Rules - Match Play - Kevin Na and DJ

[Kevin_Reilly]

John, re #13, Na (who I like) would probably have been better served by talking to DJ in a casual way on way to next tee, to remind him to wait for a concession before picking up.  No need to stop action and have a summit on the green, if he wasn't going to make anything of it.

[Pete_Pittock]

While it would have been better to discuss it on the way to the next tee, it would be best to wait until after they tee off. Once that happens it is too late for a penalty to be called or assessed (except in the case of newly learned information).

[Kalen Braley]

John,

Thanks for the various explanations, good stuff.  If I read them all right, it sounds like you're saying the "proper" course of action should have been for DJ to be assessed a one stroke penalty, in which case he would have effectively lost the hole.  It also sounds like both DJ and KN, could have plausibly been hit with a "both players agreeing to not follow the rules", and both been DQ'd?

Kevin,

I understand your point, but given there are all kinds of gamesmanship tactics in Match Play to get in your opponents head like making 'em finish very short putts or "accidentally" jiggling coins in your pocket, how is calling out your opponent because he fucked up and deserved it, as an attempt to rattle him, also not one?

However, given Kevin did give him the benefit of the doubt and didn't enforce the penalty, resulting in a halved hole instead of a lost hole, i'd say Na is pretty bullet proof on this one. Sad its being turned around on him as a form of victim shaming.

P.S.  Seems they dodged a bullet on this one as Peter said, imagine if the halved hole had resulted in DJ advancing to a playoff with McEntyre and he ended up getting bounced?

[Pete_Pittock]

Kalen,
While you say that Kevin Na chose not to enforce the Rules breach by Dustin Johnson, by bringing the fact to the attention of DJ before teeing off one the next hole, should obligate DJ to call the penalty on himself.

[Peter Flory]

This all made me think about an possible variation of match play that would interesting to try with a buddy.  It would sort of have the dynamics of a buy/sell agreement. 

- If a player holes a putt (or any shot) that is not conceded, they win the hole. 

So, for example, if you and your opponent both hit the green on the first hole and you are 10 feet out and your opponent is 6 feet out, it's your turn to putt first.  You're opponent isn't going to concede it, so if you hole it out, you win the hole. 

If you miss, he'll concede your tap in.  Then you'll make him putt his out because you have nothing to lose.  But... say he putts it 4 feet past.  Now you have to decide whether you should concede the par putt or take your chances by making him putt the comebacker.  If he makes that, he'll take the hole. 

[Tim Leahy]

Na was a dick about the whole thing. There was at least15 seconds after DJ's put came to rest 6 in from the hole where Na SHOULD have said good. Not giving DJ that putt was a pure dick move and calling him out on camera when he gave him a half anyway was just to shake DJ up, which it did. I hope Na doesn't make the Ryder Cup as an alternate because of this. Bush league crap like that shouldn't come from "professionals".

[Jim_Coleman]

+1

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,
While you say that Kevin Na chose not to enforce the Rules breach by Dustin Johnson, by bringing the fact to the attention of DJ before teeing off one the next hole, should obligate DJ to call the penalty on himself.

Yea I was more asking a question based on what I could surmise from what John said in points 2, 5, and 6 from his prior post.  Its plausible DJ didn't know the rule, based on what John also said about DJ's history, but perhaps Na did know the rule which could make him in part culpable for not calling the infraction.

Once again, all the more reason these matches should be actively officiated, so players don't have to be victim shamed for actually having the audacity to call out their opponent when they break a rule, even thou they are expected to do exactly that!

[Tim Martin]

Na is someone that should try and build goodwill with his playing partners as a result of a career full of notoriously slow play. From a karma standpoint he is tough to root for. Finally it was within his rights to call out DJ but someone far smarter than me said “you have to know when to pick your spot.”

[Pete_Pittock]

Two Americans in match play without a referee. What could possibly go wrong? I hope they now know the rules so this doesn't come back and bite them.

At least a tour official talked to them afterward per this story
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/tour-official-on-na-dj-situation-can-t-agree-to-concession-after-putt/ar-BB1f3tAH?ocid=msedgdhp

[MClutterbuck]

Kalen, query doesn't 3.2a(2)2nd bullet take precedence over 3.2b(I)(2) 2nd bullet.  If players can agree to treat a hole as tied, which clearly happened here, there is no need to replace the ball and play the stroke.


