2017 ANA Inspiration - who ya got?

[Goldenchang]

Golf is rather unique in that it's not played on a 100 yard by 40 yard field with a dozen officials and instant replay. Heck, football instituted replay because we'd all watch the blown calls on TV and yell at the screen. The coaches and fans in the stadium would see the same blown call on the big screen. No, golf is played on acres of land with 70 players. There's really no way to cover ever player's every shot. Two playing partners could be on opposite sides of the fairway. If there were a walking official with every player, maybe we'd come close to the real-time officiating people seem to want. I'm not sure we'll see that happen any time soon.

 

So, in a way I think the cats out of the bag. Technology is here. Fans have access to the video. 'Not sure everyone would be happy if Lexi was holding the trophy while they were replaying a video of the infraction that she "got away with". If the tournament is over, then there's probably not much that can be done. However, in this case the tournament was still ongoing.

 

 

Golf can't have it both ways. It can't claim that every shot can't be on video and than use video to apply rules depending on the random nature of who happens to be on camera at any given time. In the other sports, everybody is on camera all the time. Strike One.

 

You compound the insanity of the issue by allowing people outside the official capacity of the competition to insert themselves into the process. Strike Two.

 

Every other sport has a clear set of rules as to who can make "the calls" and when those calls are "final" and does so in a timely fashion as so that all participants can properly execute their game plan going forward. Golf does not. Strike Three.

 

And I haven't even mentioned the archaic nature of the ridiculous tradition of the manual scorecard signing which has zero to do with the skill required in competition. It is 2017, not 1922.

 

The issue isn't whether Lexi did what she did or that she should incur a penalty, the issue is the "process" not the "violation".

 

 

Bad organizations use bad processes. Good organizations use good processes and always try to seek streamlined processes.

 

Easily solved:

 

1. Nobody outside of a player, another player, or a rules official can call a penatly

2. Either everybody is videoed for every shot or no player can be penalized as a result of video. If this is not acceptable, than use whatever number of tour officials to watch in real time and than review after the day's competition if there is an issue.

3. Render decisions by a set time frame at the end of each day prior to the next day's play. If it is the final round, put more eyeballs on the live broadcast so you can expedite the process post round.

4. Deep six the scorecard signing along with the rotary phone and dial up internet. They aren't mowing the greens with hand pushed rotary blade mowers.

 

Start with common sense and tweek for improvement like a sensible organization would attempt.

So you would be okay with a foot wedge caught on video not able to be assessed as a penalty? Sounds extreme but hey-if no one else saw it it's okay? That is my farcical way of saying you cannot ignore violations just because all of them are not seen by the player or officials. Do you want an official with each player hovering over their every move?

Officials in golf are not the same as other sports officials. They are mainly there to assist-not spot violations.

I do agree with you on the scorecards issue. It is an archaic system.

 

Nice straw man.

 

A player that used a foot wedge caught on video (I am assuming by the TV broadcast) would be obviously spotted by my second sentence in No. 2 above either live or in the post round review covered by No. 3.

 

So what you're saying is get away with the infractions that you can get away with and avoid the ones you might get cough on?

[Highland]

I appreciate your comments, canadianglen. I also wondered whether a sponsor was behind this. The evil Nike, perhaps? Maybe not, now that all they do is produce a shoddy clothing line. Someone else with an axe to grind - who knows? There's no evidence yet for such accusations.

 

Lexi MAY have violated the rule (although it's not a certainty, even after video review). Even if you accept that Joe Armchair should be the one acting as referee-whose-opinion-the-LPGA-should-accept, it still shouldn't have been more than a two-stroke penalty. The four-stroke penalty was unjustifiable.

 

I admit to having a soft spot for Lexi, having met her as a teen at one of the Wegman's LPGA tournaments a few years ago (she was a teen, I already was an oldster, just to clarify). She was gracious and friendly to this silly person. I wished her well and she missed the cut, alas.

[Argonne69]

Are you suggesting that the tours hire 72 or 144 refs to tag along with each player?

 

I've been chuckling at some of the suggestions thrown around in the last 48 hours. I think some actually assume that the LPGA is this money-printing machine with bottomless funds to spend on an army of referees to police every shot by every player during every hole of every round. FAIRNESS! All because of one player's improper marking.

 

If they hire the refs, they'll be forced to cut down to one camera team, and outsource Tom Abbott's job. Then the kvetching will once again shift back to the lousy coverage.

