[Steve Lang]

Cris, must have been raining hard where you are...

[jeffwarne]

A viewer calls/writes on Sunday regarding an infraction on Thursday, which would have caused a player (now playing in the fourth round) to miss the cut.

Now what?

WW

Classic.
Better yet, that same player bogies the last hole on Friday to allow 12 extra guys to make the cut, and one of them is now leading on Sunday when the infraction that allowed 13 guys to make the cut is discovered.
What now?
Way worse than what happened Sunday.

[jeffwarne]

A viewer calls/writes on Sunday regarding an infraction on Thursday, which would have caused a player (now playing in the fourth round) to miss the cut.

Now what?

WW

Classic.
Better yet, that same player bogies the last hole on Friday to allow 12 extra guys to make the cut, and one of them is now leading on Sunday when the infraction that allowed 13 guys to make the cut is discovered.
What now?
Way worse than what happened Sunday.


Pat's right. There's no one to blame except the rules themselves,
but that would be the USGA.
I don't agree with most of the suggested rules changes, but this is one (call in rulings and penalties AFTER the scorecard is in in) that needs to go.

[Chris Cupit]

Pat's right. There's no one to blame except the rules themselves,
but that would be the USGA.
I don't agree with most of the suggested rules changes, but this is one (call in rulings and penalties AFTER the scorecard is in in) that needs to go.



Uh, the Royal and Ancient plays a little role too .

[jeffwarne]

Pat's right. There's no one to blame except the rules themselves,
but that would be the USGA.
I don't agree with most of the suggested rules changes, but this is one (call in rulings and penalties AFTER the scorecard is in in) that needs to go.



Uh, the Royal and Ancient plays a little role too .

They can get on board too , but meanwhile local rules for tours certainly would alleviate what has become a stain on our game.
What's your take on my scenario above where the would be cut misser is now leading?

[Bill Shamleffer]

To all of the comments that seem to imply that some want to ignore that what she did is a rules violation, that is not at all what the issue is about in this case.

If another player had seen her bad replacement and told her to correct it, almost all agree that would have been a correct call.

If the LPGA Rules Official happened to see the bad replacement, while Lexi's 3rd round was in process, informed her of the infraction and of her requirement to add a 2 stroke penalty, almost all agree that too would have been a correct call.

This controversy is about two things ONLY:
1. TV viewers, and other spectators (not part of the tournament in some capacity), getting involved in Rules issues.
2. A penalty being called after the round is fully completed for ALL participants, and the next round is now in progress.

The problem with #1, is that outsiders have no responsibility for fairness to the field.  All of the competitors, and the Rules and Tournament officials, all have obligations to be equally fair to each and every participant in the tournament.  Allowing outsiders to dictate what rules infractions our brought to attention (and possibly which ones are ignored by that outsider), can create inequalities among players.  Therefore, this practice MUST be highly discouraged, and not accepted as much as possible.

There could be exceptions.  First outright deliberate & purposeful cheating deserves to be identified by anyone.  Second, it can be helpful for players and rules officials to obtain facts from some spectators (i.e. where was the ball originally on the green, before another ball struck it and moved).

But, please stop acting like some are trying to ignore the rules just because a possible minor infraction resulted in a severe penalty.
Most will agree, the bad replacement result should be a penalty.  (She is a professional; she knows replacing a ball on the green is critical to be done with absolute precision, and she knows rule infractions can be harsh, but that is part of the game.)

The debate is all about outside referees (lacking ethical responsibilities of fairness to the field), and penalties assessed after ALL play is completed.

Bill--All play is completed after the competition is closed--not after a single round of that competition happens to be over.

Chris,


I agree, that is one of the issues.  I am not saying there is no debate here.  I just think the 2 issues are outside officiating, and calling a penalty from a prior round.  The correctness of either is up to debate.  I concentrated most of my arguement to the problems of allowing outside parties to call rules infractions.

[Chris Cupit]

Pat's right. There's no one to blame except the rules themselves,
but that would be the USGA.
I don't agree with most of the suggested rules changes, but this is one (call in rulings and penalties AFTER the scorecard is in in) that needs to go.



Uh, the Royal and Ancient plays a little role too .

They can get on board too , but meanwhile local rules for tours certainly would alleviate what has become a stain on our game.
What's your take on my scenario above where the would be cut misser is now leading?