Jim, would Na have been a better sport if he had called the penalty?  Unless one accepts Johnson's after the fact statement that he thought Na had conceded, I suggest that Johnson's behavior was improper and that Na did him a favor both by letting it go and by "reminding" him of the rule.

Players can agree to halve a hole, provided they have not holed out. Had Na holed out before the agreement or not? I did not see.

[MClutterbuck]

Thank you John for providing much clarification. Is the PGA not responsible here? Should the Committee have intervened immediately? See second bullet point. It seems to be the PGA Tour tries to minimize rules problems... which of course creates the problems.


A Committee may appoint referees to assist with the administration of a competition. A referee is an official named by the Committee to decide questions of fact and apply the Rules.[/size

(1) Referees in Match Play
In match play, a referee’s duties and authority depend on his or her assigned role:When Assigned to One Match for Entire Round. As the referee is with the match throughout the round, he or she is responsible for acting on any breach of the Rules that he or she sees or is told about (see Rule 20.1b(1) and the definition of “referee ”).

• When Assigned to Multiple Matches or to Certain Holes or Sections of the Course. As the referee is not assigned to accompany the match throughout the round, he or she should avoid becoming involved in a match unless:A player in a match asks for help with the Rules or requests a ruling (see Rule 20.1b(2)). When making a ruling at the request of a player, the referee should always confirm that the request for the ruling was made in time (see Rules 20.1b(2) and 20.1b(3)).

• A player or players in a match may be in breach of Rule 1.2b (Code of Conduct), Rule 1.3b(1) (Two or More Players Deliberately Agreeing to Ignore any Rule or Penalty they Know Applies), Rule 5.6a (Unreasonable Delay of Play) or Rule 5.6b (Prompt Pace of Play).

• A player arrives late to his or her first tee (see Rule 5.3).

• A player’s search for a ball reaches three minutes (see Rule 5.6a and definition of “lost ”).

[Pat Burke]

FWIW
I don’t see anything wrong with Na’s handling of the situation, nor do I understand how he can be the bad guy somehow.
It’s match play, and high stakes.  Probably even more so for Na at this point in a career, but that doesn’t matter.
As a player, you just do not pick your ball up whether you’re assuming it’s “good”, you’re pissed off, or you’re stupid.


Seems there are a lot of situations now where the person breaking a rule starts to look like the victim.

[Kalen Braley]

FWIW
I don’t see anything wrong with Na’s handling of the situation, nor do I understand how he can be the bad guy somehow.
It’s match play, and high stakes.  Probably even more so for Na at this point in a career, but that doesn’t matter.
As a player, you just do not pick your ball up whether you’re assuming it’s “good”, you’re pissed off, or you’re stupid.

Seems there are a lot of situations now where the person breaking a rule starts to look like the victim.

Fully agreed Pat, I don't understand this either.  If anything DJ should have been profusely apologizing, and if he knew the rule at the very least should have insisted he replace his ball and attempt the putt, but I'm guessing he didn't know that one either.

[JMEvensky]

FWIW
I don’t see anything wrong with Na’s handling of the situation, nor do I understand how he can be the bad guy somehow.
It’s match play, and high stakes.  Probably even more so for Na at this point in a career, but that doesn’t matter.
As a player, you just do not pick your ball up whether you’re assuming it’s “good”, you’re pissed off, or you’re stupid.


Seems there are a lot of situations now where the person breaking a rule starts to look like the victim.

Thanks for chiming in--some opinions are worth more than others.

[Mark Pearce]

   Na was just being a jerk. Either call it or shut up.  What purpose did his comment serve?  Of course, had he called it he’d have been excoriated. So, just keep quiet.

Interesting take.  And one that I really don't understand.  If there was a jerk here, it wasn't Na.

[MClutterbuck]

FWIW
I don’t see anything wrong with Na’s handling of the situation, nor do I understand how he can be the bad guy somehow.
It’s match play, and high stakes.  Probably even more so for Na at this point in a career, but that doesn’t matter.
As a player, you just do not pick your ball up whether you’re assuming it’s “good”, you’re pissed off, or you’re stupid.

Seems there are a lot of situations now where the person breaking a rule starts to look like the victim.

Fully agreed Pat, I don't understand this either.  If anything DJ should have been profusely apologizing, and if he knew the rule at the very least should have insisted he replace his ball and attempt the putt, but I'm guessing he didn't know that one either.

