Play it as it Lies

[Mark Pearce]

This is bizarre.  The defence seems to be that she tried to cheat but failed.

[Lou_Duran]

Mark- you seem to have the knack of reminding me why the legal system is so adversarial.  Players are allowed to do all sorts of things around the ball which do not constitute cheating.  Some may not fall within how you think the game should be played and maybe you should campaign to become a member of the R & A and clean up some of these things.  I personally prefer fewer rules and exceptions, as well as a much stricter code relative to putting one's hand on the ball, relief, and allowing the caddie to serve in a capacity beyond toting the clubs and tending to the golf course. 

[Jim Hoak]

I don’t see that “she tried to cheat.”  While I understand that argument, that’s why there are referees—or judges in court—to make decisions on intent, etc.
Why is this any different than someone having a ball up against a tree, and in taking a stance by backing into the tree, freeing up some room for a backswing by some branches being moved away as a result of the act of taking a stance.  What I see with the video of Lexi is her moving some grass aside in order to get her club behind the ball, part of taking a stance.  Sure, it is appropriate to ask what her intent was.  But from what I see, I’d make the same call that the referee did.  And remember that if there is ambiguity in the intent behind some action, the presumption goes to the player.

[Mark Pearce]

Lou, Jim,


I can only assume from those comments that you haven't seen the incident.  She isn't addressing the ball, she's holding the club in one hand and pushing the grass (which is immediately behind the ball) away.  Unless, Jim, you're arguing she was intending to play a shot with her club held only in her right hand.  This is as different from Jim's example as it's possible to be.  It is impossible to argue that her actions are part of taking a stance, not least because that isn't what she's doing when the movement complained of takes place.  It makes Patrick Reed look good.

[Sean_A]

Lou, Jim,

I can only assume from those comments that you haven't seen the incident.  She isn't addressing the ball, she's holding the club in one hand and pushing the grass (which is immediately behind the ball) away.  Unless, Jim, you're arguing she was intending to play a shot with her club held only in her right hand.  This is as different from Jim's example as it's possible to be.  It is impossible to argue that her actions are part of taking a stance, not least because that isn't what she's doing when the movement complained of takes place.  It makes Patrick Reed look good.

Mark

Read the rule. It has been explained by a rules expert.

Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Haven't seen the video, but if its as Mark describes, it seems she at least had intent and was deliberately trying to improve her lie...as opposed to accidentally moving the grass while taking her stance and getting ready to swing.

The ruling does appear to be correct given how rule 8 is worded, but sure seems that if the game is actively trying to be one of honor, integrity, etc, that her actions should be differentiated in some way to address Mark's spot on assessment of "She tried to cheat, but failed".

[Thomas Dai]

A couple of general comments -
I would like to think that a decent caddy standing close and hopefully paying attention to what was about to happen would have said something to their player like “careful” or maybe a more specific “careful the cameras are on you” comment.
Other players future reactions will be interesting. From a few observations and comments from TV etc it would seem that playing partners are paying close/closer attention to what a certain male pro player with a reputation for interesting club control around a stationary ball is up to these days.
Another aspect is of course what are the other players in the field, the ones not on TV, up to and what if any policing of them is appropriate.
As has been seen before, a playing partner refusing to co-sign a card (pre-Covid times) may not necessarily be shown support by tour officials etc, eg when Maartin Lefeber spotted a player up to something ‘iffy’, wouldn’t co-sign the players card but was over-ruled by the tour. No pooping on our own doorstep?

Atb

[Sean_A]

Haven't seen the video, but if its as Mark describes, it seems she at least had intent and was deliberately trying to improve her lie...as opposed to accidentally moving the grass while taking her stance and getting ready to swing.

The ruling does appear to be correct given how rule 8 is worded, but sure seems that if the game is actively trying to be one of honor, integrity, etc, that her actions should be differentiated in some way to address Mark's spot on assessment of "She tried to cheat, but failed".

Mark and I see the video very differently. I see a player trying to gauge how tough the grass is behind her ball.  It was pretty obvious it would spring back like any grass does. I see players stick their club behind the ball without taking a stance all the time in an effort to decide which club to take. This situation is essentially no different. As stated previously, people need to stop pointing and shouting. This reaction is getting old like three years ago.  And I am already sick to death of the "the look".  I feel as though I am in the bible belt of golf...very heavy sigh.


Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Well that's a new one for me, being an atheist and all...

P.S.  The rules makers made the rules very specific and very anal, not we the players (both casual and those playing for millions of dollars), so pardon me for looking at things with a critical eye and player intent.  Its a sad day thou when players deliberate actions to cheat are justified under the premise of "well everyone does it", and doubly so for a game that explicitly calls out its players to be honest and act with integrity.

