind her ball when she took her club back.  But who knows?  If she had gone on to win the tournament without being penalized, life would have gone on.

Was the Channel of sand from her club, or what the ball made as it rolled to rest.

[JJShanley]

I'd like to think that the interview process for the head of the R&A includes giving a public presentation after three G&Ts.

[Ken Moum]

Wait... What's wrong, exactly, with a major champion breaking the rules ? 

Tiger did it 14 times and nobody seemed to mind...

Speak for yourself.  I minded, a lot.

And  FWIW, my wife and were watching the U.S. Open when DJ set his putter down next to the ball, lifted it up and the ball moved... She said, "He's screwed. There's no way that's not a penalty."

I agreed with her. I can't figure out why so many good players take practice strokes so damned close to the ball.

By the way, have you given up on the cheater line?

K

[Carl Johnson]

Was the Channel of sand from her club, or what the ball made as it rolled to rest.

See reply 45 above for one man's view.

[noonan]

    Why is golf the only sport that allows a ruling to be changed after play has continued?  Every other sport (with the exception of tennis, which technology has solved) allows the game to continue after television later reveals a bad call.
    In golf, the players police themselves unless an official happens to be on the scene or is called onto the scene before play continues.  What's wrong with that?  If a player intentionally violates a rule and gets away it, then shame on him or her, shame on the other players playing along, and shame on the official on the scene who screwed up.  Soccer players takes dives; basketball players take dives; baseball players pretend not to trap balls; football players hold on pretty much every play; and calls are missed in every sport.  If a golfer gets caught cheating, his or her penalty will be on reputation.  And golfing authorities can deal with cheaters after the fact with fines and suspensions.  Football and hockey do that all the time, even when no penalty is called in the game.  And if the violation is inadvertent, that happens in every other sport too.
    Did Norquist know she grounded her club?  We'll never know.  I kind of think she did, not because two grains of sand moved, but because she created a channel in the sand behind her ball when she took her club back.  But who knows?  If she had gone on to win the tournament without being penalized, life would have gone on.

Was the Channel of sand from her club, or what the ball made as it rolled to rest.

The channel was somewhat high and made by the ball.

[George Pazin]

Can one of the smarter folks on here remind me of what rule Tiger broke 14 times?


My apologies in advance for being so stupid.


Re: DJ's close practice strokes, that was my first thought as well. But after watching the DVR (I was on vacation that Sunday), I saw him do the same thing several times on other later holes and he wasn't nearly as close, which led me to conclude it was the TV angle that made it appear much close than it in fact was.

[noonan]

I do not get it.


When the ball oscillated Tiger did not see it. No penalty.


If Anna did not see the sand move why is she penalized. She should claim she did not see it. No penalty.


Double standard?

[JLahrman]

Bottom line, I think this was very unfortunate, but the right call.  The only question mark in my mind is the timing of notification.

It wasn't fair to inform Nordqvist after her third shot but Lang before hers.  Lang changed clubs after getting the news!

WW

Not sure I agree with this. There's no perfect way to give the information once at least one player has teed off. There is no shot sequence (which for some reason people keep mentioning). As quickly as possible is the only real option.

Imagine if Nordqvist had decided to be aggressive and had gotten her ball within 6 or 8 feet. Now Lang has to get aggressive as well because she thinks they're tied, and she winds up dunking her ball. Meanwhile an official is standing there knowing that she has a 2-shot lead but not telling her?

No totally fair way to give out this information. Once the players tee off it might be impossible to give out the news once they've each hit the same number of shots - one player might hit four shots before the other hits her second.

[Bruce Katona]

and Ken Mourn, Portugal almost won the Euro 2016 yesterday on a free kick given by Mark Clattenburg for a hand ball at the end of the game, which video review clearly showed striking the Portuguese player, not the French defender.  He's one of the best, called what he saw and the TV folks covering the tourney were all in high praise for the officiating at this event.


