He had two-shots to make PAR (EXPERT PLAY, remember) from 30 feet.
Actually, he had THREE shots to make par.
The complaint (comment?) was that after driving the green on a short par four, he couldn't see a way to get his EAGLE putt closer than 10 feet.
While I certainly have sympathy for anyone with a putt that difficult, I'm pretty sure there are plenty of examples of holes where "good" drives that end up in the wrong place strategically leave even a great player with no chance of getting closer than 10 feet.
Note that I said good drives in the wrong place , as opposed to plain old bad drives.
Where I play in the winter, Red Mountain Ranch CC, the eight hole is a short par four that's theoretically driveable, but players who choose the "correct" tees typically have a wedge or nine iron approach. If the hole is in front of that green and you hit it in the middle, leaving 10 feet would be a good first putt.
When the course opened it had bent grass greens and that same putt would usually end up 10 yards off the green.
I think this is a great point, as the question starts with a driveable par 4, and I think it would also apply to a reachable par 5. Seems to me to be very fair to have the result of “going for it” have both good and bad outcomes, possibly putting you in a place where you realistically have a hard time 2 putting, versus understanding where the pin is, and laying up to attack with a wedge or some other controlled shot. My course has both types of holes, and depending on the pin location, the members would use 2 different strategies on different days. Isn’t that ok?