Lexi Thompson ANA

[ibradley]

What I am not comfortable with is those who are making the claim that she knew it was marked incorrectly or that it was intentional. Has she ever had any issues like this before? Here is a 22 year old girl who by all accounts that I have heard is a genuine, great person. No scandals, no reason not to trust her. Did she make a mistake marking the ball? Clearly, but to make the assertion that she knew it was incorrect or intentional is quite a leap with no evidence. You are calling her a cheater AND a liar if you make that assertion. I believe she deserves the benefit of the doubt on this. I hope your teenage or early 20's kids are never in a situation when a person of authority or the public won't give them the benefit of the doubt without good reason.

 

It is very easy to replace a ball in the correct spot on good greens. It is a huge mistake to replace it so far from the proper spot. It appears she was ready to tap it in and then changed her mind, marked it quickly and replaced it in a very different spot. It would be interesting to see how often she marks one footers versus just tapping them in.

 

Of course we can't get in her mind and know whether she intentionally cheated or not. Unfortunately for Lexi the evidence against her is quite damning.

[EmperorPenguin]

You know as they say: if you're not cheating, you're not trying.

 

I watched the video again. I can understand why she marked her ball on the side of the ball. What I do not understand is why did she immediately replace the ball on to the left? From her perspective it looks to me like this:

 

1. She approached the ball from the left side.

2. She placed her mark properly behind the ball, and from the left side it meant she marked it on the right side of the ball.

3. She lifted the ball.

4. Immediately she shifted the ball left (toward her), replacing it about a half inch left of where she should have replaced it.

 

I can understand if she marked it to the side and stepped away, then a minute or so later replaced her ball incorrectly after another golfer putted out and it was her turn to replace the ball and putt and it was an "honest mistake" for her not to replace the ball on the side of the same side of the coin, but this was not the case. The lateral shift was immediate. How can it be an honest mistake there?

[Hardluckster]

its no wonder people cant agree on anything these days.... we can all watch the same video and some want to hang her and some see a mistake and feel sorry for her... I can only hope the pro lynch mob group has insurance on the glass houses they are screaming from... im more shocked by the cheating allegations people are making up after the fact than the 2nd 2 stroke penalty to cause a playoff now.... what a world we live in ....

 

Differences in opinions is a perfectly acceptable thing, imo. What is sad is a lack of acceptance of anything but our own view, imo.

 

I have no problem with the ruling, in fact I think that is was handled exactly as it should have been handled (and exactly how I would have penalized myself had it been me who committed the infraction).

 

That doesn't mean that I don't feel for Lexi. If she did this unintentionally (and nobody but Lexi knows that for sure), this was a heartbreaking event for her. You would have to be almost inhuman to not feel sorry for someone in that position. If the action was intentional, however, then she isn't deserving of any sympathy (again, we cannot know her intent). I will assume, since I do not know her, that she made an honest mistake that cost her dearly.

 

I will also add that I'll bet she doesn't repeat this mistake. I would be willing to wager that she, and others like her, are far more cognizant of ball marking practices in the future because of this event.

[Sawgrass]

What I am not comfortable with is those who are making the claim that she knew it was marked incorrectly or that it was intentional. Has she ever had any issues like this before? Here is a 22 year old girl who by all accounts that I have heard is a genuine, great person. No scandals, no reason not to trust her. Did she make a mistake marking the ball? Clearly, but to make the assertion that she knew it was incorrect or intentional is quite a leap with no evidence. You are calling her a cheater AND a liar if you make that assertion. I believe she deserves the benefit of the doubt on this. I hope your teenage or early 20's kids are never in a situation when a person of authority or the public won't give them the benefit of the doubt without good reason.

 

Perhaps you agree, the ref did reportedly give her the benefit of the doubt as to intention when he announced her penalty. It is the judgmental public that you take issue with, right?

[Sawgrass]

I would be willing to wager that she, and others like her, are far more cognizant of ball marking practices in the future because of this event.

 

I cringe when friends casually toss their marker down near the ball. Somehow they never seem to strike it, but you never know when that will happen. But yes, this incident may give pause to some. (More likely the 2017 Local Rule allowing-penalty free replacement of a ball accidentally moved on a green will accelerate the practice.)

[Hardluckster]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

 

That doesn't mean he intentionally broke a rule.

