[Ben Attwood]

Is this worse than what Thompson did?

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

Looking at that, it does make me wonder about ball marking techniques on short putts. I have heard a number times that players believe the ball comes to sit down a little when it stops. Moving the ball slightly to the side as Choi and Lexi did lets the ball sit up and potentially stop a bobble.


Perhaps they are attempting to gain an advantage.

[Bill Shamleffer]

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

Ben,
We are not disputing the penalty.  We are disputing the involvement by outsiders who have no obligation of fairness and equity to the full field; and we are disputing the process of assessing penalties from prior rounds.


Actually, quite a few of the prior "questions" (e.g. others who did or did not make cut if not for penalty not adequately assessed prior to cut, keep their same status per making or not making the cut despite the late assessed penalty) are adequately covered by current rules and tournament procedures.
However, there is still a good debate about if the current process per late penalties is good on all fronts.

[Mike Feeney]

What if...

The LPGA did not assess a penalty. 

Lexi finishes 72 holes and, with play complete, she leads the field by a couple shots.  In the scoring tent, the LPGA tells her -- "We are not in a position to make a ruling -- no competitor or official witnessed/reported this. However, we think we owe it to you to share the video we received that is in the public domain for everyone to see. You can then decide if you are comfortable with the score you signed for yesterday."

WWLD -- What would Lexi do?    WWYD -- What would you do? 

WWBJD? -- After Bobby Jones was commended for calling a penalty on himself -- “You might as well praise a man for not robbing a bank.”)

[Bill Shamleffer]

What if...

The LPGA did not assess a penalty. 

Lexi finishes 72 holes and, with play complete, she leads the field by a couple shots.  In the scoring tent, the LPGA tells her -- "We are not in a position to make a ruling -- no competitor or official witnessed/reported this. However, we think we owe it to you to share the video we received that is in the public domain for everyone to see. You can then decide if you are comfortable with the score you signed for yesterday."

WWLD -- What would Lexi do?    WWYD -- What would you do? 

WWBJD? -- After Bobby Jones was commended for calling a penalty on himself -- “You might as well praise a man for not robbing a bank.”)

I would propose that the LPGA has an obligation NOT to accept comment from an outsider, since that outsider may have some bias to select which player's infractions to bring to attention or not to bring to attention.


If that outsider want to contact Lexi on their own, that is not a matter for the LPGA.


Of course, the problem with my proposal that ONLY those parties involved with the tournament, and thus only those with responsibilities of equity to the field should be involved in calling rules infractions, is the existence of today's social media.
What does the LPGA do if the anonymous at-home rules official posts the incriminating rules infraction on Facebook, for the world to see.
Now what?
I honestly have no idea.


This may then lead back to your question.  If the Tournament bodies (PGA Tour, LPGA, USGA, R&A, etc.) put in to place that ONLY those involved with the tournament can participate in bringing to light rules infractions; what would the LPGA do if Lexi's ball replacement issue was already posted on Facebook during the final round.  Does equity to the field then require that they must inform Lexi about this matter in the scorer's tent, or do they ignore based on their principal that outsider's lack adequate authority to also be officiating the rules.


This likely leads to why, despite some of the problems with this practice, that it then becomes necessary to possibly make the rule about infractions in prior rounds the VERY SAME AS IT CURRENTLY IS per rules infractions discovered after the tournament is concluded.


If Lexi's victory would have stood, if the ball replacement were brought to light only on Monday, then perhaps her Sat round should stand, if the rules infraction were to be brought to light on Sunday.


Then the debate will lead to some players believing that they should on their own, DQ themselves on Sunday afternoon (i.e. a Tom Watson philosophy per Rules of Golf); while others will believe that since the rules say the round is over, and since the infraction was purely accidental, and the player likely gained no advantage then they are good to turn in the Sunday card as is, and keep the Sat card as was (i.e. a Gary Player philosophy per Rules of Golf).

[Jim_Coleman]

   The fact that the caller may have an ulterior motive seems irrelevant to me. A violation is a violation. But why have the end of the tournament be the arbitrary cut off time? The day of the infraction makes more sense. If the violation is discovered later, so be it. Bad calls occur in all sports.

[Niall C]

Is this worse than what Thompson did?

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

Looking at that, it does make me wonder about ball marking techniques on short putts. I have heard a number times that players believe the ball comes to sit down a little when it stops. Moving the ball slightly to the side as Choi and Lexi did lets the ball sit up and potentially stop a bobble.


