Reed Does It Again

[John Kavanaugh]

This new culture of cheat shaming has made stroke play competition outside your primary group difficult to enjoy. None of us really understand the rules but at least when you see it with your own eyes you can take responsibility for your losses. Match play, match play, match play.

[Rob Marshall]

Interesting to know how many commenting have either officiated at tournament and/or attended Rules School.  In my experience, I have had several circumstances where players claimed a ball was embedded and my examination revealed that it was not.  It wasn't that hard to determine but maybe I was lucky.  The problem here is the perception that Reed does not respect the spirit of the rules and may even violate their letter.  The fact that certain media types are prepared to convict him on a moments notice makes it worse.  That said, he earned his reputation and he will have to live with it.  Each situation deserves to be evaluated on its own merits although I suspect that I would have to restrain myself from approaching Reed with a jaundiced eye if I were approached for a ruling.

Shel,
There was a time when I played in a lot of local and state events. I personally would never lift a ball I thought might be embedded without someone in my group watching and I would never take a drop unless they acknowledged it was embedded. That’s just me. Based on what’s happened in the past Reed would be smart to do the same.

[JohnVDB]

Interesting to know how many commenting have either officiated at tournament and/or attended Rules School.  In my experience, I have had several circumstances where players claimed a ball was embedded and my examination revealed that it was not.  It wasn't that hard to determine but maybe I was lucky.  The problem here is the perception that Reed does not respect the spirit of the rules and may even violate their letter.  The fact that certain media types are prepared to convict him on a moments notice makes it worse.  That said, he earned his reputation and he will have to live with it.  Each situation deserves to be evaluated on its own merits although I suspect that I would have to restrain myself from approaching Reed with a jaundiced eye if I were approached for a ruling.

Shel,
There was a time when I played in a lot of local and state events. I personally would never lift a ball I thought might be embedded without someone in my group watching and I would never take a drop unless they acknowledged it was embedded. That’s just me. Based on what’s happened in the past Reed would be smart to do the same.

Rob, before 2019, you were required to tell another player and give them the opportunity to observe what you were doing. It’s not a bad idea. And Reed did tell another player and then when it was a question got an official which is better than another player. 


Most of the time, the player yelled to another player that he was lifting his ball and the other player just said, ok, so it was felt that penalizing a player for a simple failure to follow a procedure wasn’t needed. Also, the basic premise of golf is that players are honest (I know, but that is the premise) so why do we need to watch them in this situation when we don’t watch them the rest of the time.

[Bill Brightly]

My question is why are people playing golf in a place with that kind of rough?  But perhaps I'm on the wrong thread...

[Jim_Coleman]

John:  is it common to determine whether a ball is embedded to do it by feel?  In my experience, it is always done by sight.  The official here seemed to stick his finger in the ground and feel some kind of edge. He never looked to see if the surface was broken. I’ve always spread whatever grass is covering the ground to see the the surface has been broken.
   If he actually did find a pitch mark, there is no way Reed’s ball caused it on a bounce.

[Jason Thurman]

I think he followed the procedure correctly. I also think he was cheating the entire time. I think we all know pretty good and well that his ball wasn't embedded, and yet he got himself a drop.


Then again, there are a few twitter accounts that say he's in the right. So maybe I'm just cynical.

[Pat Burke]

FWIW
There is NO part of me that would believe Brad Fabel would cave to any “intimidation”


Marking the ball in the rough to check if it’s plugged is normal procedure, with deep grass, is very difficult otherwise.


If nobody said they saw it bounce first, it’s perfectly reasonable to think the ball plugged given the weather yesterday, and it seems he did this correctly

[Matt_Cohn]

FWIW
There is NO part of me that would believe Brad Fabel would cave to any “intimidation”


Marking the ball in the rough to check if it’s plugged is normal procedure, with deep grass, is very difficult otherwise.


If nobody said they saw it bounce first, it’s perfectly reasonable to think the ball plugged given the weather yesterday, and it seems he did this correctly

I'm also having a hard time seeing what anyone would be complaining about if it weren't Patrick Reed.