 

I do not think that Tiger intentionally broke the rule. I think he had a mental midget moment and incorrectly interpreted the options for his drop. I think he was thinking that he could go back as far as he wanted on the line from the spot of his previous shot (which is wrong, and which I'm sure he knew was wrong but in the heat of the moment incorrectly executed).

 

Had he been intentionally cheating, it would have been idiotic of him to announce to his caddie (withing earshot of microphones and others) that he wanted to move back a yard in order to gain that advantage.

[Sawgrass]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

 

That doesn't mean he intentionally broke a rule.

 

I do not think that Tiger intentionally broke the rule. I think he had a mental midget moment and incorrectly interpreted the options for his drop. I think he was thinking that he could go back as far as he wanted on the line from the spot of his previous shot (which is wrong, and which I'm sure he knew was wrong but in the heat of the moment incorrectly executed).

 

Had he been intentionally cheating, it would have been idiotic of him to announce to his caddie (withing earshot of microphones and others) that he wanted to move back a yard in order to gain that advantage.

 

I fundamentally agree, but as I recall he was even "more innocent" in that he was not overheard speaking to his caddie, but relaying his thinking directly to reporters after his round.

[Hardluckster]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

 

That doesn't mean he intentionally broke a rule.

 

I do not think that Tiger intentionally broke the rule. I think he had a mental midget moment and incorrectly interpreted the options for his drop. I think he was thinking that he could go back as far as he wanted on the line from the spot of his previous shot (which is wrong, and which I'm sure he knew was wrong but in the heat of the moment incorrectly executed).

 

Had he been intentionally cheating, it would have been idiotic of him to announce to his caddie (withing earshot of microphones and others) that he wanted to move back a yard in order to gain that advantage.

 

I fundamentally agree, but as I recall he was even "more innocent" in that he was not overheard speaking to his caddie, but relaying his thinking directly to reporters after his round.

 

You are correct. That is absolutely what happened, Sawgrass.

 

He may have talked about it to the caddie also (was it Stevie?) or maybe not. I was quite possibly in error on that.

[KyGolf]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

 

That doesn't mean he intentionally broke a rule.

 

I do not think that Tiger intentionally broke the rule. I think he had a mental midget moment and incorrectly interpreted the options for his drop. I think he was thinking that he could go back as far as he wanted on the line from the spot of his previous shot (which is wrong, and which I'm sure he knew was wrong but in the heat of the moment incorrectly executed).

 

Had he been intentionally cheating, it would have been idiotic of him to announce to his caddie (withing earshot of microphones and others) that he wanted to move back a yard in order to gain that advantage.

 

I fundamentally agree, but as I recall he was even "more innocent" in that he was not overheard speaking to his caddie, but relaying his thinking directly to reporters after his round.

 

I agree. I think he mixed up (combined) the 2 options of the water hazard rule.

[DaveLeeNC]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

 

That doesn't mean he intentionally broke a rule.

 

I do not think that Tiger intentionally broke the rule. I think he had a mental midget moment and incorrectly interpreted the options for his drop. I think he was thinking that he could go back as far as he wanted on the line from the spot of his previous shot (which is wrong, and which I'm sure he knew was wrong but in the heat of the moment incorrectly executed).

 

Had he been intentionally cheating, it would have been idiotic of him to announce to his caddie (withing earshot of microphones and others) that he wanted to move back a yard in order to gain that advantage.

 

I fundamentally agree, but as I recall he was even "more innocent" in that he was not overheard speaking to his caddie, but relaying his thinking directly to reporters after his round.

 

SG, I recall that very clearly. In a press conference he clearly said that he took a drop a couple paces back "for a better yardage". He was obviously (in his mind) taking an unplayable lie from the initial position of the previous shot, rather than where it ended up. At the time he had no idea WRT his error here.

 

dave

[Noles]

What I am not comfortable with is those who are making the claim that she knew it was marked incorrectly or that it was intentional. Has she ever had any issues like this before? Here is a 22 year old girl who by all accounts that I have heard is a genuine, great person. No scandals, no reason not to trust her. Did she make a mistake marking the ball? Clearly, but to make the assertion that she knew it was incorrect or intentional is quite a leap with no evidence. You are calling her a cheater AND a liar if you make that assertion. I believe she deserves the benefit of the doubt on this. I hope your teenage or early 20's kids are never in a situation when a person of authority or the public won't give them the benefit of the doubt without good reason.

 

Perhaps you agree, the ref did reportedly give her the benefit of the doubt as to intention when he announced her penalty. It is the judgmental public that you take issue with, right?