Perhaps they are attempting to gain an advantage.

Over here we call it a preferred lie. Generally only used over the winter when conditions aren't great. As far as I know preferred lies weren't in play in this tournament therefore if it was judged that the player knowingly didn't place the ball back in the correct spot then that is cheating and the consequences should be a lot more than a few penalty shots. Just my opinion.


Niall

[JJShanley]

I keep writing the Scottish Football Association to tell them of officiating errors, but they never write back.


Conspiracy theory: no one called or emailed in.  A tournament official saw this video sometime Sunday, decided that LT deserved a penalty, but used the cover of a "television viewer" to impose said penalty.


Must go now, as I need to purchase some tinfoil visors from Imperial.

[Bill Shamleffer]

   The fact that the caller may have an ulterior motive seems irrelevant to me. A violation is a violation. But why have the end of the tournament be the arbitrary cut off time? The day of the infraction makes more sense. If the violation is discovered later, so be it. Bad calls occur in all sports.

Jim,


The possible motivation of a caller is very important and gets to one of the primary principals of the rules of golf in tournament play.
Every golfer in a tournament is also obligated to bring to attention any rules infractions, weather by them self,or by others.  To purposely ignore a rules infraction is it self a violation of the rules of golf.  The rules officials and the tournament committee are under the same obligation to call to attention all possible rules infractions.


This protects the integrity of the tournament (no doubts that some contestants are being treated differently than others), and it protects the players who call a penalty on another since they are REQUIRED to do this.


When an outsider is lacking this obligation to equity, it actually reduces the integrity of the tournament, rather than enhancing.


Although it sounds fair enough to allow an outsider to bring to attention a rules infraction, since that outsider has NO obligation to do this, and since the outsider can choose to call in or not call in the rules infraction, eventually it will lead to un-equal treatment.  (Would some parents not call in an accidental rules infraction by their offspring when they know it had a de minimis impact on the outcome; unless of course the rules infraction was by someone 1 stroke ahead of their offspring.)


Therefore, to protect the integrity of the competition, it is essential to minimize this risk of inequality by NOT accepting outsiders to submit rules infractions.


The other problem, is that their can be many circumstances in which the camera view or other circumstances not obvious to the viewer change the perception so that what appears to be a rules infraction to an untrained outsider, is actually within the rules.


I would limit this outright ban to have the Committee to consider calls about possible deliberate known cheating, since at that point that competitor has them self failed their own obligation of equity to the field.


Also, the matter of not enforcing rules infractions discovered after a tournament is completed was not a proposal on my part, but rather is and has been for decades, the current rule.  Especially for professional tours, it is impractical to do otherwise.


I suppose someone has an example of some local or regional event where a competitor DQed after a tournament was completed.  But the current procedure works best for tournaments (especially pro events, when having to later redistribute prize winnings could get too complicated).  The practice has been well considered and discussed many many years ago, and does work best.


I suppose if a player was ever discovered to have purposely cheated to a win, a title could later be stripped, along with other penalties that already exist (i.e. banned for a time period).

[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

Actually, quite a few of the prior "questions" (e.g. others who did or did not make cut if not for penalty not adequately assessed prior to cut, keep their same status per making or not making the cut despite the late assessed penalty) are adequately covered by current rules and tournament procedures.
However, there is still a good debate about if the current process per late penalties is good on all fronts.

Ben,
We are not disputing the penalty.  We are disputing the involvement by outsiders who have no obligation of fairness and equity to the full field; and we are disputing the process of assessing penalties from prior rounds.

Bill, This was 21 years ago so I'm not certain but I recall that someone from the media called it in. So it was outsiders involved I'm pretty sure.  She didn't know the rule nor did anyone in the group.  She was DQ the following day, so it is pretty much the same.  Because of this situation and others like it over the years, they changed it to the penalty shots that Lexi received.  In 1996 Lexi would of been DQ. 

[John Connolly]

Is this worse than what Thompson did?

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

That's like asking if one woman is more pregnant than the other.

[BCowan]

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.

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.

       This way of thinking is so ass backwards.  Players these days and people in general have been conditioned not to self police things and rely on others.  It is fellow competitors job to pay attention to their fellow players in a tournament.  The modern pro is too self absorbed in their game then 30 years ago.  So no need for a walking official, the people have USGA rules books.  So players watching to make sure fellow players are playing by the rules is bad, but a police state of cameras all over is okay?  Big brother has everything under control.  Sheeple.  No one or few are saying to prohibit video if a rules official or player sees it right away.  They aren't 3rd parties and it isn't 24 hrs later. 