[Argonne69]

'Not sure why the LPGA should have to take the blame. Had they received the information before the end of the 3rd round, and failed to act upon it in a timely manner, then sure, it would be on their shoulders. As it is, they received the information on Sunday, and acted quickly.

[North Texas]

I appreciate your comments, canadianglen. I also wondered whether a sponsor was behind this. The evil Nike, perhaps? Maybe not, now that all they do is produce a shoddy clothing line. Someone else with an axe to grind - who knows? There's no evidence yet for such accusations.

 

Lexi MAY have violated the rule (although it's not a certainty, even after video review). Even if you accept that Joe Armchair should be the one acting as referee-whose-opinion-the-LPGA-should-accept, it still shouldn't have been more than a two-stroke penalty. The four-stroke penalty was unjustifiable.

 

I admit to having a soft spot for Lexi, having met her as a teen at one of the Wegman's LPGA tournaments a few years ago (she was a teen, I already was an oldster, just to clarify). She was gracious and friendly to this silly person. I wished her well and she missed the cut, alas.

 

I second the appreciation for canadianglen's comments in post #601 at the top of this page (21).

 

Maybe someone can find the real-time version of Lexi's mark and replacing the ball and post it here. I saw it on the other thread on the Tour page and, imho, unless you knew to look for it you wouldn't never have noticed anything out of the ordinary.

 

And that's what makes me think it's very possible that someone was alerted to look for this by someone "close" to the action. Maybe a fan, maybe a player, maybe a caddie.

[chris975d]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

And also stated that he thought Lexi's ruling should be overturned and she should be given the trophy.

[Argonne69]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

And also stated that he thought Lexi's ruling should be overturned and she should be given the trophy.

 

Phil just admitted to widespread cheating?

[chris975d]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

And also stated that he thought Lexi's ruling should be overturned and she should be given the trophy.

 

Phil just admitted to widespread cheating?

 

If that's what you want to call it. He said that the Tours need to handle it on their own.

 

Nobilo and Begay are discussing his comments now.

[DavePelz4]

Great post as always Glen. Personally, it wouldn't make a difference who the player was be it Crusty, SNaP or even Jodi Hyphen. The goal of any tournament is to define the best player during those 4 rounds and as much as I think SYR is a sweetheart and a helluva golfer, this tournament didn't decide who played the best.

[legitimategolf]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

I think it's permissible to replace in a different spot if the ball won't stay still in the original spot.

 

20-3 d

 

d. Ball Fails to Come to Rest on Spot

 

If a ball when placed fails to come to rest on the spot on which it was placed, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced. If it still fails to come to rest on that spot:

 

(i) except in a hazard, it must be placed at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole and not in a hazard;

 

(ii) In a hazard, it must be placed in the hazard at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole.

 

If a ball when placed comes to rest on the spot on which it is placed, and it subsequently moves, there is no penalty and the ball must be played as it lies, unless the provisions of any other Rule apply.

 

Lexi moved her ball closer to the hole, I'm guessing that's what did her in.

[chris975d]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

I think it's permissible to replace in a different spot if the ball won't stay still in the original spot.

 

20-3 d

 

d. Ball Fails to Come to Rest on Spot

 

If a ball when placed fails to come to rest on the spot on which it was placed, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced. If it still fails to come to rest on that spot:

 

(i) except in a hazard, it must be placed at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole and not in a hazard;

 

(ii) In a hazard, it must be placed in the hazard at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole.

 

If a ball when placed comes to rest on the spot on which it is placed, and it subsequently moves, there is no penalty and the ball must be played as it lies, unless the provisions of any other Rule apply.

 

Lexi moved her ball closer to the hole, I'm guessing that's what did her in.

 

Phi basically said it's known that some people do it for an advantage. He said something to the effect of its known that some players intentionally and some unintentionally move the ball when replacing.

[LexHair]

I think it was Mark Cannizzaro in the NY Post today mentioned the disparity in application because most rounds, especially on the LPGA are not broadcast. So if Lexi was a hack playing out the string with a 5:45am tee time and did this, nobody would know any better. She was penalized (right or wrong) because she was leading the tournament and on national TV.

 

I've spent a good share of my adult life officiating soccer and to Highland's point, once the ball is back in play, that's the end of the referee fiddling with the match.