Correct. I believe that the official even said as much in the conversation between the 12th green and 13th tee.

[Augster]

Everything you'd ever want to know about the Tiger incident is in this thread which played out in real time.

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/825483-tiger-woods-assessed-2-stroke-penalty-at-the-masters-for-illegal-drop/page__fromsearch__1

 

That wasn't the original title. They changed the title when they merged topics.

 

 

[cval]

After watching the video of Lexi I'm pretty sure she did it on purpose.

 

She approached the ball from off to the side.....not directly behind it.

 

Then, she failed to put her ball mark down directly behind the ball. She placed it off to the side. Was this an accident? Because she walked up to the ball from the side and not behind it? Perhaps, but then the next part I can't accept as an accident.

 

She then picks up the ball and relocates it to a spot immediately in front of the marker. She lifted up the ball and put it back down on a completely different spot.

 

That's what I don't understand. How could someone possibly do this? How could a LPGA pro make an error like that? I mean, she picks up the ball and moves it to a different spot. Really??

 

Also, when officials explained to her what she did, I thought that her reaction was not appropriate for someone who did this unknowingly. Her reaction was much more consistent with someone who got caught doing something wrong and knew that it was wrong.

 

It looks to me like she was finding the part of the ball she likes to see while putting and placed the ball on the coin wrong. She was thinking about the putt not the placement and it cost her a major championship. Her trying to be careful in not missing a one footer ultimately cost her the tournament. To say she did it on purpose is a huge stretch.

 

This is a black eye on the sport because the idea of sport is to find the best player, team etc. Did that happen this week? To a casual fan the one inch one millimeter makes no sense the 4 stroke penalty even less.

 

What we lose in all these weird rules violation is the spirit of the rule and therefore common sense goes out the window. You can never account for all situations and when you try the rule book gets to big and confusing. Stick with the spirit of the rules and I think these type of things would not occur.

[Hardluckster]

After watching the video of Lexi I'm pretty sure she did it on purpose.

 

She approached the ball from off to the side.....not directly behind it.

 

Then, she failed to put her ball mark down directly behind the ball. She placed it off to the side. Was this an accident? Because she walked up to the ball from the side and not behind it? Perhaps, but then the next part I can't accept as an accident.

 

She then picks up the ball and relocates it to a spot immediately in front of the marker. She lifted up the ball and put it back down on a completely different spot.

 

That's what I don't understand. How could someone possibly do this? How could a LPGA pro make an error like that? I mean, she picks up the ball and moves it to a different spot. Really??

 

Also, when officials explained to her what she did, I thought that her reaction was not appropriate for someone who did this unknowingly. Her reaction was much more consistent with someone who got caught doing something wrong and knew that it was wrong.

 

It looks to me like she was finding the part of the ball she likes to see while putting and placed the ball on the coin wrong. She was thinking about the putt not the placement and it cost her a major championship. Her trying to be careful in not missing a one footer ultimately cost her the tournament. To say she did it on purpose is a huge stretch.

 

This is a black eye on the sport because the idea of sport is to find the best player, team etc. Did that happen this week? To a casual fan the one inch one millimeter makes no sense the 4 stroke penalty even less.

 

What we lose in all these weird rules violation is the spirit of the rule and therefore common sense goes out the window. You can never account for all situations and when you try the rule book gets to big and confusing. Stick with the spirit of the rules and I think these type of things would not occur.

 

I disagree. The "spirit of the rules", as you put it, is very arbitrary and not nearly rigid enough to provide a level playing field - which is the objective of rules in the first place. At least that's the way that I see it.

 

How much movement is within the "spirit of the rules"? How much excedes the "spirit of the rules"?

 

I used to play with a group where anything inside of the leather on the putter was conceded (I know, that's breaking the RoG, but that's the way this group has been playing for eons). Quite a few of the players were known to take advantage of this rule and stretch the distances in their foursomes. I suggested that we just adopt a "putt everything out" policy to eliminate any advantages/disadvantages. One member of the group responded that it was "just a friendly game" - money was at stake so it was definitely more than just a friendly game. I asked him if he could identify exactly where on my putter the "friendly" distance was so that I could make certain that my foursome always played with the same rules as everyone else. As a side note, I was told by more than one member of this group of players that whoever was in my foursome was the only group that ever fully followed the "leather rule" - according to them, all other foursomes routinely gave putts outside of the leather. I took that as a compliment - maybe I should not have, but I did.