+1 and +1

[Jim_Coleman]

   If you don’t understand my point, I’ll try to explain.  Na was perfectly within his rights to claim the hole.  Johnson cannot assume he’d be given a 6” putt under the rules. But Na obviously knew he’d have been killed by most (if not the rules gurus here) if he claimed the hole.  So, what purpose did his comment to DJ serve?  To make sure it wouldn’t happen again?  Please.  It was 6”.  DJ knows the rule and rightly assumed the gimme, at least from a guy with class.

[Pat Burke]

   If you don’t understand my point, I’ll try to explain.  Na was perfectly within his rights to claim the hole.  Johnson cannot assume he’d be given a 6” putt under the rules. But Na obviously knew he’d have been killed by most (if not the rules gurus here) if he claimed the hole.  So, what purpose did his comment to DJ serve?  To make sure it wouldn’t happen again?  Please.  It was 6”.  DJ knows the rule and rightly assumed the gimme, at least from a guy with class.

if DJ knows the rule, Why’d he pick up his ball without being sure?
And DJ has had rules mistakes (costly ones too) to create an issue.


Maybe you know Kevin too.  I do, and I have personally known him to take the time with a young guy I was coaching and make a big impact on him, just because he had experienced similar issue my student was....so to me at least, showed his class there, with NO cameras around.

[Mark Pearce]

  rightly assumed the gimme

Read what you wrote.  You aren't describing golf.  This is why Johnson was (and you are) wrong.  Johnson didn't look at Na.  He assumed.  And had the arrogance and disrespect to knock the ball away in a huff.  How would you and social media have responded if Na had claimed the hole?  Frankly, Johnson put Na in a difficult situation.  One he had to deal with then and there.  He didn't have time to consider at length how it might play out.  He handled it really well.

[Jim_Coleman]

   Seems Na had three choices: 1) call the penalty, 2) let it slide, or 3) don’t call the penalty but inform DJ of what he did.  Why is 3 the best choice?

[Michael Dugger]

I'm going with Na is a bit of a turd here.  Makes a fuss over a gimme and then fast walks his own putts home.


   

[Mike Sweeney]

   Seems Na had three choices: 1) call the penalty, 2) let it slide, or 3) don’t call the penalty but inform DJ of what he did.  Why is 3 the best choice?

Dustin Johnson seems to be the current #1 player in the world:


http://www.owgr.com/Ranking/PlayerProfile.aspx?playerID=12422


As he is the current Masters Champion, he certainly is up there in most rankings. Kevin Na is a second tier player in comparison, and this exchange is a nice symbol of "Truth to Power" in a very unique sport that we all seem to care about.


Maybe there was a miscommunication, but 6 centimeters, 6 inches, 6 feet, 6 yards... it is Kevin Na's putt to concede. I think the world would be a better place if we had more of this "Truth to Power". Sure, it's just golf, but I love golf, and I appreciate what Kevin Na did.


To address the other options:


1) If he "calls the penalty", Kevin Na becomes the bad guy. It was a gimme, so no don't do that.


2) "Let it slide". Not a fan. I could be talked into it 98 times out of 100 in Amateur matches (Pat Mucci and Gib are the  two exceptions ), but this is the PGA Tour, so I support Kevin Na's decision.

[Charles Lund]

"There was at least15 seconds after DJ's put came to rest 6 in from the hole where Na SHOULD have said good."

Maybe Na was waiting for Johnson to offer good-good. 

Also, it sounds like it was clear from the description that Na did not give the putt, which means whacking it away would be a one stroke penalty.  Johnson would then putt out or Na could give it.

Johnson played in the Walker Cup and the Ryder Cup.  He knows the rules.  Maybe Na was a dick, but that doesn't factor in.  Johnson could have marked or played out of turn.

Charles Lund

[Mark Kiely]

Na was a dick about the whole thing. There was at least15 seconds after DJ's put came to rest 6 in from the hole where Na SHOULD have said good.

It's more like five seconds. I see the putt stop moving at the :07 mark and DJ knocks it away at :12.


https://www.pgatour.com/video/2021/03/26/kevin-na-and-dustin-johnson-discuss-conceded-putt-at-wgc-dell-ma.html


I disagree with your overall assessment (Na being a dick about it), but still seems like 5 seconds is sufficient time for Na to have conceded such a short putt. I'm wondering if he wasn't right there (or wasn't paying attention) and needed a minute to gauge how close DJ's ball stopped from the hole. You can see him enter the frame around the same time DJ picks up, but not where he was or what he was doing prior.