[Patrick_Mucci]

Brent Hutto,

Do you think that a breach of the rules should be ignored ?

[rgkeller]

Since Mr. Keller was apparently on the scene pacing it off with Mr. "Not Part of the Story" Bamberger, I'll defer to his superior knowledge of the situation. I guess that's the problem with kids these days, they'll cheat every time they get the chance. Good thing we've got people with press passes on the spot to keep them honest. Maybe his not saying anything until the next day was just intended to teach the girl a lesson.

An experienced and qualified rules official made the investigation and the ruling. His commentary is available on the LPGA website. The delay in Bamberger's reporting the possible infraction was wrong. However, the FACTS indicate that Wie did, in fact, break the rules - TWO rules actually - and deserved a penalty.

She decided to push the edge and got caught.

[TEPaul]

"She decided to push the edge and got caught."

One of the nice things about the Rules of Golf and competent rules officials like Robert O. Smith, rg, is they just attempt to determine the "facts" of the actual rules situation and then make a correct ruling on those "facts" alone and after the ruling they only report the "facts" of the rules situation as they were determined and ruled on and they refrain from assumptions of motive or intent on the part of the player, as you just did.  

[rgkeller]

The FACT is that a legal drop would have put Ms. Wie in a bad lie. The FACT is that the illegal drop gave Ms. Wie a good lie. The FACT is that Ms. Wie knew that she was operating close to the boundary because she redropped and then placed her ball because it rolled a foot or so closer to the hole and she determined that the resting spot was now nearer to the hole than the original location.

Further the FACT is that Ms. Wie had no qualms about calling for an official to successfully lobby for a free drop from a bush with bees present.

The FACT is that faced with a close call on the drop from an unplayable lie, Ms. Wie chose NOT to call for an official before taking the advantageous and illegal drop.

The FACT is after being questioned about drop at the SATURDAY news conference, Ms. Wie did not seek out the Committee and inform them about a possible rules violation asking them to investigate the matter.

Since I am not a Rules Official, I feel free to draw some conclusions from the FACTS surrounding Ms. Wie's actions. Others may draw different conclusions, based on Ms. Wie's age, supposed innocence and any other factors.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
Are you saying she should know that by waiting around on a Rules official before wiping her nose she'll ensure never having a penalty assessed the next day? Or are you saying she should take her own piece of string to measure the distance to the hole before a drop?"

Brent:

Yes, unfortunately, I am saying that if Wie had waited for a rules official to oversee her drop for her and to tell her it was OK that even if the drop turned out to be incorrect Wie would not be penalized. Frankly, I don't know how in the world something like that could be improved on within the rules. If a player can't rely on a ruling from a rules official who can he rely on? This increasingly common practice of "after the fact" reporting of rules infractions from "witnesses" perhaps should be reanalyzed somehow within the rules. Some of the recomendations Dan King and Mike Sweeney mentioned about that might work better. As to the Rules of Golf requiring all groups have a rules official to observe everything is absolutely never going to happen in golf and I'd never recommend something that unlikely.

Golfers of all levels really do have a certain responsibility to protect their own interests in tournament golf and the best way I know they can do that is to understand the Rules of Golf well and apply those Rules themselves correctly (with the oversight of their "fellow competitors" who do have a responsiblity to protect the "field". Unfortunately an incorrect ruling confirmed by a fellow competitor does not enure a player against penalty as does and incorrect ruling confirmed by a rules official.

"It sounded to me like she knew the Rule and applied it correctly. Her estimation of distance was retroactively determined to be in error which is what resulted in her disqualification."

You have to understand that the "facts" of where the ball originally was and where the drop was on which the measuring took place (the next day) and the ruling was made the next day were "facts" that were confirmed by Michele Wie and her caddie---not Bamberger or anyone else.

[TEPaul]

"Since I am not a Rules Official, I feel free to draw some conclusions from the FACTS surrounding Ms. Wie's actions. Others may draw different conclusions, based on Ms. Wie's age, supposed innocence and any other factors."

rg:

You certainly aren't a rules offiical and it shows loud and clear. Good rules officials try to collect the "facts" of any rules situation from the player or players involved as Smith did. Good rules officials don't get into a series of "assumptions" about a player's motives and intent, most particularly after the fact of the ruling. If you were a rules official in that situation and said the things you have about it on here after the fact, and I was in charge of the tournament or association you were officiating for I guarantee you I'd insure you never worked another tournament in that association again.