 

Unlike most sports, golf doesn't have enough officials to watch every call. Even in those sports, they use video replay to confirm/overrule calls.

 

Are you suggesting that the tours hire 72 or 144 refs to tag along with each player?

No, not at all.

 

IRT video review, that has to be done at the time of the incident and used where the resources are available. It's probably a bad analogy anyway so I'll leave that lie.

 

I see this as an inconsistency, that's all. If her round wasn't televised, she wouldn't have been penalized.

[deadsolid...shank]

Perhaps some fans should lobby the tours to create multi-day tournaments. NASCAR does this, no? Players would receive points for their position at the end of each round. The results would be official for each round at midnight. The highest point total would be the winner. In theory, the winner could be a player who didn't finish first on any day.

 

I'm guessing it would go over like a lead balloon.

 

Again, I think many of you are looking at a tournament as four rounds. I view it, as do the rules, as a 72 hole stroke play event. The fact that it involved four 18 hole go arounds is pretty much immaterial. Yes, they usually, but not always, re-pair after certain rounds. However, it's not mandatory. There are no prizes awarded after 9, 18, 38, or 71 holes.

 

A poster in the rules forum summed it up pretty well. There's no practical way to referee 10,000+ shots during the course of a tournament. Heck, basketball and football can't get it right on a small court/field with numerous refs. Golf is self policing, and requires honesty on behalf of the participants. However, to be effective it has to have severe penalties for being "dishonest". That sometimes includes mental screw-ups, and not intentional cheating. Since we can't read minds, the intent is not included in the rule.

 

If its all one cumalitive tournament and not four separate parts, then a scorecard shouldn't be finalized til all four are done.

 

Again, myself (and I think most of the posters) don't have too big of a problem with the two strokes for the wrong place. It's that scorecard issue. It was correct, to Lexi, her playing partners, her scorer, the officials, the Golf Chanell, and anybody else who cared when she signed it.

 

Just apply the stupid penalty to her three day total, or apply it at that current time in that current round, it was overkill to throw it on that round thus making the card incorrect.

[Highland]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

And also stated that he thought Lexi's ruling should be overturned and she should be given the trophy.

Phil just admitted to widespread cheating?

Not even close.

[4waymiss]

 

One of the issues, in my opinion, that really hasn't been talked about here is who the "tipster" could have been. Anyone who has been to events knows there are all kinds of people involved with the game from parents to sponsors to agents to caddies to tour employees to run-of-the-mill fans out there watching. The public will not find out who the infraction notification came from. Ever. But, it may have been submitted with a threat that if the LPGA did not deal with it, there would be hell to pay. The tour could simply not allow that to happen. Whether it came from someone in attendance or not, a major event that still invokes the ghost of Dinah Shore at every opportunity could not take the risk of tarnishing that forever. And imagine how ANA would feel about that? Whan has proven one thing if nothing else, he takes care of the tour's sponsors. That is his job.

 

 

It makes sense and it has been suggested in one of the threads that the tip came from within the circle of rule officials. It was sent in as an email. I doubt LPGA was checking their [email protected] account in the middle of the final round. It has to be someone who knows the personal email of one of the LPGA rules officials.

 

Once LPGA received it, it basically had no choice. Sweeping it under the rug was not an option, or they risking turning it into a big cover up scandal.

 

What puzzles me, is why the TOUR did not take the blame for allowing an incorrect scorecard to be signed? Why was Lexi forced to pay for what turns out to be an accounting error? Two stroke penalty? Harsh, late, dubious, but correct. Two stroke incorrect scorecard penalty? Arbitrary, knee-jerk, gutless and chickensh*t. I am sure the next meeting of the card carriers with their reps on the Board of Directors is going to be one for the ages. Remember, this is a union worksite, and the membership still have the most to say about worksite environment. They will not stand for this.

 

 

The 2 strokes incorrect scorecard penalty is also specified by the Rules of Golf. It is not up to LPGA.

[Argonne69]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

And also stated that he thought Lexi's ruling should be overturned and she should be given the trophy.

 

Phil just admitted to widespread cheating?

 

If that's what you want to call it. He said that the Tours need to handle it on their own.

 

Nobilo and Begay are discussing his comments now.

 

Not sure what else you would call it. Playing the ball from anywhere but its original position is a violation of the rules. Doing it purposely makes one a cheater.

[North Texas]

Is anyone watching Phil's press conference at Augusta? He just acknowledged that many tour players move their ball during marking on purpose to get out of depressions, etc.

