ANA rules issue (Merged)

[chris975d]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

 

No one is arguing that she shouldn't have gotten 2 strokes for not placing it back in the same spot.

 

The disagreement is in that she was also assessed for 2 strokes for an incorrect scorecard when she never had a chance to correct it before signing.

 

I mean, if I were on a tour I might not sign scorecards until my score cannot change anymore. If you are going to tell me that someone can watch something all the way up until the last scorecard is signed and find a violation then it's absurd. I shouldn't sign anything so I can have a chance to change it and not get double penalized. It's just insane to me to say we can now do this to players.

 

And yes the precedent is out there now that they are going to penalize anything at any time of an event, and if it happens after the round it's a 4 stroke penalty (or 3 if the original penalty was 1 stroke) every time now. The LPGA put themselves in a corner now that they have to apply all penalties brought to light retroactively to the fullest stroke penalty.

 

But they always had to. This is not new, this is not unique to them.

 

And begging your pardon but yes people are arguing that she should have received NO penalty

 

I think the reasonable people are saying how asinine the additional 2 stroke penalty is for the "incorrect scorecard". That's all I have a beef with. Yes, she made a careless mistake (I'm giving her benefit of a doubt), but careless mistakes still can incur penalties. Same as life. I'm all for the 2 stroke penalty for replacing the ball incorrectly. But that silly additional penalty is what I think the committee should have had the ability to waive. It was unnecessary in this instance in my opinion.

[warfelg]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

 

No one is arguing that she shouldn't have gotten 2 strokes for not placing it back in the same spot.

 

The disagreement is in that she was also assessed for 2 strokes for an incorrect scorecard when she never had a chance to correct it before signing.

 

I mean, if I were on a tour I might not sign scorecards until my score cannot change anymore. If you are going to tell me that someone can watch something all the way up until the last scorecard is signed and find a violation then it's absurd. I shouldn't sign anything so I can have a chance to change it and not get double penalized. It's just insane to me to say we can now do this to players.

 

And yes the precedent is out there now that they are going to penalize anything at any time of an event, and if it happens after the round it's a 4 stroke penalty (or 3 if the original penalty was 1 stroke) every time now. The LPGA put themselves in a corner now that they have to apply all penalties brought to light retroactively to the fullest stroke penalty.

 

But they always had to. This is not new, this is not unique to them.

 

And begging your pardon but yes people are arguing that she should have received NO penalty

 

IMO they could have easily used the same explanation as the 2013 Masters:

 

The rules committee made an error by not catching the infraction in time and came to the conclusion that there was a rules infraction after the scorecard had been signed. Therefore they waived the rule because they made an error in not making a timely ruling.

 

I would 100% have been fine with that. And the funny thing about that one was Tiger admitted to knowingly have dropped further back and they still waived the rule because they didn't find out about the violation till long after the scorecard was signed. If they said, "Look Lexi, there's 2 strokes for placing the ball back improperly, but we won't penalize you 2 more strokes for signing a wrong card because we messed up in not finding this sooner to bring to your attention," you would have a problem with that?

[KyGolf]

How about when your playing partner asks you to move your coin because it's in his way? Generally we all use the putter head as the distance to move the coin but the angle of how we use that putter head can always change. I try to find a tree or something to line up the putter and do the same when I put the coin back. But I know I may not always get the exact position of where the original coin was let alone where the ball sat at the beginning. Thoughts?

 

 

There is leeway in that situation because there is time between when your mark is moved and replaced. If you make your best effort to replace your mark exactly where it was lifted then there is nothing amiss.

 

Now try this. Place your mark beside your ball, lift it and immediately replace your ball directly in front of your mark. Is it in the same place it was when you lifted it?

[warfelg]

The disagreement is in that she was also assessed for 2 strokes for an incorrect scorecard when she never had a chance to correct it before signing.

 

 

 

The other side of that coin is that she as a player, a pro no less, has a duty to know the rules and abide by them. She is the one above all others who should have realized the infraction and addressed it herself without those on the outside having to "find it".

 

So what your saying is you don't believe her when she says she didn't intentionally do anything and it was an honest mistake she didn't realize the made. That 1/2-3/4 an inch on a 12 inch to 18 inch putt was going to make or break her event?

 

Heck I'll be the first to admit I likely put the ball back incorrectly at least 18 times a round and don't realize it.

[Vindog]

I don't think that is correct. I think Tiger was "saved" because they in error told him that there was no penalty and he acted on that, not because of an untimely ruling.

 

I could be wrong but I think that's the way it went down.