I am without my book but if this is the question/scenario:


Player A commits a breach but does not include it in his Thursday score.  He makes the cut on the number because of this.  It is discovered Saturday or Sunday.  He is penalized 4 strokes on his Thursday card which would have meant he missed the cut.  At first blush I'd say he is a trunk slammer.

[Chris Cupit]

Cris, must have been raining hard where you are...

Yep 

[Chris Cupit]

Pat's right. There's no one to blame except the rules themselves,
but that would be the USGA.
I don't agree with most of the suggested rules changes, but this is one (call in rulings and penalties AFTER the scorecard is in in) that needs to go.



Uh, the Royal and Ancient plays a little role too .

They can get on board too , but meanwhile local rules for tours certainly would alleviate what has become a stain on our game.
What's your take on my scenario above where the would be cut misser is now leading?

Jeff--I happened to have my Women's Association meeting at the club today--86 ladies and someone brought up the Lexi issue and how golf was "different" than other sports.  Now these ladies are not golfers (not my 9 Holers or WGA) they play bridge, eat lunches and meet once a month with a guest speaker.  Anyway, the take among these non golf ladies was that unlike other sports golf was "nice" and playing by the rules for the entire competition was a good thing. 


They were not hung up on the fact that it was a "call in" penalty and instead focused on how golf was unique and "better" in that respect than typical sports.  I don't think this is nearly the black eye to outsiders that some seem to think.

[BCowan]

I remember when Meg Mallon was disqualified after an opening round of 65 in The Klinger Classic.  She waited more then 10 seconds for a ball hanging on the lip to fall. Signed an incorrect scorecard.


 http://www.deseretnews.com/article/500073/PITCOCK-CLOSES-WITH-A-BANG-TO-WREST-LEAD-FROM-MALLON.html

[Mark Bourgeois]

A viewer calls/writes on Sunday regarding an infraction on Thursday, which would have caused a player (now playing in the fourth round) to miss the cut.

Now what?

WW

Classic.
Better yet, that same player bogies the last hole on Friday to allow 12 extra guys to make the cut, and one of them is now leading on Sunday when the infraction that allowed 13 guys to make the cut is discovered.
What now?
Way worse than what happened Sunday.

What's the view if Thompson had won only to have the title stripped afterwards? Had this thought when considering that North Carolina men's basketball victories -- including a possible national title tonight -- are going to be vacated by the NCAA after the investigation concludes.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff--I happened to have my Women's Association meeting at the club today--86 ladies and someone brought up the Lexi issue and how golf was "different" than other sports.  Now these ladies are not golfers (not my 9 Holers or WGA) they play bridge, eat lunches and meet once a month with a guest speaker.  Anyway, the take among these non golf ladies was that unlike other sports golf was "nice" and playing by the rules for the entire competition was a good thing. 


They were not hung up on the fact that it was a "call in" penalty and instead focused on how golf was unique and "better" in that respect than typical sports.  I don't think this is nearly the black eye to outsiders that some seem to think.

Chris:


Your story brought to mind a story from another pro who told me that women, in general, tended to call for harsher penalties in club competition than men did.


He'd been officiating at a senior women's event and a player in one group had hit her second shot from the fairway, only to decapitate a mushroom.  [Her actual ball was 15 yards away.]  The ladies tried to resolve it themselves, but could not ... some thought the stroke should count, while others thought she should also receive a penalty for hitting the wrong ball.

[Ed Homsey]

Amazing to me that this OT thread has gone as far as it has.  7 pages!!  And, given the same piece of evidence, the opinions go from "hang her" to "hang them".  Seems to me, as a fellow golfer, the game should be ruled by those directly involved in it.  Not from some outside observer.  The notion that the game can be governed, or influenced, by folks far removed, with all of their video capabilities to play and replay specific actions, is absurd, in my opinion.  Has nothing to do with the intentions or motivations of the player, sanctity of the rules, etc.  It's just that the game should be played, and ruled, within the ropes.


Close the doors to outside, i.e. call/email-in parties.  If a rule is broken, whether by mistake or intentional, it should be penalized only through the call of those on the field.  If we need more on-site observers, so be it.   

[John Kavanaugh]

Sadly someone is going to have to be killed or seriously injured before we ban all forms of video from the course. Anyone who has ever been involved in junior golf knows that video of opposing players is going to be a serious issue. If you run a tournament and want a life, ban all video now.