 

I think it's permissible to replace in a different spot if the ball won't stay still in the original spot.

 

20-3 d

 

d. Ball Fails to Come to Rest on Spot

 

If a ball when placed fails to come to rest on the spot on which it was placed, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced. If it still fails to come to rest on that spot:

 

(i) except in a hazard, it must be placed at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole and not in a hazard;

 

(ii) In a hazard, it must be placed in the hazard at the nearest spot where it can be placed at rest that is not nearer the hole.

 

If a ball when placed comes to rest on the spot on which it is placed, and it subsequently moves, there is no penalty and the ball must be played as it lies, unless the provisions of any other Rule apply.

 

Lexi moved her ball closer to the hole, I'm guessing that's what did her in.

 

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

[Argonne69]

I think it was Mark Cannizzaro in the NY Post today mentioned the disparity in application because most rounds, especially on the LPGA are not broadcast. So if Lexi was a hack playing out the string with a 5:45am tee time and did this, nobody would know any better. She was penalized (right or wrong) because she was leading the tournament and on national TV.

 

I've spent a good share of my adult life officiating soccer and to Highland's point, once the ball is back in play, that's the end of the referee fiddling with the match.

 

Unlike most sports, golf doesn't have enough officials to watch every call. Even in those sports, they use video replay to confirm/overrule calls.

 

Are you suggesting that the tours hire 72 or 144 refs to tag along with each player?

No, not at all.

 

IRT video review, that has to be done at the time of the incident and used where the resources are available. It's probably a bad analogy anyway so I'll leave that lie.

 

I see this as an inconsistency, that's all. If her round wasn't televised, she wouldn't have been penalized.

 

Which is all the more reason the players in the lead have to take extra care. They know they're on camera. Yes, it's still an infraction if the 67th place player does it, but the focus is almost always on the leaderboard.

 

In Lexi's case the camera didn't even zoom in on the ball. In Anna's case last year the camera was zoomed in so one could see the few grains of sand move, even though it was likely imperceptible to her. It still wound up costing her the U.S. Open.

[The Pearl]

Golf is rather unique in that it's not played on a 100 yard by 40 yard field with a dozen officials and instant replay. Heck, football instituted replay because we'd all watch the blown calls on TV and yell at the screen. The coaches and fans in the stadium would see the same blown call on the big screen. No, golf is played on acres of land with 70 players. There's really no way to cover ever player's every shot. Two playing partners could be on opposite sides of the fairway. If there were a walking official with every player, maybe we'd come close to the real-time officiating people seem to want. I'm not sure we'll see that happen any time soon.

 

So, in a way I think the cats out of the bag. Technology is here. Fans have access to the video. 'Not sure everyone would be happy if Lexi was holding the trophy while they were replaying a video of the infraction that she "got away with". If the tournament is over, then there's probably not much that can be done. However, in this case the tournament was still ongoing.

 

 

Golf can't have it both ways. It can't claim that every shot can't be on video and than use video to apply rules depending on the random nature of who happens to be on camera at any given time. In the other sports, everybody is on camera all the time. Strike One.

 

You compound the insanity of the issue by allowing people outside the official capacity of the competition to insert themselves into the process. Strike Two.

 

Every other sport has a clear set of rules as to who can make "the calls" and when those calls are "final" and does so in a timely fashion as so that all participants can properly execute their game plan going forward. Golf does not. Strike Three.

 

And I haven't even mentioned the archaic nature of the ridiculous tradition of the manual scorecard signing which has zero to do with the skill required in competition. It is 2017, not 1922.

 

The issue isn't whether Lexi did what she did or that she should incur a penalty, the issue is the "process" not the "violation".

 

 

Bad organizations use bad processes. Good organizations use good processes and always try to seek streamlined processes.

 

Easily solved:

 

1. Nobody outside of a player, another player, or a rules official can call a penatly

2. Either everybody is videoed for every shot or no player can be penalized as a result of video. If this is not acceptable, than use whatever number of tour officials to watch in real time and than review after the day's competition if there is an issue.

3. Render decisions by a set time frame at the end of each day prior to the next day's play. If it is the final round, put more eyeballs on the live broadcast so you can expedite the process post round.

4. Deep six the scorecard signing along with the rotary phone and dial up internet. They aren't mowing the greens with hand pushed rotary blade mowers.