Nothing could be done, a hand ball was what Clatterburg saw.  Luckily Portugal hit the woodwork on the free kick and this became a non-issue.


Soccer only has goal line video review.  No one called into Far Hills or Nyon, Switzerland  to stop the match or have France take a goal kick after the play because Clattenburg missed one.

[Tom_Doak]

What I've seen with all big organizations (whether focused on politics or business or sport) over the last 20 years is the hyper-consolidation of power at the top, in the hands of the very few.

While the leaders in all these organizations all talk off the same script about "employee empowerment" and "breaking down the silos" and "flattening the reporting relationships", what they've actually been doing (and becoming experts at) is ensuring that all key decisions (including, of course, those involving salaries and benefits) are made by a small group of hand-picked cronies and confidantes, all of whom know and play by the rules of this (inside) game. 
 

It has always been so in the 35 years I've been involved in golf, and probably for long before that. 


The only difference is the increase of p.r. to assure us it's not so.  And, different people in the seats of power.


I did not see the incident as I had to catch a flight just as the playoff started.  What I haven't seen from anyone here was whether FOX analysts called it out right away, or whether they were getting phone calls from viewers, or what compelled them to report it.  I am wondering if their "partnership" with the USGA, and their pointed criticism during the telecast of the final round at Oakmont, led them to bring it up.

[Pete_Pittock]

I do not get it.


When the ball oscillated Tiger did not see it. No penalty.

If Anna did not see the sand move why is she penalized. She should claim she did not see it. No penalty.


Double standard?

Jerry, the rules and decisions changed

[MCirba]

I don't know but it seems to me that Tiger routinely kicked the ass*es of all his competitors, sometimes by a little; most often by a lot.   Jack's record will likely stand but no one ever played better golf than Tiger did during his prime and I was/am a huge Nicklaus fan as a golfer.

Unless someone can prove he pulled a Maguire or Sosa I think he deserves what he earned.  Anything else seems like sour grapes or agenda-driven, sorry.

[MCirba]

btw...what does this thread have to do with GCA?   Let me try to help.

Our general love for natural looking hazards and bunkers have seriously complicated exact bunker dimensions or led to confusion vis a vis Dustin Johnson at Whistling Straits.   

Ok...that was a stretch, but I tried.

[Ronald Montesano]

Pretending the sophisticated video equipment that is present at highest-level championship golf doesn't exist doesn't make any sense to me. No one is going to tell FOX not to zoom in on incidents that might carry rules violations with them.


Furthermore, since according to the letter of the Rules Nordqvist committed a violation, the field was protected by the presence of that sophisticated camera. How exactly would it have been better if that violation had gone unnoticed? How is it "inherently unfair" that the penalty earned was ultimately dealt?


Subjecting the entire field to the same kind of visual scrutiny as was on the leaders would be ideal, but it's also a pipe dream. The current system where the players who have a real chance to win the championship are subject to the most scrutiny brings the proceedings closer to fairness than selectively turning the cameras off. I'm pretty sure that the players would take that stronger microscope as an inverse reward for their excellent play every time.


Finally, let's not fool ourselves into thinking there's some causality between what happened at the U.S. Open and what happened in the U.S. Women's Open. The vast majority of U.S. Opens and other big-time golf tournaments have come and gone without any rules weirdness, so even though these two episodes have happened back-to-back, they're still anomalies.

Also, +1

[Ken Moum]

and Ken Mourn, Portugal almost won the Euro 2016 yesterday on a free kick given by Mark Clattenburg for a hand ball at the end of the game, which video review clearly showed striking the Portuguese player, not the French defender.  He's one of the best, called what he saw and the TV folks covering the tourney were all in high praise for the officiating at this event.


Nothing could be done, a hand ball was what Clatterburg saw.  Luckily Portugal hit the woodwork on the free kick and this became a non-issue.


Soccer only has goal line video review.  No one called into Far Hills or Nyon, Switzerland  to stop the match or have France take a goal kick after the play because Clattenburg missed one.