[Doug Siebert]

rgkeller,

How is what Wie did "trying to gain an unfair advantage" any different than stuff like Ernie Els always calling for second opinions on rulings he doesn't like -- and he's hardly the only one who does that sort of thing.  Tiger certainly stretched the spirit of the rules when he had a dozen guys carry a huge boulder out of his way as a "loose impediment" a few years ago.  Isn't that trying to gain an unfair advantage over the field, since Billy Joe Nobody struggling to make the cut could never muster up a bunch of guys willing to risk back injury and hernias to help him!

IMHO, this SI guy is just a publicity seeker, plain and simple, for waiting for the next day so he could get her DQed instead of just sticking her with a penalty.  If he thought it was odd, he could have let someone know that afternoon and the officials could have reviewed the tape and enforced the penalty on her then.  But he sensed a big story if he could verify it himself and get his name in the papers.  He just better hope Wie's fans aren't as diehard as Tiger's -- if he got Tiger DQed SI would probably have thousands of fans writing in threatening to cancel their subscriptions unless he was fired!

Imagine if college football ran this way.  You get two teams playing, there's a controversial call at the end, and one team is declared the winner.  Some SI photographer gets a picture from just the right angle where the TV cameras and officials weren't and publishes it on Monday, and it conclusively shows the call was wrong and that the other team in fact was the winner.  I don't think anyone would want the outcome to be reversed after the fact like that.

[Steve Wilson]

I don't know if Ms. Wie decided to push the envelope or not, but it's apparent she broke two rules and her punishment fit the crimes.   By the same token, I can speak to Bamberger's motives, and while his conduct didn't break a rule per se, his  time delay activated conscience attracts flies in my universe.
     His timing was off by more hours than her drop was by inches.

He couldn't accept her explanation of using "the triangle thing" as her means of determining the drop point, but we are supposed to nod appreciately and murmur "Makes sense" when he justifies his tardy notification of the officials due to him being in "reporter mode."

I tuned in to ESPN to catch PTI and Wilbon and Cornheiser (sp) both thought that Bamberger's timing stunk.

I truly regret all of this for I very much enjoyed Bamberger's book To the Linksland, but I don't think I would buy anything else he ever published as I don't think he's someone I want to be giving money to.

[Brent Hutto]

Pat,

I believe measuring the distance from the drop point to the hole is the responsibility of the players with the assistance of the officials helping run the tournament. I do not believe the players or officials should ignore violations of the Rules nor do I believe that Michelle Wie, her caddie or her fellow competitor allowed the ball to played from a spot they knew to be closer to the hole in a deliberate attempt to circumvent those Rules.

I also believe as I have stated that some spectator with a press credential out there pacing off distances and interjecting himself into the tournament is contrary to the spirit of the game. In my opinion Mr. Bamberger had no standing to offer an unsolicited evaluation of the facts of the case at any time. Allowing him to do so at the time of the infraction would be somewhat reasonable, allowing it the next day is just wrong.

[Brent Hutto]

Tom,

I wouldn't think it at all practical for the Rules to specify the presence of officials. I just think making explicit the list of persons with standing to investigate and present the facts of a situation would be a good idea.

Every time a golfer has ever taken a free or penalty drop there has been a finite chance that the ball was actually closer to the hole. The fact of the ball's position relative to the hole has to be considered a settled manner at some point. I'm just suggesting that the Rules specify a point fairly close in time to the occurance of the drop.

[TEPaul]

I must say that Michael Bamberger is a friend of mine--not a particularly close friend but I've known him pretty well for maybe a dozen years.

Did Michael completely understand what this whole chain of events he got involved in could lead to? I have no idea. I think it's pretty safe to say that he probably didn't understand this entire Rule 33 situation and procedure and all the cross referencing from Rules 28, 20, 6 and 33 as well as people like John VanderB and I do. Why would he---I doubt he's ever officiated.