[David_Elvins]

Is this worse than what Thompson did?

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/bad-mark-choi-withdraws-after-penalty-canadian-pacific/

[jeffwarne]

Is this worse than what Thompson did?

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/bad-mark-choi-withdraws-after-penalty-canadian-pacific/

yes.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Or also imagine winning a tournament and having an asterisk alongside your name because you breached a rule which was spotted but not enforced.

That - or if the LPGA had been made aware and covered it up - would have been much worse.

Since Mike Y is correct and you cannot exactly replace your ball after a mark-what is the accepted tolerance? Eighth of an inch? Quarter?, 3 eighths? No intent, no advantage...it's then a subjective call. Not like she moved her ball a putter length and forgot to adjust the mark.

The accepted distance is well less than she did. She marked it at least 0.7" away.

Is it just me or should the player not be more embarrassed than indignant when such an obvious violation of the rules is detected like this?

Seriously.
Lexi is the perpetrator here, not the victim.

Or just play by the rules. I never understand why there is such a groundswell of support to see a player get away with a flagrant rules violation.

Yes, this: just play by the rules. It's Lexi's responsibility and obligation to do so.

Elliot Saltman got banned and ostracized for this kind of action. And somehow everyone is giving Lexi a pass because a viewer phoned it in instead of a competitor?

Yeah. Had this not been a popular player, the outrage would have been significantly subdued.

Here is the problem: If you have a serial cheater (or even an accidental one) on tour who has a 50:50 chance of getting caught by such actions (and if you are not one of the stars maybe only a 10% chance). What is the harm for you to not call any rule infraction on yourself if the penalty stays the same no matter if you call it on yourself or it is discovered later?

That's why the extra penalty is added. Otherwise you'd never call a penalty on yourself. There'd be no downside to not including it.

I'll give you the first part...2 strokesbut not the incorrect card.The rule should be changed to waive the incorrect card penalty when the player was unaware there was a rules infraction at the time of signing.

The card was incorrect. She incurred a penalty, but didn't include it on her score card.

This is not the USGA!!!  Stop blaming them for everything.  The LPGA made the ruling.The new USGA rules will hopefully stop all this stupidity.  It will require reliance on the reasonable judgment of the player.  Unless there is a clear lack of judgment--or intentional cheating--it will not be a penalty.

I don't think the proposed rule will absolve Lexi. I think that's more to do with where a ball crosses the line in a Penalty Area, that sort of thing.

So, if no one had called, and The Golf Channel saw the infraction in the course of setting up their recap of the day, and then reported it, are they wrong to do so? No different than a call in after the fact, and the result would be same. Four shots.
………Seems these days if we don't like rules, we trash them and the people enforcing them, rather than following them and working towards equitably making changes

Yep, to all of that.

What's to stop fan/family from pouring over video in an attempt to find something that could potentially change the outcome in favor of their preferred player?

Nothing. Go for it. What's to stop them? The realization that the player they're targeting at least knows the rules well enough not to botch the simplest of them…

[Tim Leahy]

The rules are supposed to be applied fairly to all participants. Since all participants are not on TV you cant apply a video decision exclusively to one participant. If her partner calls it who is supposed to protect the field then the penalty should apply until the next hole is started or round is completed.

[Steve Okula]

Jeff--I happened to have my Women's Association meeting at the club today--86 ladies and someone brought up the Lexi issue and how golf was "different" than other sports.  Now these ladies are not golfers (not my 9 Holers or WGA) they play bridge, eat lunches and meet once a month with a guest speaker.  Anyway, the take among these non golf ladies was that unlike other sports golf was "nice" and playing by the rules for the entire competition was a good thing. 


They were not hung up on the fact that it was a "call in" penalty and instead focused on how golf was unique and "better" in that respect than typical sports.  I don't think this is nearly the black eye to outsiders that some seem to think.

Chris:


Your story brought to mind a story from another pro who told me that women, in general, tended to call for harsher penalties in club competition than men did.


He'd been officiating at a senior women's event and a player in one group had hit her second shot from the fairway, only to decapitate a mushroom.  [Her actual ball was 15 yards away.]  The ladies tried to resolve it themselves, but could not ... some thought the stroke should count, while others thought she should also receive a penalty for hitting the wrong ball.

Tom,

Assuming she was not in a hazard, how could that count as a stroke or penalty if the player has not addressed the ball, and is nowhere near it?