[deadsolid...shank]

Ray - I can't agree about delayed penalties. For a start, in matchplay, as soon as you tee off on the next hole, the score at the last hole is final and cannot be altered. Here, there was 14 holes and 24-odd hours before a very severe penalty was imposed. For that key passage of play, all the leaders (not just Lexi) were strategizing and playing under assumptions of the state of play, which was suddenly altered - altered very significantly. Players were misled, uncertain and unsure - not to mention the spectators & fans - in the final stages of a major tournament. And I am damn sure that I don't want to see another tournament go down this road! Scores need to be finalised so that players, caddies, officials, spectators, fans - everyone - know where they stand. It is farcical that players play 12 or more holes with one tourney score sheet, only for it to be torn up & trashed with a few holes to play, and then face a very different situation - it has to stop. No other sport would put up with it!

 

 

....but this isn't match play. It is a cumulative event where the strokes on Thursday are just as important as the last stroke on Sunday. If it was a mistake then it is unfortunate how it played out. If it was deliberate she is lucky it is no longer a DQ. We can't read her mind so we will never know.

 

One thing is certain, the rest of the field pays the price when an organization says "this player committed an obvious violation which by rule attaches penalty strokes to their final score but we choose to ignore it".

Sorry - I can't agree.

If it was obvious, it would have been picked up immediately - at the time it happened. Players, caddies, officials, cameramen and TV commentators, hundreds of spectators - they were all at the 17th but no-one saw it there and then? Obvious - no way. It was picked up 24+ hours later on high definition, zoomed-in slow motion video replay by an anally retentive nit-picking fanatic whose brain is rooted in the rulebook. And what did we see? A ball misplaced by maybe 5mm laterally by a young lady trying desperately to win a major golf tournament. So what are you "protecting the field" from? A 5mm lateral ball marking error? That has no bearing on Lexi holing that putt? And imposing it late in the final round? On the say-so of an anonymous email? 24+hours later? With 2 EXTRA penalty strokes? This is nonsensical and making golf an absolute laughing stock! At least the proposed 2019 rules will fix this ridiculous scenario.

 

isnt that like half inch snead?

move the ball when putting it forward half an inch?

golfers cant cheat either intentional or by mistake today.

she broke the rules and she paid the price and she couldn't handle it.

If it had happen to another player not american you guys wouldn't have said anything.

 

Couldn't handle it? What were you watching? She birdied the next friggin hole.

 

And if you're saying emotionaly, anyone and everyone would have been in a state of shock after getting that dropped on them.

[WidespreadPanic]

Watch in the actual video this morning. It almost looks like she kind of mismarked (not rules wise) the ball. Put it more to the side of instread of directly behind the ball. Then we she replaced it she put it down with the mark directly behind. Where it probably should have been originally.

 

Looks like a brain fart in the heat of the moment.

 

To me, and of course I could be wrong, it looks like she marked it wrong and then intentionally moved the ball over an inch. But, as I said before, maybe this is the way the pros play the game and it's seen as acceptable.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee8vQ2DSkY4

 

I can certainly see where it could be seen that way.

 

I saw it has remarking the ball where it should have been originally.

How is moving the ball corrext?

[williamsnrb]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

 

I agree. I don't understand the "she should get away with it" mentality.

 

I agree that there was an infraction and as a person who holds the rules of golf in the highest regard, I also agree that she should be penalized *if it was noted at the time of the infraction*. But the issues that need to be hashed out, IMO, are in regard to fairness to competitors. How long should a penalty be enforceable for an unintentional infraction? (no one even knew it occurred including Lexi). Should players play with worry in the back of their minds that at any moment they could get popped on a Sunday for something they were unaware of from Thursday morning? Also, it is inherently unfair that only televised/more popular players are effected much more than others. I am not saying that I think the following happened to Lexi, but who is to say that precedents like this could not be used to sway the outcome of events? What if someone sat on footage like this for a day or two until it appeared that the "wrong" player was going to win - then popped them with a penalty down the stretch to throw the player for a loop. Just some thoughts...

[bullseye26]

Most agree there was rules violation. Pretty easy to see. Really no way to determine intent without an admission in this case, but that's inconsequential to my argument. Rules officials decided it was not intentional. If determined that it had been intentional to gain advantage (cheating), she would have been DQd for a serious breach.

 

The problem I think many of us have with this is that the rules in this case present a cruel paradox:

 

- At the conclusion of a single round, the competitor signs her attested and tallied card with great care. There is a sense of finality, as once it is signed, you're done, and on the hook for what you've signed.

 

yet...

 

- In subsequent rounds and until the tournament is completely over, the competition is deemed to still be "open," therefore allowing call-in penalties to be retroactively applied to previous rounds...even after cards have been signed...PLUS...risk of an additional 2 stroke penalty for having signed an incorrect card.

