OT - Reed, Again

[Sean_A]

If you watch the entire exchange from last week, it's ridiculous.  https://youtu.be/b0_Zm1Us4O4?t=35

First PR says that it looks like his ball and he supports it by saying that others saw it crash into the tree.  Then the official says that isn't good enough and that he needs to definitely know that it is his.  That's when PR ramps it up and starts getting more definitive with his language. 

PR claimed that he can tell that it is a 2017 ProV and that nobody else plays that ball anymore and that he knows that it is his because of the "black arrow on the proV", presumably meaning what is shown in the pic below. He admitted that he couldn't see the number of the ball or any other markings.  The rules official told him that isn't enough and PR went on to re-emphasize how he knows that the specific black line is his because of where it ends in relation to the arrow ("my line goes and that there is a black arrow on the end and that's where I see the arrow... that's why I'm giving you that distinct mark." (seems to be implying that he draws a black line over the Pro V font and ends it before the black arrows on the actual golf ball).  Official- "OK, that arrow is not part of the make up of the golf ball."  PR "OK, how I do my line is I start my line there and then the arrow is right there."  Official, "So you do that?  I can't see that arrow.... OK, that's fine with me.  If that's your distinctive marking, that's fine." 



Here is the distinctive line on PR's golf ball.  On this and the balls that fans have, the line goes over the black arrows and well past.  If this is all you can see on a golf ball, you can't ID it as your own in good faith. 

I would think pros identify their ball with (at least) three criteria: make, number and personal markings. Players routinely try to identify all three prior to hitting. If there is doubt, they even mark balls and oscillate them to get a better look. Why would an official accept PR's case? Sounds like a bad ruling to me and PR should know better.

Ciao

[Rob Marshall]

I can't believe we haven't heard about someone climbing the tree to look for his actual ball.

[Tim Martin]

The guy just can’t help himself.

I think this is a fair assessment. You won’t see him take the high road when it comes to any situation where the low road delivers him an advantage. If you start at the beginning with this guy was there ever any decision where the game itself was a benefactor instead of him? Finally I’m a fan of Rory but I wonder if Reed wins the tournament by one instead of him that he steps in to defend him?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Curious what y'all think of Rory's take:

[Tim Martin]

Curious what y'all think of Rory's take:

Smart from a public relations standpoint as it diffuses the “Teegate” situation. As I said in the prior post I wonder if that same statement materializes if Reed wins by one?

[Jim_Coleman]

   I think Rory just decided to pass on this one.

[Rob Marshall]

   I think Rory just decided to pass on this one.

Exactly, He took the high road.

[Tommy Williamsen]

His actions will follow him long after he retires. At some point, he should take a penalty without complaint. Jane Blalock won 27 LPGA tournaments and is still waiting to enter the World Golf Hall of Fame.

[Anthony Butler]

The only way this can come to conclusion is to cut down the palm tree, replace it with a new one, and remove all the golf balls.
See if PR's ball is there.  If the ball is not there repeat the procedure with the 3rd palm tree.

Don't they have ladders in the Middle East? Failing that I know they have a lot of cranes - judging by how much the skyline has changed in Dubai over recent years.

[John Kavanaugh]

Of course a ball was recovered. Didn’t fit the narrative.


Reed has zero obligation to prove he didn’t misrepresent his opinion.

[Kalen Braley]

Of course a ball was recovered. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Reed has zero obligation to prove he didn’t misrepresent his opinion.

Well that's sort of the point John, Reed shouldn't have had an opinion in this case, he should have been making a statement of fact...

[John Kavanaugh]

The rules failed us. I can’t be 100% sure a ball in my hand is mine, yet alone one in a tree.

[Kalen Braley]

The rules failed us. I can’t be 100% sure a ball in my hand is mine, yet alone one in a tree.

I suppose that could be plausible if it happened on your home course in say the club championship, given the number of rounds you would have played out there prior.

But not so much in this case...

[Charlie Goerges]

The rules failed us. I can’t be 100% sure a ball in my hand is mine, yet alone one in a tree.

There's a place for that kind of radical skepticism, but the administration of a game is probably not it.

[Sean_A]

Of course a ball was recovered. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Reed has zero obligation to prove he didn’t misrepresent his opinion.

Well that's sort of the point John, Reed shouldn't have had an opinion in this case, he should have been making a statement of fact...

Which of course was extremely difficult to do in this situation. Again, why would an official accept PR's identification if it wasn't verifiable? Is the golfer the sole person who can ultimately decide on this matter?

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Any suggestions for how the player concerned should uniquely mark his ball in case one of his shots ends up in a tree once again?
Atb

[Kalen Braley]

Of course a ball was recovered. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Reed has zero obligation to prove he didn’t misrepresent his opinion.