[Shilgy]

Golfweek has the video played in normal speed, NOT zoomed in. The move is even easier to see at full speed. Anyone standing near her and watching would could have noticed.

 

According to the article, officials informed her she moved the ball an inch.

 

< edit: forgot to put link >

http://golfweek.com/...na-inspiration/

interesting that her fellow competitor, Park, appears to be watching and says nothing. Either she could not see it ....or as a limited English speaking rookie chose to stay silent....or that is an understood method on the KLPGA.

[Shilgy]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

Tiger dropped back on the line it entered the hazard initially. Brain fart in his case as after ricocheting off the flagstick it entered the hazard on another line. If the ball had entered the line where it first crossed he would have been allowed to go back on that line as far as he wanted. That was his brain fart.

[Hardluckster]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

Tiger dropped back on the line it entered the hazard initially. Brain fart in his case as after ricocheting off the flagstick it entered the hazard on another line. If the ball had entered the line where it first crossed he would have been allowed to go back on that line as far as he wanted. That was his brain fart.

 

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but did he not first go down to the point close to the Sarazen Bridge and check out that option before returning to the spot of the original shot? That's how I remember it, but very possibly I'm mistaken.

[Shilgy]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

Tiger dropped back on the line it entered the hazard initially. Brain fart in his case as after ricocheting off the flagstick it entered the hazard on another line. If the ball had entered the line where it first crossed he would have been allowed to go back on that line as far as he wanted. That was his brain fart.

 

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but did he not first go down to the point close to the Sarazen Bridge and check out that option before returning to the spot of the original shot? That's how I remember it, but very possibly I'm mistaken.

I recall he was checking out a drop zone-not based on the ball entry into the hazard. But then it was four years ago and I would have a hart time recalling what I had for dinner Saturday.

[rogolf]

Lol @ the replies here

 

People were shi**** on Tiger when this happened. Now it's poor little Lexi so it's okay.

 

Tiger intentionally dropped in a different spot to get a better yardage.

Tiger dropped back on the line it entered the hazard initially. Brain fart in his case as after ricocheting off the flagstick it entered the hazard on another line. If the ball had entered the line where it first crossed he would have been allowed to go back on that line as far as he wanted. That was his brain fart.

 

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but did he not first go down to the point close to the Sarazen Bridge and check out that option before returning to the spot of the original shot? That's how I remember it, but very possibly I'm mistaken.

I recall he was checking out a drop zone-not based on the ball entry into the hazard. But then it was four years ago and I would have a hart time recalling what I had for dinner Saturday.

 

There was (is) no dropping zone on hole #15. He walked to the left side of the fairway to check out the options of 26-1b (drop behind the hazard keeping the spot where the ball last crossed the margin of the hazard), didn't like that, so went back to the original spot to proceed under 26-1a (stroke and distance), but he intentionally dropped two club lengths behind the original spot (this statement was part of his post-round press conference). Rule 26-1a (and 27-1) say the ball must be played from as near as possible to the last spot. Dropping two club lengths away from that spot is not as near as possible, hence the two stroke penalty. The Committee had reviewed the situation before he finished his round and concluded from the replay that it wasn't a breach. However, when Tiger admitted that he intended not to play from the original spot, the Committee reversed their original decision and invoked the two stroke penalty. There was no scorecard issue in this situation, merely the Committee correcting their "error" based on new information (Tiger's press conference).

[llewol007]

Makes the USGA look like it is run by whomever has the guts to take the lead and right now, there is no leadership. To allow an outside entity decide a ruling after the fact just shows that they do not need any rules officials walking the grounds and following the players. Why in the world would they let a person watching at home call in and point out an infraction that they themselves did not catch. And one point to add is the fact that not every player is followed and showed on television unless you are up in the leader board. So why is it that the USGA cannot get this right. I just hope somebody in leadership actually steps up and fixes this mess.

 

For the umpteenth time, this was NOT a USGA event.

 

This was the LPGA Tour, a commercial enterprise masquerading as a 501c(3). It's a TV reality show whose sole reason for existence is to sell things like automobiles made in Korea and stuff to shave ladies legs with. (The PGA Tour is a similar outfit except they advertise Viagra and Buicks.)

Sorry. LPGA or PGA, the point I was making is that the whole calling in business should be disallowed.