 

This is where there's a gap in logic and common sense. If the completed and signed card at the conclusion of a single stipulated round is is so sacred and "final," that should be it. No retroactive penalties should be allowed. Period.

 

...or

 

since the competition is considered "open" until the final player completes her 72nd hole, players should sign for their entire 72 hole tournament score (going over all 4 cards) at that point.

 

...or...

 

simply add a stipulation that allows players to amend any score during a tournament (signed for or not) without penalty, for any rules violations which in good faith they were previously unaware, but may be brought to their attention by the rules committee after the fact, but before the conclusion of competition (72 holes).

 

Either of the above would eliminate the "double jeopardy" scenario that is not sitting well with most. It would not surprise me to see a change along these lines and I don't believe it's a heavy lift.

 

Rules and laws generally have a foundation in logic, and there's a glaring deficiency in logic and common sense surrounding this particular set of rules and how they're applied.

 

Exactly right. This is by far the best reply to this thread.

[bladehunter]

Most agree there was rules violation. Pretty easy to see. Really no way to determine intent without an admission in this case, but that's inconsequential to my argument. Rules officials decided it was not intentional. If determined that it had been intentional to gain advantage (cheating), she would have been DQd for a serious breach.

 

The problem I think many of us have with this is that the rules in this case present a cruel paradox:

 

- At the conclusion of a single round, the competitor signs her attested and tallied card with great care. There is a sense of finality, as once it is signed, you're done, and on the hook for what you've signed.

 

yet...

 

- In subsequent rounds and until the tournament is completely over, the competition is deemed to still be "open," therefore allowing call-in penalties to be retroactively applied to previous rounds...even after cards have been signed...PLUS...risk of an additional 2 stroke penalty for having signed an incorrect card.

 

This is where there's a gap in logic and common sense. If the completed and signed card at the conclusion of a single stipulated round is is so sacred and "final," that should be it. No retroactive penalties should be allowed. Period.

 

...or

 

since the competition is considered "open" until the final player completes her 72nd hole, players should sign for their entire 72 hole tournament score (going over all 4 cards) at that point.

 

...or...

 

simply add a stipulation that allows players to amend any score during a tournament (signed for or not) without penalty, for any rules violations which in good faith they were previously unaware, but may be brought to their attention by the rules committee after the fact, but before the conclusion of competition (72 holes).

 

Either of the above would eliminate the "double jeopardy" scenario that is not sitting well with most. It would not surprise me to see a change along these lines and I don't believe it's a heavy lift.

 

Rules and laws generally have a foundation in logic, and there's a glaring deficiency in logic and common sense surrounding this particular set of rules and how they're applied.

 

 

The 2 shot penalty is only 2 years old. Before that it was a straight DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard, whether you knew it was incorrect or not when you signed it. So she got off lucky, she still gets to collect the second place check, Rolex points, Race to the Globe points, etc.

 

 

I think the tour got off lucky. This would be a much bigger story if they had DQ the leader by 4. Would Ibe a s*** storm they would have to address then.

[Vindog]

Makes me wonder if cheating was more prevalent or if at least golf needed more protection from it in the past with the DQ penalty.

 

I always thought it was harsh especially if a player was not aware.

[CCTxGolf]

Is it possible that Lexi had been creatively marking her ball for some time?

 

A fellow competitor noticed it and brought it up to an official. And then, a viewer clearly spotted it and brought it to an official's attention on video?

 

Why else would an official react to a viewer's email unless there was more to it?

 

I'm thinking that there may have been a pattern that culminated in this also. Of course you do know your going to get blasted for having a different point of view on this subject. Lol Thanks for the perspective

 

Be careful pulling more thoughts from your " back pocket". They usually stink

 

Nice quote. Readers Digest?

 

Nope just smell of made up bullxxxx brought it to mind.

 

I mean cite some sources if we are going to start throwing out more allegations.

 

Cite some sources?!? This is all opinion. Only Lexi knows if she cheated but to anybody that has ever played golf before itsure as hell looks like she did. Oh I forgot you do play in all the big tournamemts. Get over yourself. You don't now how nuts I can be lady... haha what a joke.

[warfelg]

I don't think that is correct. I think Tiger was "saved" because they in error told him that there was no penalty and he acted on that, not because of an untimely ruling.

 

I could be wrong but I think that's the way it went down.

 

I don't think they told him there was no penalty, they as a committee agreed there wasn't one when it was called in. Then after talking to him they decided there was one that occurred. Their reasoning for waiving was they said they made an error for not coming to a determination on the rule until after he signed.