 

Start with common sense and tweek for improvement like a sensible organization would attempt.

So you would be okay with a foot wedge caught on video not able to be assessed as a penalty? Sounds extreme but hey-if no one else saw it it's okay? That is my farcical way of saying you cannot ignore violations just because all of them are not seen by the player or officials. Do you want an official with each player hovering over their every move?

Officials in golf are not the same as other sports officials. They are mainly there to assist-not spot violations.

I do agree with you on the scorecards issue. It is an archaic system.

 

Nice straw man.

 

A player that used a foot wedge caught on video (I am assuming by the TV broadcast) would be obviously spotted by my second sentence in No. 2 above either live or in the post round review covered by No. 3.

 

So what you're saying is get away with the infractions that you can get away with and avoid the ones you might get cough on?

 

Where in any of my comments did I imply anything of the sorts?

[duffer987]

On a lighter note, with the most recent kerfuffle, the general golfing/sports audience now thinks the LPGA season contains two tournaments instead of just one! :)

[legitimategolf]

I think a penalty for signing the wrong scorecard is just.

 

Lexi might have made an innocent mistake, but if you don't penalize in general for that infraction, that opens up many potential avenues for abuse.

[legitimategolf]

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

 

It looks indisputable. I feel like it would hold up in a court of law. When she puts down the coin it is almost completely obscured by the ball. AFter she replaces the ball, the coin is then visible. Unless it can be proven that the camera rotated or revolved in that moment, the ball being placed closer to the hole is the only reasonable explanation for the coin being visble after the ball's replaced.

[Argonne69]

I think a penalty for signing the wrong scorecard is just.

 

Lexi might have made an innocent mistake, but if you don't penalize in general for that infraction, that opens up many potential avenues for abuse.

 

Agreed, but it does open up the valid question as to whether scorecards should be signed at the conclusion of the tournament. Since one is open to penalties for rules violations in earlier rounds, then I think it's fair to hold off until all possible challenges have been received and handled.

[Argonne69]

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

 

It looks indisputable. I feel like it would hold up in a court of law. When she puts down the coin it is almost completely obscured by the ball. AFter she replaces the ball, the coin is then visible. Unless it can be proven that the camera rotated or revolved in that moment, the ball being placed closer to the hole is the only reasonable explanation for the coin being visble after the ball's replaced.

 

Simple geometry I'm afraid.

[The Pearl]

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

 

It looks indisputable. I feel like it would hold up in a court of law. When she puts down the coin it is almost completely obscured by the ball. AFter she replaces the ball, the coin is then visible. Unless it can be proven that the camera rotated or revolved in that moment, the ball being placed closer to the hole is the only reasonable explanation for the coin being visble after the ball's replaced.

 

If she put the ball behind the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole. If she put the ball to the left the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole.

[4waymiss]

 

Easily solved:

 

1. Nobody outside of a player, another player, or a rules official can call a penatly

2. Either everybody is videoed for every shot or no player can be penalized as a result of video. If this is not acceptable, than use whatever number of tour officials to watch in real time and than review after the day's competition if there is an issue.

3. Render decisions by a set time frame at the end of each day prior to the next day's play. If it is the final round, put more eyeballs on the live broadcast so you can expedite the process post round.

4. Deep six the scorecard signing along with the rotary phone and dial up internet. They aren't mowing the greens with hand pushed rotary blade mowers.

 

Start with common sense and tweek for improvement like a sensible organization would attempt.

 

Not disagreeing with you here. But I just need to get it straight from you:

 

So if AFTER the time frame of the day that decisions can be made, someone presents newly found video evidence to an rule official of a violation, it would be "too late" for a change?

 

So it would fall into the category of "missed/bad calls are part of the game", just like the other sports?

[Argonne69]

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

 

It looks indisputable. I feel like it would hold up in a court of law. When she puts down the coin it is almost completely obscured by the ball. AFter she replaces the ball, the coin is then visible. Unless it can be proven that the camera rotated or revolved in that moment, the ball being placed closer to the hole is the only reasonable explanation for the coin being visble after the ball's replaced.

 

If she put the ball behind the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole. If she put the ball to the left the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole.

 

I'm afraid not. The camera was behind the hole. The ball covered the coin as viewed from the camera. That mean that the ball was slight to the right of her marker from her perspective. After the ball was placed, the marker was visible to the camera's left, or her right. This would place the ball directly between the marker and the hole, and thus closer.