[HighSpeedScene]

Makes the USGA look like it is run by whomever has the guts to take the lead and right now, there is no leadership. To allow an outside entity decide a ruling after the fact just shows that they do not need any rules officials walking the grounds and following the players. Why in the world would they let a person watching at home call in and point out an infraction that they themselves did not catch. And one point to add is the fact that not every player is followed and showed on television unless you are up in the leader board. So why is it that the USGA cannot get this right. I just hope somebody in leadership actually steps up and fixes this mess.

 

For the umpteenth time, this was NOT a USGA event.

 

This was the LPGA Tour, a commercial enterprise masquerading as a 501c(3). It's a TV reality show whose sole reason for existence is to sell things like automobiles made in Korea and stuff to shave ladies legs with. (The PGA Tour is a similar outfit except they advertise Viagra and Buicks.)

Sorry. LPGA or PGA, the point I was making is that the whole calling in business should be disallowed.

 

And hang a win on a 22 year old that we all find out later didn't deserve it? You really think that trade-off is worth it?

 

Edit: MAY NOT have deserved it, to be fair.

[LeoLeo99]

Makes the USGA look like it is run by whomever has the guts to take the lead and right now, there is no leadership. To allow an outside entity decide a ruling after the fact just shows that they do not need any rules officials walking the grounds and following the players. Why in the world would they let a person watching at home call in and point out an infraction that they themselves did not catch. And one point to add is the fact that not every player is followed and showed on television unless you are up in the leader board. So why is it that the USGA cannot get this right. I just hope somebody in leadership actually steps up and fixes this mess.

 

For the umpteenth time, this was NOT a USGA event.

 

This was the LPGA Tour, a commercial enterprise masquerading as a 501c(3). It's a TV reality show whose sole reason for existence is to sell things like automobiles made in Korea and stuff to shave ladies legs with. (The PGA Tour is a similar outfit except they advertise Viagra and Buicks.)

Sorry. LPGA or PGA, the point I was making is that the whole calling in business should be disallowed.

 

And hang a win on a 22 year old that we all find out later didn't deserve it? You really think that trade-off is worth it?

 

Happened last night in the NCAA basketball finals where the refs missed a call where the NC player was out of bounds but they didn't see it. UNC are the champs and people are pointing out the missed call. No one is saying there needs to be a correction after the fact.

 

Most of the touring pros and fans would be quite happy to call it on the course and live with the results. The trade-off is absolutely worth it.

 

Something that would have helped this situation is for the USGA or LPGA to hold a press conference and explain how and why they made the decision to penalize. Educate people on their thought process and how/why golf is different and getting it right is paramount over the sporting event itself.

[HighSpeedScene]

Makes the USGA look like it is run by whomever has the guts to take the lead and right now, there is no leadership. To allow an outside entity decide a ruling after the fact just shows that they do not need any rules officials walking the grounds and following the players. Why in the world would they let a person watching at home call in and point out an infraction that they themselves did not catch. And one point to add is the fact that not every player is followed and showed on television unless you are up in the leader board. So why is it that the USGA cannot get this right. I just hope somebody in leadership actually steps up and fixes this mess.

 

For the umpteenth time, this was NOT a USGA event.

 

This was the LPGA Tour, a commercial enterprise masquerading as a 501c(3). It's a TV reality show whose sole reason for existence is to sell things like automobiles made in Korea and stuff to shave ladies legs with. (The PGA Tour is a similar outfit except they advertise Viagra and Buicks.)

Sorry. LPGA or PGA, the point I was making is that the whole calling in business should be disallowed.

 

And hang a win on a 22 year old that we all find out later didn't deserve it? You really think that trade-off is worth it?

 

Happened last night in the NCAA basketball finals where the refs missed a call where the NC player was out of bounds but they didn't see it. UNC are the champs and people are pointing out the missed call. No one is saying there needs to be a correction after the fact.

 

Most of the touring pros and fans would be quite happy to call it on the course and live with the results. The trade-off is absolutely worth it.

 

Something that would have helped this situation is for the USGA or LPGA to hold a press conference and explain how and why they made the decision to penalize. Educate people on their thought process and how/why golf is different and getting it right is paramount over the sporting event itself.

 

You are making my point - you think the tours want that kind of feedback? Those kinds of discussions that call the results into question?

 

Golf allows the right call to be made - and that's a weakness?? Vs the strength of a bad call going unresolved due to the logistical considerations of a basketball game? Huh?