[George Pazin]

George Pazin said "That marking was THE WORST I've ever seen"   Yes, if you have seen every ball that has been marked in every tournament in super zoomed in mode.....I am going to study some old video of Jack, and zoom in real tight...any infractions will be noted to the USGA....we'll see how well his 18 majors hold up.

Silly isn't it? And so is the USGA and R&A letting people at home ref a golf tournament.

Yep, that's silly. Those competitions were closed a long time ago, no action could be taken.

[jeffwarne]

   The fact that the caller may have an ulterior motive seems irrelevant to me. A violation is a violation. But why have the end of the tournament be the arbitrary cut off time? The day of the infraction makes more sense. If the violation is discovered later, so be it. Bad calls occur in all sports.

I'd go even further. Once the player tees off on the next hole,too late to call the penalty.
Like other sports-part of the game.
A game of honor we're playing. If she wants to cheat (as some are implying) eventually karma and the field, will turn on her.
P
How is it a game of honor if we're using video to call penalties?




All players are not being filmed so why should one be under scrutiny for EVERY shot and another not.

[jeffwarne]

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.

So if fellow competitors aren't going to fulfill their responsibilities, nor officials,....that means the 99% NOT on TV are free to do what they want?
I'm not saying anyone should "get away with this".
I'm saying there are controls in place for all groups, and occasionally a call is missed-just like other sports.
The more we go to camera spying as a source of "prof" the less we're playing a game of honor.
and doing it a day later is absurd, especially applying a penalty for a wrong scorecard that is impossible to foresee .


I'll go a step farther-what if the caller waits on purpose a day to make it a 4 stroke penalty, not a 2 stroker.


The idea that a caller is a referee(for a tiny portion of the field) is absolutely absurd.

[Pat Burke]

I always believed I was pretty good short distance putter.  Wish we had the stats they have today from shotlink when I played.  Would be interesting to see.


If I was allowed within the rules to move the ball as far as it appeared that Lexi did, I might never have missed a three footer.


The number of times I had short putts that had a heel print, spike Mark, softspike dent, or old ball Mark affect a putt was small, but it did happen.  On crazy fast greens it is even worse.  One I remember vividly was a three footer I had on 18 at Riviera.  I was in a heel print (lots of rain) and just above hole high with a lot of break for a shorty.  I laid up.  I thought about chipping it    obviously and extreme and silly moment, but it doesn't take much to impact a short putt on fast greens.


I don't like the idea of call ins at all.  And I just feel 4 shots in Lexis deal is too much, so I hope they look at that part of the ruling.  She should have been penalized, I have little doubt.  I'm still amazed that her playing partners, tv, or gallery didn't notice.

[Bill Shamleffer]

...

[Chris Cupit]

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.

Yes--ladies can be quite tough!


I will say, at my club the ladies have a great culture and are more adamant about pace of play and care for the course than my men's groups.  And my guys aren't bad at all--actually I am very lucky to have a great membership.

[George Pazin]

I am hesitant to weigh in, but what the heck, it’s pouring here at my course.
1.  Mike Young is 1000% correct--The LPGA and the Committee in charge of this particular championship can play by whatever set of rules they wish.  They can also choose to enforce or not enforce whatever rule or rules they wish.  It would be chaos but they can do it. 

The PGA and LPGA don’t play by every rule anyway.  For example, the rules of golf allow you to hit practice putts after finishing a hole—the PGA and LPGA prohibit this.  The rules allow you to tee off each hole with a different brand of ball which the PGA and LPGA prohibit.  The rules prohibit “undue delay” and by most anyone’s standards, that is never called—kinda like traveling in basketball I guess.  Hell, a whole new kind of obstruction—temporary immovable obstructions were invented to give “line of play” relief. 

2.  I am not sure what some of you would have expected once this Committee of the LPGA decided to play a championship by the Rules of the USGA and R & A.  Are people really suggesting you change the rules during the competition?  How fair would that be?  Again, to be clear—the LPGA Committee could have absolutely ignored the evidence.  What could the USGA/R & A “do” about it—nothing.  If asked their opinion on the matter they will give it—that’s it.