 

 

[Argonne69]

Easily solved:

 

1. Nobody outside of a player, another player, or a rules official can call a penatly

2. Either everybody is videoed for every shot or no player can be penalized as a result of video. If this is not acceptable, than use whatever number of tour officials to watch in real time and than review after the day's competition if there is an issue.

3. Render decisions by a set time frame at the end of each day prior to the next day's play. If it is the final round, put more eyeballs on the live broadcast so you can expedite the process post round.

4. Deep six the scorecard signing along with the rotary phone and dial up internet. They aren't mowing the greens with hand pushed rotary blade mowers.

 

Start with common sense and tweek for improvement like a sensible organization would attempt.

 

Not disagreeing with you here. But I just need to get it straight from you:

 

So if AFTER the time frame of the day that decisions can be made, someone presents newly found video evidence to an rule official of a violation, it would be "too late" for a change?

 

So it would fall into the category of "missed/bad calls are part of the game", just like the other sports?

 

1. Currently, nobody except a player or ref can call a penalty. TV viewers can notify the officials, but the officials make the call.

 

2. What difference does it make who saw the infraction on video? Having thousands of extra sets of eyes reviewing video ensures that infractions are more likely to be caught, making it fair for the other players. Did the infraction take place?

 

3. Don't see why the timing makes any difference. Had they caught the infraction at 11 pm on Saturday, she would have still been assessed a four shot penalty. If anything, she caught a break. Had she been assessed the four shots on Saturday evening, she would have been in the 2nd group with a score of 207. So Yeon (206) and Suzann (205) would have been in the final group. Lexi actually got an extra 1/2 to 1 hole to try to claw back.

 

4. On the fence here. It's like when you came home as a kid, and your father asked you, "Is there anything you want to tell me?" Given that golf is self policing, the signing of a scorecard after its review is one final chance for the player to come clean. I am beginning to believe that it should be done after the final round, though.

[The Pearl]

Not sure that it can said with absolute certainty that she moved it closer to the hole.

 

It looks indisputable. I feel like it would hold up in a court of law. When she puts down the coin it is almost completely obscured by the ball. AFter she replaces the ball, the coin is then visible. Unless it can be proven that the camera rotated or revolved in that moment, the ball being placed closer to the hole is the only reasonable explanation for the coin being visble after the ball's replaced.

 

If she put the ball behind the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole. If she put the ball to the left the coin, the coin would be visible and the ball would be farther from the hole.

 

I'm afraid not. The camera was behind the hole. The ball covered the coin as viewed from the camera. That mean that the ball was slight to the right of her marker from her perspective. After the ball was placed, the marker was visible to the camera's left, or her right. This would place the ball directly between the marker and the hole, and thus closer.

 

 

 

I never stated that the ball was closer to the hole. I stated two situations whereby she could have placed the ball to disproved the "can be proven in a court of law" claim. The poster stated that because the coin was plainly visible that it proves the ball was closer to the hole. I gave two instances where this is incorrect.

 

In terms of your drawing, in order to prove anything, it first has to be to scale and second you have to know the exact distance between her marker and the original position of the golf ball. You can't accurately discern that from the video because it is blocked by the ball. I could mark a ball 3/4 of an inch behind the ball, and than place the ball back to a spot 1/4 in front the mark. I would than be farther from the hole. This is pretty easy to recreate, particularly in a court of law.

 

The mind is easily fooled by video. Particularly where distance and depth are concerned.

 

Now after all that nonsense, it is moot. She committed a ridiculous and careless blunder. No doubt about that.

[lumberman2462]

Canadianglen - your 'long' post on the previous page is good stuff.

 

At the bar at my home club there were several theories bandied about for the "anonymous caller/emailer."

 

#1) Somebody that had another player 'marking a charge' in their Fantasy League. The only problem with that is we couldn't figure out if there actually is an LPGA Fantasy League.

 

#2) (and I love this one) It was either the South Korean or Chinese National Intelligence Agencies that emailed it in. Apparently after many afternoon drinks it seemed plausible to a few patrons.

 

#3) Rival club manufacturer people.

 

I don't know and agree that we will never find out.

 

But if someone wants to start a GoFundMe deal to raise enough money to bribe and LPGA official to give us some info then I will gladly contribute. We've got some real CSI-WrXers on here that can track this down.