 

Ask yourself: why haven't the tours addressed this? They certainly can and it can be implemented in one hot second. If this is so bad, why haven't they fixed it? Simple - the flip side is worse. Classic case of the grass being greener on the other side of the fence for those so vociferously attacking the rules/tours for doing what the rules were designed to do.

 

Personally, I'm surprised but delighted the ruling bodies of both the rules and the tours have more foresight than many of the members here. Particularly that guy that appears to want to touch his friend in his private area.

[Pingfitz]

Why the need to use an alignment stripe or marking on the ball for such a short putt, just knock it in and move on.

[LeoLeo99]

Why the need to use an alignment stripe or marking on the ball for such a short putt, just knock it in and move on.

 

Annoys me when Spieth does it. And backs away. And resets to knock in a 1 foot putt.

[cval]

After watching the video of Lexi I'm pretty sure she did it on purpose.

 

She approached the ball from off to the side.....not directly behind it.

 

Then, she failed to put her ball mark down directly behind the ball. She placed it off to the side. Was this an accident? Because she walked up to the ball from the side and not behind it? Perhaps, but then the next part I can't accept as an accident.

 

She then picks up the ball and relocates it to a spot immediately in front of the marker. She lifted up the ball and put it back down on a completely different spot.

 

That's what I don't understand. How could someone possibly do this? How could a LPGA pro make an error like that? I mean, she picks up the ball and moves it to a different spot. Really??

 

Also, when officials explained to her what she did, I thought that her reaction was not appropriate for someone who did this unknowingly. Her reaction was much more consistent with someone who got caught doing something wrong and knew that it was wrong.

 

It looks to me like she was finding the part of the ball she likes to see while putting and placed the ball on the coin wrong. She was thinking about the putt not the placement and it cost her a major championship. Her trying to be careful in not missing a one footer ultimately cost her the tournament. To say she did it on purpose is a huge stretch.

 

This is a black eye on the sport because the idea of sport is to find the best player, team etc. Did that happen this week? To a casual fan the one inch one millimeter makes no sense the 4 stroke penalty even less.

 

What we lose in all these weird rules violation is the spirit of the rule and therefore common sense goes out the window. You can never account for all situations and when you try the rule book gets to big and confusing. Stick with the spirit of the rules and I think these type of things would not occur.

 

I disagree. The "spirit of the rules", as you put it, is very arbitrary and not nearly rigid enough to provide a level playing field - which is the objective of rules in the first place. At least that's the way that I see it.

 

How much movement is within the "spirit of the rules"? How much excedes the "spirit of the rules"?

 

Easy enough was an advantage gained? if yes penalty if not no. Is that not why the rule was written? Really not that hard to determine. Then crap like super slo mo for a leaf moving or a grain of sand or a ball oscillating on the green would never happen. In the case she might have still been penalized if it was deemed she gained an advantage moving the ball 1/2 inch. The argument against the field does not hold up because you can never have enough rules to cover every exception and you end getting away from why the rule was written in the first place. The NFL has the same problem to many rules then you need another rule to clarify the last rule then another etc etc. Has common sense gone out the window?

 

I used to play with a group where anything inside of the leather on the putter was conceded (I know, that's breaking the RoG, but that's the way this group has been playing for eons). Quite a few of the players were known to take advantage of this rule and stretch the distances in their foursomes. I suggested that we just adopt a "putt everything out" policy to eliminate any advantages/disadvantages. One member of the group responded that it was "just a friendly game" - money was at stake so it was definitely more than just a friendly game. I asked him if he could identify exactly where on my putter the "friendly" distance was so that I could make certain that my foursome always played with the same rules as everyone else. As a side note, I was told by more than one member of this group of players that whoever was in my foursome was the only group that ever fully followed the "leather rule" - according to them, all other foursomes routinely gave putts outside of the leather. I took that as a compliment - maybe I should not have, but I did.

[Hardluckster]

 

Happened last night in the NCAA basketball finals where the refs missed a call where the NC player was out of bounds but they didn't see it. UNC are the champs and people are pointing out the missed call. No one is saying there needs to be a correction after the fact.

 

Most of the touring pros and fans would be quite happy to call it on the course and live with the results. The trade-off is absolutely worth it.

 

Something that would have helped this situation is for the USGA or LPGA to hold a press conference and explain how and why they made the decision to penalize. Educate people on their thought process and how/why golf is different and getting it right is paramount over the sporting event itself.