I will tell you one undeniable certainty about Michael, though, and that is he really is one of the most extraordinary "purists" I've ever run across regarding both golf, equipment and also golf architecture.

Ironically, I hadn't seen Michael in a couple of years and ran into him and his wonderful wife most unexpectedly last weekend at Nemacolin Woodlands.

Rather than just speculating on what his motives were I'd rather just ask him what he really knew or understood about what the technicalities of various scenarios to Wie could have resulted in as he reported this situation to rules officials when he did.

Could he have warned her of a potentially wrong drop before she teed off on the next hole? That's very unlikely and would've been seriously frowned on. Could he have warned her before she signed her card if he even understood the signficance of that? That's pretty unlikely too. Knowing what he says he felt should he have just kept his mouth shut in the pressroom after she signed her card? That's tough to say. If you were convinced someone had violated a rule what would you have done if you were in his position? Would you have felt all you could do was just realize you could never really mention it before the "close of competition" on Sunday without potentially creating this kind of brouhaha? I have no idea what he thought or understood during this whole chain of events but maybe I'll ask him someday. Michael Bamberger really is a purist but only he can answer those things. I know I can't and I don't think any of you can either.

[Brent Hutto]

Since I am not a Rules Official, I feel free to draw some conclusions from the FACTS surrounding Ms. Wie's actions. Others may draw different conclusions, based on Ms. Wie's age, supposed innocence and any other factors.

If Bamberger had pulled this stunt on Annika Sorenstam instead of Michelle Wie my opinion and my comments on this thread would have been exactly the same. It is a virtual certainty that at some point in her career Annika has executed a drop in which the ball ended up closer to the hole but that fact went unnoticed. The same is true of anyone who has played golf for many years.

Bamberger's dishonorable behavior and our lack of belief in your attribution of the player's intention to cheat has nothing to do with the player's age or "other factors". If someone told me that rgkeller had taken a penalty drop resulting in the ball being slightly closer to the hole I would assume that you had proceeded to put that ball in play fully thinking that you had made a legal drop.

[TEPaul]

It should be noted that recently Annika Sorenstam did something I've never heard of an active Tour player doing. She signed up for and took an advanced course (generally takes a few days) on the Rules of Golf from the USGA (as most rules officials do). Is it any wonder that Sorenstam is as successful as she has been? She obviously brings to her profession total preparation in every single way. Taking a full-blown Rules school class from the USGA, again, is something I've never heard of a tour player doing and certainly not a current star.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Not sure it changes a thing, but something the Golf Channel noted was that Mr Barnberger professionally caddied on the Euro Tour for a few years-- So, despite his career in journalism, he has a background in the game--and lest you think caddies are not "part of the ruling process" they are frequently key witnesses in fact finding issues re rules questions--

Also according to the TGC he talked with his boss before making the inquiry--

I could not tell from the video exactly what happened, but what MW does need to learn is that in taking relief she needs to "sell" what see is doing and make clear that she has located a position well within the proper drop area-- or if she is dropping on the edge (which she was) she had better sell the fact she had confirmed it was not nearer the hole.

If I was officiating that event from afar I probably would have tried to get to the point before she played, and if not would have examined the area since it looked like she was attempting to get something out of the drop she may have been entitled to and perhaps intentionally dropping in such a manner so that she could place the ball.

Translatiion-- If a player does not want to draw a possible bad lie from a drop sometimes they will intentionally drop right on the outside point to achieve a likely roll closer to the hole twice so they can place-- However they better be real precise where that point is, and not calling in a Rules official is a real risk-- I think MW was aware of that risk and lost when she was unable to establish her drop point was in compliance with Rule 28.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Tom,

Are you saying she should know that by waiting around on a Rules official before wiping her nose she'll ensure never having a penalty assessed the next day? Or are you saying she should take her own piece of string to measure the distance to the hole before a drop?

It sounded to me like she knew the Rule and applied it correctly. Her estimation of distance was retroactively determined to be in error which is what resulted in her disqualification. It's not knowing the Rules of Golf that would help her, it is knowing the proper procedure for immunizing herself against retroactive disqualification.