As I said before, soccer ain't golf.  The game thrives on cheating.


I can tell you this, anyone who gets beat by a player who should have been penalized over an infraction seen by millions of viewers.... but ignored by the committee isn't going to agree with your line of thinking.


K

[MCirba]

David,

Yes, your wider observation that credit for what he's "earned" cuts both ways is very true in Tiger's case, as it does with most of us, sooner or later, I suppose.

[Daryl David]

What I've seen with all big organizations (whether focused on politics or business or sport) over the last 20 years is the hyper-consolidation of power at the top, in the hands of the very few.

While the leaders in all these organizations all talk off the same script about "employee empowerment" and "breaking down the silos" and "flattening the reporting relationships", what they've actually been doing (and becoming experts at) is ensuring that all key decisions (including, of course, those involving salaries and benefits) are made by a small group of hand-picked cronies and confidantes, all of whom know and play by the rules of this (inside) game. 
 

It has always been so in the 35 years I've been involved in golf, and probably for long before that. 


The only difference is the increase of p.r. to assure us it's not so.  And, different people in the seats of power.


I did not see the incident as I had to catch a flight just as the playoff started.  What I haven't seen from anyone here was whether FOX analysts called it out right away, or whether they were getting phone calls from viewers, or what compelled them to report it.  I am wondering if their "partnership" with the USGA, and their pointed criticism during the telecast of the final round at Oakmont, led them to bring it up.

They did not call it right away.  It  was after the hole was played that the video came to light. (It wasn't a part of the live shot shown real time)  Must have been someone in the truck that called the booth and USGA around the same time. I wonder if the network is required to report things the camera picks up to the USGA or it was just a technician's decision to insert themselves into the tournament.

[Jason Topp]

I have not seen it but it is unclear to me what the issue is.  Unlike the DJ ruling which in my view involved a poorly written rule, if the descriptions are accurate this one is a straight up breach of a rule that has been around for as long as I can remember.  Anyone who plays in a stroke play, especially for a living, event knows you cannot brush sand on the backswing.   

Using video evidence to determine whether a breach occurred has been around for quite awhile.

How did the USGA screw this one up?

[Jim_Coleman]

   I looked at the tape again, and I agree that Norquist did not cause the channel, and I doubt she was aware that the couple of grains of sand moved.  I must say, her bunker routine does seem to ask for trouble.  When I hit a bunker shot, I'm sure hover at least an inch or two above the sand.

[Bruce Katona]

David Schmidt:


The family of Dean Martin ( I don't know about Betty Ford) would be appalled to have Dino compared to the current USGA President.  Dino required a bit of lubrication to be on his "A" game.   


Ken: You win.

[MCirba]

OK, I'll try.  All the time the TV dimbulbs waste talking about rules controversies could be spent talking about architectural features on the golf course like flyer strips instead...

Good one, David.

How about a little Maintenance Meld?   

I would contend that no such infraction would have occurred on a course with finer grained sand, such as often found on true linksland.   In this case, the bunker sand seemed as big and coarse as pebbles, or small boulders even. 

The miracle is how those large grains didn't stop her backswing entirely!   

[Bob Montle]

Is it true that the last group needed 5 hours 45 minutes to play?

If I were King of the World, anyone playing in more than 4 hours would be immediately disqualified.

Admittedly, I was only in a twosome, but we played 18 holes in 2 hrs 26 minutes yesterday.
We were required to have a cart, but it was cart-path only.

Also, I thought we were playing too slowly and expected a ranger to tell us to speed up.

[Carl Johnson]

OK, I'll try.  All the time the TV dimbulbs waste talking about rules controversies could be spent talking about architectural features on the golf course like flyer strips instead...

I would contend that no such infraction would have occurred on a course with finer grained sand, such as often found on true linksland.     

Not clear what the wink means here, but in my experience links land "sand" is very coarse . . . not fine grained at all.