3.  For those who want a “time limit” in this case, there is one—when the competition is over.  If this breach was discovered after they gave Lexi the trophy, no penalty could be applied unless Lexi admitted that she knew she was in breach of a rule and simply said “so what”—she would literally have to admit to cheating and then, yes, the committee should go grab the trophy from her.  I say “should” because as I pointed out earlier, the committee can do whatever the hell it wants to.

4.  The reason for the four stroke penalty was to keep from having to DQ a player.  This was a rules change to be “fairer”.   

5.  Does anyone here think Lexi would have preferred to win and THEN have this obvious breach pointed out?  She comes out far better in the long run and the good thing is everyone did what they were “supposed” to do.

6.  If your problem is with the rules, don’t play by them.  Oh wait, 99.99% of you don’t anyway.    

7.  If you think the rule allowing/requiring the Committee to act on all information presented to them (TV call ins too) is bad, what is the solution?  What if the video shows a player clearly and obviously cheating?  What about situations where the video evidence can exonerate a player?  Should video evidence be used if it can overturn a penalty given in error even if it is the next day?

8.  Those that think it’s not “fair” that TV groups get more scrutiny what is that solution?  To be fair should large galleries not be able to search for golf balls?  How many lost balls did Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods have in their careers?  Was it fair that large galleries sometimes helped deflect their balls back into play?  Is it fair that a fat golfer can draw casual water easier than a skinny golfer?

9.  Just because there is an official in every group does not mean breaches of this sort are going to be caught.  Do any of you know how close an official would have to be to see infractions like that?  The players already hate the officials anyway and want us as far away from their sight-lines as possible.  We are there to assist when they have questions and help prevent penalties.  We are not there to “hover” and/or look for penalties. 

10.  No doubt the biggest area where players breach the rules is on the greens—when their balls end up in a slight depression or behind a spike mark they will often only need to slide the ball ½ and inch or so to get away from the problem.  That is what I would describe as “cheating”—a player intentionally trying to gain an advantage whereas a breach can be by accident. 

I am not saying that is what happened in the Lexi situation at all as I can’t know what is in her heart or mind.  But since we can’t know that and should not try and guess it, we have to go on a player’s actions and here the ball was not put back in the same place.  She clearly breached the rule. 

For those who say it was insignificant, on a one-foot putt, an inch one way or another is significant.  If you don’t think so you have not played high level golf or been around world class players.  They expect perfect, billiard top like conditions and hate it—hate it, if anything like a scuff, depression or spike mark is in their way.  They feel ENTITLED to perfect conditions to putt on.  Again, I am not speaking to Lexi’s intent just saying that accidental or not, on smooth, fast greens, moving a ball away from an imperfection will affect the roll.

11.  All you guys saying this hurts “grow the game”—UGH.  Really?  That is just a dumb statement.  No one picks up or quits golf based on how they feel about the rules.  Again, 99% of all players and all rounds are not played by the rules to begin with.  Most groups like having some beers, being outside and as long as those in their group agree to whatever way to play among themselves, they are fine.

If you think incidents like this “hurt” the game I disagree.  I think it actually helps show the difference between Golf and other games where cheating is encouraged and even practiced.  Being responsible for your actions and mistakes no matter when or if they are ever caught is a lesson I wish all of us would live by. 

The notion that a sponsor should be ashamed that the sport they associate with holds its players to higher standards than others is silly.  In fact, if I learned a sponsor demanded a ruling body ignore its own rules to get the winner they wanted, I’d avoid that company like the plague.

12.  All golfers are not Bob Jones, in fact, few are or ever were.  With tens of millions of dollars at stake we need to recognize that more and more golfers will cheat.  Our game does not lend itself to referees like other sports in which cheating is an embedded part of the culture of the game.  Football, Baseball, Soccer, Basketball….those sports have a “code” and getting away with as much as you can is how to play those games.  There, referees have a job to “catch” players and if they don’t and the player gains an advantage for the team or themselves, all the better. 

13.  Golf has traditionally expected players to call penalties on themselves.  That mostly worked though the “good old days” were not always so good and probably more players got away with more cheating back then than now (thanks to TV).  Today there is the pressure of millions of dollars on the line and a new ethos whereby players feel entitled to conditions that are close to perfect so they can perform/entertain.  Because of that, subtle things that are breaches of the rules are accepted now more than ever and when a player is in clear but minor violation of a rule the entertainment sports industry rushes to their defense.

14.  This is heresy for a rules nerd but I live “normal” golf every day and spend time on championship golf far less often.  We should bifurcate the rules and bifurcate equipment.  We play nowhere near the same game as the professional and the rules should reflect that fact.  Professional golf is entertainment.