[Jerry Kluger]

I believe they mentioned that Reed was in with. the scorers for a long time after his round - I presume now that it was because of this.  What was the final outcome?  Do I understand that currently if the rules official was incorrect and Reed had signed his card that he would not be disqualified but he would be assessed the proper number of penalty strokes?

[Paul Rudovsky]

Question--


I was half watching the golf this afternoon and did not see this.  Have read all the comments here and read the articles on TGC website... but cannot find a video showing the shot landing and bouncing once.  Is it available someplace on the web?  Where did you guys see it?


Thanks.

[Jason Thurman]

Bouncing landing: https://twitter.com/bennettevan/status/1355615370812518407?s=19
Full exchanges with spotter, playing partners, and official: https://twitter.com/PGATOUR/status/1355659901897486341?s=19

I really like the parts where he asks if it bounced a good 10 secs before reaching the ball, spends 6 seconds lifting it while still moving quickly enough to make sure it's well out of the way by the time the official arrives, and then putting the onus on him immediately. It's James Harden-level shit.

This dude keeps showing us who he is. Hell, this drop isn't even the biggest Patrick Reed story of the day.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Having watched the errant approach shot and what Reed did, I am amazed that he is getting roasted on this one.  There is no way he or his fellow players and caddies could see the ball land. And for those who know Torrey, it becomes a mud sanctuary after any rainfall.  And even worse, the amount of water that drains from Scripps Green Hospital onto the 9th and 10th is very substantial, bordering upon epic during an inch plus rainfall.  Unfortunately in the past, I spent quite a few rainy days at Scripps with my parents, so I have witnessed the water flows.  If there was a spot that a bounced ball could plug, above the cart path would be ideal

[Tim Leahy]

Anybody else notice the tree support wire right behind his original plugged ball location. Looked to me that he would have received relief from that even if the plugged ball hadn't been ruled in his favor. Move along people.

[Jeff Schley]

Wow, I'm shocked that the rules official agreed with Reed after he stuck his finger to check for a lip apparently. I can't see how a ball can create a lip so as to be classified as embedded from after falling from 2 feet in the air on a bounce into very high rough. I don't know if Reed saw the ball bounce or not, but when the volunteer incorrectly stated it didn't (when she should have said I'm not sure) it allowed Reed to "check" and he did alert his playing partners.


I guess the rules allow you to move the ball as well before a rules official or your playing partners witness it. If the ball is obviously embedded upon visual inspection, why not call over your playing partner to ask, or a rules official before moving it?  I guess that isn't required, but I'd like to have at least your playing partners have to visually inspect the ball before being moved. Was this changed in 2019?  Can I move the ball and then verbally tell you what I believe and allow the playing partner or rules official to only inspect the "crater or lip" of where the ball was?

I agree with several others here in that how in the heck did the ball become embedded off a bounce of 2 feet into very heavy rough? I don't see how that is physically possible, so both Reed's opinion and moving of the ball led the rules official to stick his finger in that crater to identify a lip apparently. I don't question the rules official's integrity, but I think it more possible that:

1. Reed perhaps pushed the ball into the ground before removing it. On video it is plausible he exerted some pressure onto the ball so as to make a lip or crater IMO. Why lift it and move it for heavens sakes, then call a rules official?
2. The rules official did a cursory evaluation of the crater to find the lip, and perhaps made an error in judgement (not in ethics).

I mean we are to the point with Patrick Reed where he almost should be mandated to wear a body cam like police officers. Make him and his caddie wear body cams and charge $9.99 a tournament for archival footage for all fans to inspect. Donate the funds to charity and at the end of the year I think you will have a robust fund to do some good.

[Sinclair Eaddy]

I'm in complete agreement with Matt Cohn if anyone would be complaining if it weren't Patrick Reed. John VDB has acquitted himself perfectly well in this discussion but here I feel compelled to chime in. John is not just a "retired rules official" who has taught Rules of Golf workshops he is an acknowledged EXPERT on the Rules of Golf. He has helped and provided feedback on the actual drafting of the rules AND he was involved with creating the actual Rules of Golf qualifying exam that all serious and professional rules officials must take (and master). I'm telling you if John VDB says its righteous you can bank on it. Period. I do not make any judgment about Reed's character just the rules. I'll leave all the other stuff to Chamblee and Twitter.