At any rate, she knows it now and as Dan King said at the top of the thread this will just be one more step in the inexolerable slowing of the game.

What you need to know about Rule 28 procedure is this-- the ball can roll closer to the hole after it first contacts a part of the course so long as it does not come to rest closer to the hole than where it originally lay in an unplayable lie-- Therefore a player who is attempting to "push the envelope" by hoping to place the ball after two drops can not use the NPR procedrue used in Rule 24 or 25(obstructions or ground under repair)--

If MW was attempting to get into a placing situation she would have to drop the ball at the outside point of relief under Rule 28c(the two club length option) and that is a real precise point where, if she does not get guidance from a Rules Official, is a high risk situation,

She could have safely dropped within the two club lengths and this would not have been an issue--but if she wanted to place (and I am guessing she did) she exposed herself to a high risk procedure--and she lost.

[Dennis_Harwood]

"She decided to push the edge and got caught."

One of the nice things about the Rules of Golf and competent rules officials like Robert O. Smith, rg, is they just attempt to determine the "facts" of the actual rules situation and then make a correct ruling on those "facts" alone and after the ruling they only report the "facts" of the rules situation as they were determined and ruled on and they refrain from assumptions of motive or intent on the part of the player, as you just did.  

She did press the envelope-- And here is why--

She was taking relief under Rule 28, and if she wanted to set up a place and two drop situation (which I believe she did) she does not have the luxury of fixing the NPR under Rules 24 or 25--Rather proceeding under Rule 28 she must find that point at the outter edge of the relief area--not far enough and even if the ball rolls closer to the hole if its not closer than its original unplayable position then if she lifts the ball to redrop its a penalty-- if she is beyond the line, as she apparently was , when she places and plays she is playing from a wrong place--

Without an official its like performing brain surgery without a doctor-- But she obviously wanted to assume that risk in order to be able to place the ball.

[Mike_Sweeney]

From LPGA.com

Q. When did you find out there might be a problem, when were you first told?
MICHELLE WIE: Like 10 minutes after I signed my scorecard today.


Rules Guys,

This happened 10 minutes after signing her scorecard. Is there anything to stop it from happening 10 hours or 10 day after she signs? Is there a formal process, time limit or other for the Tournament Committee to "close out" a tournament? By that I mean, there is no changing the results, the results stand no mattter what is discovered down the road.

[rgkeller]

Since I am not a Rules Official, I feel free to draw some conclusions from the FACTS surrounding Ms. Wie's actions. Others may draw different conclusions, based on Ms. Wie's age, supposed innocence and any other factors.

If Bamberger had pulled this stunt on Annika Sorenstam instead of Michelle Wie my opinion and my comments on this thread would have been exactly the same. It is a virtual certainty that at some point in her career Annika has executed a drop in which the ball ended up closer to the hole but that fact went unnoticed. The same is true of anyone who has played golf for many years.

Bamberger's dishonorable behavior and our lack of belief in your attribution of the player's intention to cheat has nothing to do with the player's age or "other factors". If someone told me that rgkeller had taken a penalty drop resulting in the ball being slightly closer to the hole I would assume that you had proceeded to put that ball in play fully thinking that you had made a legal drop.

Ms. Wie chose a spot with a good lie that "looked" to be no nearer the hole.

Ms. Wie should have called for a Rules Official - NOT TO COVER HER ASS, BUT TO ENSURE THAT SHE WAS NOT GAINING AN UNFAIR AND ILLEGAL ADVANTAGE.

There are many many golfers, some tour professionals who go out of their way to avoid rules violations. Davis Love in last years Ryder Cup comes to mind. There are others who have spent their professional careers pushing the edge of the Rules for advantages over the field. Ernie Els, Gary Player, Stewart Cink, Seve Ballesteros are examples.

I hope that Ms. Wie learned a lesson here. I fear that she learned the wrong one.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Well at least George White agrees with me!

http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=15104&dv=7320213&select=17857&select2=1

[JohnV]

Mike,
The tournament officials were informed of the possible breach when the last group was on the 14th hole and Wie was on the 15th hole.