[Mark Pearce]

Sean,


Seriously?  I know you like to be the contrarian, but you reckon that a player pushing thick grass behind the ball to "see how tough it is" is OK?  You're being absurd now.


And I've seen the rules explained.  And if the explanations are right, they're stupid.  There should be a presumption that someone who tries to cheat has succeeded.

[Jon Wiggett]

 As stated previously, people need to stop pointing and shouting.

Says the man who is pointing and shouting 


Sean,


your not allowed to test the lie prior to the shot. In fact, your not allowed to alter the lie of the ball in ANY way except through taking a normal stance and address position. Who knows what her intentions were but in the end the lie was not altered and so no penalty was incurred.

[Rob Marshall]

I looked at the video again, the grass she moves is not directly behind her ball imo. It actually looks to me like it was blowing over or behind the ball. After she hits the ball the grass that she moved is still there.

[Jeff Johnston]

Sean, we haven’t yet met and I have huge respect for all you contribute on here - and I hope we may get to play a game before long COVID permitting - but the Bible Belt strand of comments is not warranted in my humble (and amateur) opinion.


This thread however feels like the twilight zone of GCA.com.


For the sake of my own sanity I have had several further close looks at the tape. After picking her club and addressing the ball - with stiff grasses behind the right half of the ball -  Lexi steps away, then then makes two distinct passes through /  pads down with her clubhead those stiff grasses to the right, at almost right angles to the ball. At the point she removes her club from this manoeuvre, the grasses are certainly lying to the right of their original position, and her path to the ball has accordingly improved. The wind is off the right though, and blowing the strands - with the wind’s help the grasses make it back a fair bit but after her stepping away to swing (fairly quickly) it is v hard to say the grass has regained its original position. And who knows if a strand or two got broken in the midst of all the gardening.


Yet a good few above seem to be fine that all of this is within the law and spirit of 8.1 - in some cases to the level of ‘nothing to see here’ - good luck to you. Given he teed it up in a lot of v serious events, [size=78%]  I think I’d rather be with Mr Clayton’s misgivings to be honest.[/size]


Just to be clear, I am far removed from a string ‘em up rules junkie - to use one example I have always thought the Craig Stadler towel thing was completely laughable, and the dial-in rules stuff is not my scene. I’m pretty sure though that I know what I saw here.

[Sean_A]

I can agree to disagree knowing the "ruling" makes sense to me.

Ciao

[Erik J. Barzeski]

John explained the rule.

She altered the CATS, but then the CATS were restored. It's really that simple.

I've put my clubhead down lightly in the rough (which even if the lie is slightly altered, you're allowed to do), and the grass springs back when you lift it back up. As grass tends to do.

[Mark Pearce]

I've put my clubhead down lightly in the rough (which even if the lie is slightly altered, you're allowed to do), and the grass springs back when you lift it back up. As grass tends to do.

Sure.  But that's not what happened here, is it?  I've driven at 35 in a 30 limit.  So does that mean I think it's OK to do 70 down the high street, past the school? 


Every time the R&A, PGA Tour or whoever let's a pro get away with something like this, to avoid confrontation,  the more everybody's going to think it's OK to do stuff like this.

[Jeff Johnston]

Prompted by these goings on, RTÉ’s golf guy Greg Allen tweeted the tale below - bit of light relief....


Christy O’Connor Snr was playing in a pro am. After an errant drive one of his group waded into the deep stuff armed only with a 3 wood. After a good bit of padding around of club behind ball, he enquires ‘Christy, do you think that’s a 3 wood lie?’ To which the great man responds ‘ehhhh - not yet......’

[Niall C]

Reminds me of the well-known Seve ploy of repeatedly addressing his ball in the rough with his 3 wood before after a while deciding it was only a 9 iron to the green after all.


Having viewed the clip I'm not sure what she was trying to do but I'm pretty sure it wasn't to identify the ball or see better what kind of lie she had. That seems to leave only the possibility she was attempting to knock the grass out of the way of her swing path. If indeed the rules don't take into account the players intent and that therefore there was no transgression because the grass went back to its original position, then that I think is unfortunate.


However, given her previous transgressions, she should be made fully aware by the powers that be that she should consider her future conduct. I understand that the professional tours have rules regarding bringing the game into disrepute and IMHO repeated incidents of this nature do exactly that.


Niall 

[Niall C]

A couple of general comments -
I would like to think that a decent caddy standing close and hopefully paying attention to what was about to happen would have said something to their player like “careful” or maybe a more specific “careful the cameras are on you” comment.