[David_Elvins]

I'm in complete agreement with Matt Cohn if anyone would be complaining if it weren't Patrick Reed.

Yet when Matt Kuchar tried to cheat the same way, everyone did complain.  Anyone getting a free drop for an embedded ball on a ball that bounced is going to get roasted.

[David_Elvins]

My question is why are people playing golf in a place with that kind of rough?  But perhaps I'm on the wrong thread...

And why is a local rule used to give players relief from imbedded balls in that kind of rough?


Why not just play the normal rules of golf that were designed to keep things simple by not offering relief for an embedded ball in the rough? 

[Thomas Dai]

Worth posting these for historic purposes -

https://twitter.com/i/status/1355660459655876612 - ‘interesting’ how PR’s body is almost entirely aligned between the camera and the ball. Is there just visible some finger-ball-ground movement though?

and
https://twitter.com/i/status/1355661980355407872


Later edit - per the Golf Channel - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aIKObXgWpRY

atb

PS - consider the implications for sports gambling.

PSS - another reason to have less manicured rough and more grass cut to fairway height?

[James Reader]

My question is why are people playing golf in a place with that kind of rough?  But perhaps I'm on the wrong thread...

And why is a local rule used to give players relief from imbedded balls in that kind of rough?


Why not just play the normal rules of golf that were designed to keep things simple by not offering relief for an embedded ball in the rough?

This isn’t a local rule.  The new rules give relief for an embedded ball anywhere in the ‘general area’ - ie including the rough.

[David_Elvins]

This isn’t a local rule.  The new rules give relief for an embedded ball anywhere in the ‘general area’ - ie including the rough.

Thanks James,  hadn't realised that. I guess that dovetails into the other poor rule changes.

[James Reader]

This isn’t a local rule.  The new rules give relief for an embedded ball anywhere in the ‘general area’ - ie including the rough.

Thanks James,  hadn't realised that. I guess that dovetails into the other poor rule changes.

Agreed.  “Play it as it lies” isn’t what it used to be.

[Niall C]

I'm struggling to see where the rules infringement took place. If as John says, he was allowed to pick the ball up to check whether it was embedded, and then having done so conferred with a rules official and then Reed went along with the ruling given by the rules official, then where was the rules infringement ? And if you don't break the rules then how can that be cheating ?


John - perhaps you could answer this, if the rules official had decided that the ball hadn't imbedded then Reed could have put the ball back to where it was an played the shot without penalty ?


Niall

[Tim Martin]

How does the prize money situation work?
If a player is DQ’d does that mean the rest of the field who make the cut receive more prize money? If so it should be a damn good incentive for playing partners to watch like a hawk what the other guys/gals in their group are doing including refusing to sign cards if necessary.

And one more thing ........ betting on golf ....... if a player does or doesn’t get away with something a bit naughty there could be a lot of angry punters around, including potentially some in the field or on the premises ...... Pandora’s Box time.

Atb

Thomas-I thought of the gambling angle also. DraftKings will soon have betting lines born out of Reed’s propensity to improve his lie.

[David_Elvins]

I'm struggling to see where the rules infringement took place. If as John says, he was allowed to pick the ball up to check whether it was embedded, and then having done so conferred with a rules official and then Reed went along with the ruling given by the rules official, then where was the rules infringement ? And if you don't break the rules then how can that be cheating ?

Niall,


The most obvious potential rules infringement is Reed embedding his ball to get a free drop. 


All the available evidence points to Reed's ball not embedding,  Reed being pre-meditated in wanting to get ball in hand before he got to his ball, Reed spending about 5 seconds picking up his ball and then Reed getting relief for an embedded ball. 


The most likely explanation is that he embedded his ball. 

[Niall C]

David


It seems to me you've presupposed that Reed cheated, and then tried to find evidence, of which there is none, that fits your assumption. Then in the absence of evidence you are trying to build a case based on supposition.


I do however agree with your last line about the likely explanation of what happened is that Reed embedded his ball. Where we probably differ is on how he did it.


Niall