15.  The Committee yesterday acted correctly based on the rules they announced to the players they were going to play by at the start of the event.  They could have said, “to hell with the rules” but I guarantee you, that would have resulted in a legitimate lawsuit.  You can’t tell people these are the rules and later say that you changed your mind about “all” the rules, especially with millions of dollars at stake. 

16.  The rules specifically say that when trying to figure out what happened, testimony of those not involved with the competition (spectators and/or television footage) should be used in order to determine what, in fact, did occur.  The rules also require referees to act upon violations reported to them.

17.  Ignore the rules, change the rules or modify the rules to play whatever game you wish.  Just tell me ahead of time so I know what game we are all supposed to play.  If your answer is that we aren’t sure but will do what’s “fair”, I’ll pass.

Best post on the thread, by a large margin. Thanks, Chris. Too bad it will be lost on most, preferring simply what's "fair"...

[Jim Franklin]

So I watched the replay of the UNC player's hand clearly out of bounds last night and the refs still gave them the ball. (Called jump ball and UNC had the arrow). Do you think they will reverse the outcome of the game if I email the NCAA?

[jeffwarne]

A bit condescending George.


Chris brings up some very thought out points-perhaps a bit too well thought out


I just disagree.


Do away with video referees-close a "round" when scorecard signed and attested.
Pretty simple stuff.


You're never going to catch EVERY infraction.
Game of honor.
Those that want to shame a player can post on Social media.

[George Pazin]

A bit condescending George.


Chris brings up some very thought out points-perhaps a bit too well thought out


I just disagree.


Do away with video referees-close a "round" when scorecard signed and attested.
Pretty simple stuff.


You're never going to catch EVERY infraction.
Game of honor.
Those that want to shame a player can post on Social media.

I get all that.


I just disagree.


The last thing I want is shaming on social media. That's the genie I see being let out of the box when I see people clamoring on and on about intent. I prefer the truly simple - see an infraction, call an infraction. Closed at end of competition.

[George Pazin]

So I watched the replay of the UNC player's hand clearly out of bounds last night and the refs still gave them the ball. (Called jump ball and UNC had the arrow). Do you think they will reverse the outcome of the game if I email the NCAA?

Nope, competition's closed!

[Jim Hoak]

I still believe--hope--that the new "reasonable judgment" standard in the proposed USGA rules would cause a different outcome in the future.  That's what Golf Digest thinks.  We'll see.

[Chris Cupit]

I always believed I was pretty good short distance putter.  Wish we had the stats they have today from shotlink when I played.  Would be interesting to see.


If I was allowed within the rules to move the ball as far as it appeared that Lexi did, I might never have missed a three footer.


The number of times I had short putts that had a heel print, spike Mark, softspike dent, or old ball Mark affect a putt was small, but it did happen.  On crazy fast greens it is even worse.  One I remember vividly was a three footer I had on 18 at Riviera.  I was in a heel print (lots of rain) and just above hole high with a lot of break for a shorty.  I laid up.  I thought about chipping it    obviously and extreme and silly moment, but it doesn't take much to impact a short putt on fast greens.


I don't like the idea of call ins at all.  And I just feel 4 shots in Lexis deal is too much, so I hope they look at that part of the ruling.  She should have been penalized, I have little doubt.  I'm still amazed that her playing partners, tv, or gallery didn't notice.

Believe it or not, I am not crazy about call ins either but given the Rules, there is no way currently to ignore information a committee receives no matter what the source.


As a player, and assuming we no longer accepted call ins, if you were in shape for a high finish and then it was revealed after a round and before the competition was over that you were in breach and should have been penalized what do you do?  There are so many implications at the professional level and I wonder if a player who may have benefited from a missed call may not really benefit in the long run at all.  Wouldn't there be lots of pressure to WD?


What if a player had a big win or high finish and then it came out that the got away with a breach and that certainly effected his peers? 

[JESII]

I still believe--hope--that the new "reasonable judgment" standard in the proposed USGA rules would cause a different outcome in the future.  That's what Golf Digest thinks.  We'll see.

Jim,


That proposed revision cannot possibly include the act of replacing a ball on the putting green. It's clearly intending to address reasonable attempts (yet still wrong) to judge where a ball entered a hazard or where the nearest point of relief from GUR or an obstruction is. Those items are occasionally unprovable...marking and replacing a ball on the green is hardly a mystery.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()