 

Nobody is calling in because it would be futile - there is no provision for outside agencies to call in and have rules enforced in the NCAA tournament. I will guarantee you, though, that there are Gonzaga fans (and others who are anti-UNC fans who are screaming about this on social media and other soap box formats).

 

The biggest distinction, however, is that golfers are responsible for policing their own penalties and infractions. That sets it apart from all other sports and requires a different set of procedures. In my opinion, the procedures that are currently in place work just fine.

[Hardluckster]

Easy enough was an advantage gained? if yes penalty if not no. Is that not why the rule was written? Really not that hard to determine. Then crap like super slo mo for a leaf moving or a grain of sand or a ball oscillating on the green would never happen. In the case she might have still been penalized if it was deemed she gained an advantage moving the ball 1/2 inch. The argument against the field does not hold up because you can never have enough rules to cover every exception and you end getting away from why the rule was written in the first place. The NFL has the same problem to many rules then you need another rule to clarify the last rule then another etc etc. Has common sense gone out the window?

 

 

It seems to me that your answer to the rules is that there be no rules.

 

Under your approach, I could move my ball a football field so long as I ascertained that no advantage was gained. But then why would I move it in the first place if I wasn't gaining an advantage? Hmmmmm.

 

That would definitely simplify things, but I doubt very seriously if it would create an even and fair playing environment.

 

What I perceive as an advantage, you would most likely choose to ignore. Or vice versa. Either way, the rules of golf cannot allow competitors to arbitrarily determine what is advantageous and what is not - at least not if there is to be equity among the competitors.

 

I have found that in golf, like life, there are those that will take advantage (cheat, if you will). If it is an arbitrary judgement as to what is allowed, cheating becomes acceptable.

 

That's how I see it. There will be no changing my mind on this issue.

 

Here's what I guarantee you: if you were to play golf with me and I was to misplace my ball on the green, I would penalize myself the required strokes regardless of whether I gained an advantage or not. I would expect you to do the same. Why? Because that is what the rules demand. It really is that plain and simple.

[Sawgrass]

Makes the USGA look like it is run by whomever has the guts to take the lead and right now, there is no leadership. To allow an outside entity decide a ruling after the fact just shows that they do not need any rules officials walking the grounds and following the players. Why in the world would they let a person watching at home call in and point out an infraction that they themselves did not catch. And one point to add is the fact that not every player is followed and showed on television unless you are up in the leader board. So why is it that the USGA cannot get this right. I just hope somebody in leadership actually steps up and fixes this mess.

 

For the umpteenth time, this was NOT a USGA event.

 

This was the LPGA Tour, a commercial enterprise masquerading as a 501c(3). It's a TV reality show whose sole reason for existence is to sell things like automobiles made in Korea and stuff to shave ladies legs with. (The PGA Tour is a similar outfit except they advertise Viagra and Buicks.)

Sorry. LPGA or PGA, the point I was making is that the whole calling in business should be disallowed.

 

And hang a win on a 22 year old that we all find out later didn't deserve it? You really think that trade-off is worth it?

 

Happened last night in the NCAA basketball finals where the refs missed a call where the NC player was out of bounds but they didn't see it. UNC are the champs and people are pointing out the missed call. No one is saying there needs to be a correction after the fact.

 

Most of the touring pros and fans would be quite happy to call it on the course and live with the results. The trade-off is absolutely worth it.

 

Something that would have helped this situation is for the USGA or LPGA to hold a press conference and explain how and why they made the decision to penalize. Educate people on their thought process and how/why golf is different and getting it right is paramount over the sporting event itself.

The basketball contest starts and ends on one day. Many golf tournaments start and end several days apart, with "carryover" scoring adding up to a final total. If the golf tournament's results were announced, like the basketball game the result would stand under all but the most deliberately deceptive behaviors. The parallel doesn't work.

[landolakes]

Golfweek has the video played in normal speed, NOT zoomed in. The move is even easier to see at full speed. Anyone standing near her and watching would could have noticed.

 

According to the article, officials informed her she moved the ball an inch.

 

< edit: forgot to put link >

http://golfweek.com/...na-inspiration/

interesting that her fellow competitor, Park, appears to be watching and says nothing. Either she could not see it ....or as a limited English speaking rookie chose to stay silent....or that is an understood method on the KLPGA.

 

ahh....maybe Park called later that night