[Mark Kiely]

Anyone saying video shouldn't be allowed to make this type of ruling is essentially saying players should be able to get away with this type of infraction. A player's fellow competitors are concentrating on his/her own putts and can't be looking like hawks to ensure everyone is replacing his/her ball in the right spot. Neither can officials be expected to do so, especially if they are prohibited from "going to the video" to confirm what they think they saw.


And to those arguing that the caller/emailer might have an agenda other than the pure protection of the rules, it's not as if he/she made the definitive call on it. The LPGA received the email, examined the evidence and agreed with what was emailed, and then instituted the penalty. If the content of the email wasn't proven true, there wouldn't have been an issue.

[Jon Wiggett]

Anyone saying video shouldn't be allowed to make this type of ruling is essentially saying players should be able to get away with this type of infraction. A player's fellow competitors are concentrating on his/her own putts and can't be looking like hawks to ensure everyone is replacing his/her ball in the right spot. Neither can officials be expected to do so, especially if they are prohibited from "going to the video" to confirm what they think they saw.


And to those arguing that the caller/emailer might have an agenda other than the pure protection of the rules, it's not as if he/she made the definitive call on it. The LPGA received the email, examined the evidence and agreed with what was emailed, and then instituted the penalty. If the content of the email wasn't proven true, there wouldn't have been an issue.

Mark,


I disagree a little with what you are saying though understand where you are coming from.


Firstly, each player has a responsibility to the rest of the field to ensure that they and the rest of their group play according to the rules so a player so absorbed in their own game as to ignore what is going on in their group is failing in this duty. Secondly, I think there is an argument that the mistake was not deliberate and that the player gained absolutely no advantage from it. The rules are their to ensure fairness throughout the field and in this case the infringement did not cause there to be any advantage to the player.


This shows how HD telly is making a rod for big events.


Jon

[Tim Leahy]

Anyone saying video shouldn't be allowed to make this type of ruling is essentially saying players should be able to get away with this type of infraction. A player's fellow competitors are concentrating on his/her own putts and can't be looking like hawks to ensure everyone is replacing his/her ball in the right spot. Neither can officials be expected to do so, especially if they are prohibited from "going to the video" to confirm what they think they saw.


And to those arguing that the caller/emailer might have an agenda other than the pure protection of the rules, it's not as if he/she made the definitive call on it. The LPGA received the email, examined the evidence and agreed with what was emailed, and then instituted the penalty. If the content of the email wasn't proven true, there wouldn't have been an issue.

So if a player is not on TV they can mark their ball anywhere and their playing partner has no responsibility to protect the field. Not a chance in hell.

[Brian Walshe]

Probably the best thing to come out of this is that I can guarantee a LOT of care will be taken in marking and replacing the ball on the major tours in the next couple of weeks. We can complain about people calling in but how many people on Tour are prepared to call out this sort of infraction?  There are always whispers about some players but they never get called publically.  When was the last time a player called another player out?


Just to go back a bit, Dave Elvins nailed it with the comparison to the Chella Choi incident.  Both short putts, both marked and then replaced in a different spot.  The only difference was that Choi had the camera behind her and the move was very obvious.  Lexi was almost side one and it was harder to spot.  Had she marked and replaced the ball properly this whole thread doesn't exist.


An interesting facet to golf is that any knowing breach of the rules is automatically declared as "cheating".  There are plenty of sports where competitors will push the envelope right up until they are caught.  Let's hope that is never the case with golf.

[Jerry Kluger]

My solution would be the following:


Unless the committee is convinced that the act was done intentionally and to gain an advantage over the field, any rules violation detected after the round is completed shall not be assessed a penalty.

[Ben Attwood]

My solution would be the following:


Unless the committee is convinced that the act was done intentionally and to gain an advantage over the field, any rules violation detected after the round is completed shall not be assessed a penalty.

Yes, I completely agree. The rules of golf are underpinned by the spirit of the game which places the burden on the player not to cheat.


To give credit to the R&A and USGA I think the proposed rule changes want to reinforce that the rules are there to stop cheating, not to penalise players for things outside of their control.


Golfdigest think that the proposed rules would have allowed the rules committee could avoid giving Lexi a penalty under a 'reasonable judgement standard'. 


http://www.golfdigest.com/story/how-so-yeon-ryu-won-lexi-thompson-lost-and-the-penalty-that-stole-the-story-line

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()