Also from LPGA.com:
Q. When did the spectator bring this up?
ROBERT O. SMITH: I was sitting on the 15th hole. The final group was on, what, Jim, 14.
JIM HALEY: Yes, somebody else asked me the same thing. I think it was about 40 minutes before the tournament was over.

Perhaps you would have preferred that they haul her off the course immediately to resolve it.  Since there was no way this could affect her future play in the tournament there was no point in telling her before she finished the round.  If it was a possible violation during the 4th round, they might have said something to her earlier as knowing she might have a penalty might cause her to play differently.

If you read some of this or the Bees and Wie thread you will see that Rule 34 sets a specific time limit which is when the tournament is officially over.  According to Kendra Graham on Golf Central last night the LPGA declares a tournament over when the money list is released to the media.  Obviously they didn't do that until this was resolved.

To those who say that the official should have ignored a report like this or that the rule should be changed so that he could have ignored it don't realize what a bad situation that could put an official in.  Lets say a person somes up and says, I saw Vijay Singh take a bad drop.  The person seems credible so I investigate it and determine that he did and penalize him.  Later another person comes up and says, I saw Tiger Woods take a bad drop, but the person seems flaky so I ignore it.  Aren't I opening myself up for charges of favoritism?  By requiring me to investigate every incident and by investigating them all as thoroughly as possible I'm assured that I never get in that situation.

Bamberger has said he wanted to ask Michelle about it first.  If he did ask her about it on Saturday, she should have gone to an official then or Sunday morning and gotten it cleared up.

[Brent Hutto]

John,

My preference would be for a Decision to specify that the officials are not to accept unsolicited offers of Rules violations from persons other than players and officials.

Failing that, at the very least it should be specified that an unsolicited offer from a person with no standing a day or more later is to be ignored.

I agree that asking the officials to decide whether a particular person is credible is a burden that puts them in a can't win situation.

[JohnV]

Well at least George White agrees with me!

http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=15104&dv=7320213&select=17857&select2=1

Wow, he must be a pretty important person since I've never heard of him before this.

The rulebook is so thick, and players are notorious in their ignorance of it.

That 85 page rule book must look pretty thick all right if all you know how to do is write a 500 word column.  Ignorance of the law is now an excuse?

How would he feel if there was an violation where it was obvious that someone was cheating and not just making a mistake, but nothing could be done because his statute of limitations had expired?

[Mike_Sweeney]

If you read some of this or the Bees and Wie thread you will see that Rule 34 sets a specific time limit which is when the tournament is officially over.  According to Kendra Graham on Golf Central last night the LPGA declares a tournament over when the money list is released to the media.  Obviously they didn't do that until this was resolved.

Thanks, now I am clear.

To those who say that the official should have ignored a report like this or that the rule should be changed so that he could have ignored it don't realize what a bad situation that could put an official in.  Lets say a person somes up and says, I saw Vijay Singh take a bad drop.  The person seems credible so I investigate it and determine that he did and penalize him.  Later another person comes up and says, I saw Tiger Woods take a bad drop, but the person seems flaky so I ignore it.  Aren't I opening myself up for charges of favoritism?  By requiring me to investigate every incident and by investigating them all as thoroughly as possible I'm assured that I never get in that situation.

John, I think officials should ignore all of these. I think they should only invetigate those that come through that which they observe, from tournament officials and tournament players.

Bamberger has said he wanted to ask Michelle about it first.  If he did ask her about it on Saturday, she should have gone to an official then or Sunday morning and gotten it cleared up.

This would be fine to me if Wie, not Bamberger, reported the incident to tournament officials. The problem of course is with the power of Sports Illustrated behind you, a reporter could potentially abuse this, but that is not a Rules of Golf problem

[Craig Sweet]

rgkeller


"Ms. Wie chose a spot with a good lie that "looked" to be no nearer the hole."

Isn't that what golfers do everyday in countless matches? Using our best judgement we take a drop that "looks" to be no nearer the hole. Do you carry string with you to measure every drop when you play your weekly 4'some game? I doubt it...

[PThomas]

Redanman - you are absolutely correct about the focus being on the wrong golfer...probably the greatest woman player ever doubles the last in that field - and still wins by 8!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()