Well that's sort of the point John, Reed shouldn't have had an opinion in this case, he should have been making a statement of fact...

Which of course was extremely difficult to do in this situation. Again, why would an official accept PR's identification if it wasn't verifiable? Is the golfer the sole person who can ultimately decide on this matter?

Ciao

Well this is what I alluded to earlier.

The official stands his ground and doesn't accept the identification as valid, Reed throws a fit and takes the walk of shame, texts his lawyer to add one more name to the lawsuit, and then Pat drags him thru the mud in ensuing pressers and interviews. The pro game has neutered and declawed officiating, which needed to change a long time ago...

[John Kavanaugh]

Please don’t question the ethics of the officials. Once Scooby Double got a pass for taking the LIV cash that cat is out of the bag.

[Kalen Braley]

Please don’t question the ethics of the officials. Once Scooby Double got a pass for taking the LIV cash that cat is out of the bag.

John,

I'm not questioning their ethics in the slightest, i'm advocating they should have the handcuffs removed to hold firm when a dispute arises and have the autonomy to actually protect the field.

Can you imagine a basketball ref blowing the whistle for a foul, then asking the player if they concur?  And then negating the call if the players insists "100% positive I didn't touch the guy".  The absurdity....

[Rob Marshall]

Of course a ball was recovered. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Reed has zero obligation to prove he didn’t misrepresent his opinion.

Well that's sort of the point John, Reed shouldn't have had an opinion in this case, he should have been making a statement of fact...

Which of course was extremely difficult to do in this situation. Again, why would an official accept PR's identification if it wasn't verifiable? Is the golfer the sole person who can ultimately decide on this matter?

Ciao

Well this is what I alluded to earlier.

The official stands his ground and doesn't accept the identification as valid, Reed throws a fit and takes the walk of shame, texts his lawyer to add one more name to the lawsuit, and then Pat drags him thru the mud in ensuing pressers and interviews. The pro game has neutered and declawed officiating, which needed to change a long time ago...

Come one Kalen, We've seen Bryson told numerous times he wasn't getting a drop and Sergio had his famous "I can't wait to leave this tour" tantrum last year when a ruling didn't go his way.

[Kalen Braley]

Rob,

There are a ton of nuanced scenarios that come up in the pro game.  Some are clear cut and others not so much.
In the case of Sergio, he was actually justified...the official got it wrong and they admitted it afterwards.

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/sergio-garcia-ruling-heated-incident-mistake-pga-tour/

[John Kavanaugh]

No one wants more camera time for officials.


I’d rather see one cheater go free than a thousand honest golfers punished.

[Rob Marshall]

Rob,

There are a ton of nuanced scenarios that come up in the pro game.  Some are clear cut and others not so much.
In the case of Sergio, he was actually justified...the official got it wrong and they admitted it afterwards.

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/sergio-garcia-ruling-heated-incident-mistake-pga-tour/

Kalen,
That's not my point. I don't see them backing down to the players which I thought was what you were implying. It I got it wrong, sorry.


I was playing in a  tournament a few years ago when Jerry Stahl gave a talk about the big 4 and rulings he had to give them. One was about Jack trying to intimidate him at the masters into giving him a free drop.  Jerry didn't care who he was he wasn't getting a drop.

[Jeff Schley]

Rob,

There are a ton of nuanced scenarios that come up in the pro game.  Some are clear cut and others not so much.
In the case of Sergio, he was actually justified...the official got it wrong and they admitted it afterwards.

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/sergio-garcia-ruling-heated-incident-mistake-pga-tour/

Kalen,
That's not my point. I don't see them backing down to the players which I thought was what you were implying. It I got it wrong, sorry.


I was playing in a  tournament a few years ago when Jerry Stahl gave a talk about the big 4 and rulings he had to give them. One was about Jack trying to intimidate him at the masters into giving him a free drop.  Jerry didn't care who he was he wasn't getting a drop.

I have heard of the Big 3, but who is the 4th?  Trevino?

[Jeff Evagues]

Rob,

There are a ton of nuanced scenarios that come up in the pro game.  Some are clear cut and others not so much.
In the case of Sergio, he was actually justified...the official got it wrong and they admitted it afterwards.

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/sergio-garcia-ruling-heated-incident-mistake-pga-tour/

Kalen,
That's not my point. I don't see them backing down to the players which I thought was what you were implying. It I got it wrong, sorry.


I was playing in a  tournament a few years ago when Jerry Stahl gave a talk about the big 4 and rulings he had to give them. One was about Jack trying to intimidate him at the masters into giving him a free drop.  Jerry didn't care who he was he wasn't getting a drop.

I have heard of the Big 3, but who is the 4th?  Trevino?

I always thought the 4th was Billy Casper.