David


There is a world of difference between those two comments. The first suggest the caddy giving a reminder to the player that they might be about to break the rules, whereas the second comment suggests the caddy is being complicit with the player in deliberately breaking the rules. I'd hope we never hear the latter.


Niall


edit; too many complicits

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

I think the wording of the rule should be changed to "If a player attempts to improve or improves...etc"

She clearly attempted to improve her lie and that to me is cheating, but evidently not according to the rule book. Maybe it doesn't matter, but she pressed her club on the tuft of grass at around ball height, not the wispy bits higher up. The grass closer to the ground was probably less likely to return to it's original position.

It's a certainty that the lie was altered, and considering the direction she pushed the tuft of grass, it's very likely it was altered in a way that benefitted her, however so minutely. But this can't be proven, so she's off the hook.

Here's another link to the video:
https://golf.com/instruction/rules/why-lexi-thompson-was-not-penalized-during-controversial-ruling/

It all seems a bit odd, sort of like I tried to rob a bank, but I didn't succeed your honour.

Why did she press on the tuft of grass?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Sure. But that's not what happened here, is it?  I've driven at 35 in a 30 limit.  So does that mean I think it's OK to do 70 down the high street, past the school?

Is that the worst analogy ever? It is this month. You can't "restore" going 15 in a school zone after going past it at 70. A thousand possible analogies and you land on that?

Her lie was the same when the ball came to rest and when she hit it. Does it matter what restored the lie? No. What did you want her to do: bend down, touch the grass to move it a millimeter so she could say "the player" restored the conditions?

Every time the R&A, PGA Tour or whoever let's a pro get away with something like this, to avoid confrontation,  the more everybody's going to think it's OK to do stuff like this.

Under the Rules, what she did was okay because the lie was restored.

I think the wording of the rule should be changed to "If a player attempts to improve or improves...etc"

That adds more subjectivity. Now not only must you judge whether the CATS were improved or altered, you must determine whether they were even attempting to do so.

It's a certainty that the lie was altered, and considering the direction she pushed the tuft of grass, it's very likely it was altered in a way that benefitted her, however so minutely. But this can't be proved, so she's off the hook.

The CATS were not affected.

I get what those who are saying that she tried to push it out of the way are saying, but because she failed, because she played from the lie she was given, because the grass rebounded… no penalty.

[JESII]

I went back to the video to confirm what I saw a couple days ago so I could debate the side that said she cheated...but then it was clear that she did try and fail. But the bank robbery is only fitting in the context of, she packed her things to go rob a bank and got lost on the way. This is not analogous with getting into the vault only to find it empty.


She makes a concerted effort to depress the grass, removing it from her field of vision to the ball. But she never really influences the grass. Even as she swiped at it, the grass remained whisping/waving in the same place. To me, this is equivalent to moving a tree branch out of your swing and wedging it against another branch only to have it release before you actually swing. Every attempt was made to gain an undue advantage but she didn't gain one.


Something tells me that if she was in the trees wedging a big tree branch around another that she would have been penalized before taking her stroke...

[Mark Pearce]

But the bank robbery is only fitting in the context of, she packed her things to go rob a bank and got lost on the way. This is not analogous with getting into the vault only to find it empty.

She forced her way into the bank vault, picked up a gold bar and put it in her bag but it fell out and landed where she took it from?

[John Kavanaugh]

How can you possibly enjoy the game if you think everyone else is cheating? This mentality almost destroyed me even though I was right.

[Thomas Dai]

There is a world of difference between those two comments. The first suggest the caddy giving a reminder to the player that they might be about to break the rules, whereas the second comment suggests the caddy is being complicit with the player in deliberately breaking the rules. I'd hope we never hear the latter.

I go along with you Niall, hence my further comments within the same post. Who knows what else is going on within the event when only some are on camera and with cuts and £$€ on the line ....
Mind ‘iffy’ action by some is likely to cost others some cash so there should be a strong incentive to report ‘iffy’ antics. Trouble is when the judges, ie the tour officials etc, don’t want to hear unpleasant news as it devalues the image of their whiter than white, sponsor/PR dependent, product.
Just imagine if this incident had occurred on the last hole of a Men’s Major and the ‘iffy’ player had been allowed to ‘get away’ with it to the detriment of another player(s). Given the £$€ involved, prize money, bonus’s, spin-offs, good/bad product publicity, egos, history, etc etc I envisage the legal profession getting involved pretty quickly. I hope it never happens but ...
Atb
Atb