 

I think that the LPGA would have been completely in their rights to say, "Look we made the mistake by not finding out about this sooner. We're waiving the rule because we decided to apply the rule after the fact."

[warfelg]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

 

I agree. I don't understand the "she should get away with it" mentality.

 

I agree that there was an infraction and as a person who holds the rules of golf in the highest regard, I also agree that she should be penalized *if it was noted at the time of the infraction*. But the issues that need to be hashed out, IMO, are in regard to fairness to competitors. How long should a penalty be enforceable for an unintentional infraction? (no one even knew it occurred including Lexi). Should players play with worry in the back of their minds that at any moment they could get popped on a Sunday for something they were unaware of from Thursday morning? Also, it is inherently unfair that only televised/more popular players are effected much more than others. I am not saying that I think the following happened to Lexi, but who is to say that precedents like this could not be used to sway the outcome of events? What if someone sat on footage like this for a day or two until it appeared that the "wrong" player was going to win - then popped them with a penalty down the stretch to throw the player for a loop. Just some thoughts...

 

Well said. Sums up my feelings very well.

[Lime Shark]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

yes but the scorecard that was turned in was the correct scorecard when it was turned in. And the argument is about how it is accenine that someone from home can make a call or email to affect the outcome. No other sport even comes close to that period.

 

 

The scorecard was not correct. She incurred a 2 stroke penalty on #17 the moment she lifted the ball and replaced it 3/4 of an inch to the side.

3/4 of an inch? Yet another number. I've heard everything from 1/4 to 2 inches. What's the real number?

 

The camera was at an angle. The ball was moved on another angle. Given that it is impossible to determine exactly how far it moved.

 

Given that replacing the ball isn't an exact science, how far off can it be before it's a penalty?

 

I would argue that some looseness in ball replacement has become accepted over the years (for practical reasons). She got penalized for something the rest of the field was also doing.

 

This reminds me of the George Brett pine tar incident. An after the fact penalty struck most people as an unfair application of the rules.

 

 

 

 

[jonsnow]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

yes but the scorecard that was turned in was the correct scorecard when it was turned in. And the argument is about how it is accenine that someone from home can make a call or email to affect the outcome. No other sport even comes close to that period.

 

 

The scorecard was not correct. She incurred a 2 stroke penalty on #17 the moment she lifted the ball and replaced it 3/4 of an inch to the side.

 

Exactly. The penalty was incurred during her third round & her scorecard did not reflect it, so her scorecard was incorrect when she signed it. Her scorecard did not become incorrect only when the penalty was discovered & the LPGA was alerted to it.

 

Perhaps the LPGA, PGA, European & any other tours which are routinely televised should adopt a "local rule" or Condition of Competition whereby they allow a signed scorecard to be amended without penalty for these types of situations. Until & unless they do, something of this nature is likely to happen again...

[Lime Shark]

How about when your playing partner asks you to move your coin because it's in his way? Generally we all use the putter head as the distance to move the coin but the angle of how we use that putter head can always change. I try to find a tree or something to line up the putter and do the same when I put the coin back. But I know I may not always get the exact position of where the original coin was let alone where the ball sat at the beginning. Thoughts?

 

 

There is leeway in that situation because there is time between when your mark is moved and replaced. If you make your best effort to replace your mark exactly where it was lifted then there is nothing amiss.

 

Now try this. Place your mark beside your ball, lift it and immediately replace your ball directly in front of your mark. Is it in the same place it was when you lifted it?

Define "same place".

[chris975d]

I don't think that is correct. I think Tiger was "saved" because they in error told him that there was no penalty and he acted on that, not because of an untimely ruling.

 

I could be wrong but I think that's the way it went down.

 

I don't think they told him there was no penalty, they as a committee agreed there wasn't one when it was called in. Then after talking to him they decided there was one that occurred. Their reasoning for waiving was they said they made an error for not coming to a determination on the rule until after he signed.

 

I think that the LPGA would have been completely in their rights to say, "Look we made the mistake by not finding out about this sooner. We're waiving the rule because we decided to apply the rule after the fact."

 

Here's the entire story on the Tiger situation. The committee did make a judgement call and issue an exception in this case.

 

http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/clone-tiger-woods-and-drop-inside-look-golfs-most-controversial-pardon

[heavy_hitter]

There was no penalty.

 

The probability of marking your ball in the same exact spot you lifted the ball is very very low. I would say it is almost impossible to place your ball back down into the same place.

 

You then run into the situation of by courtesy moving the ball out of another's line. If I were a professional and the event was televised I would tell my playing partner "NO!". It is 100% impossible to move your coin right or left and then get it back into the same exact spot. It will never happen unless it is by sheer luck. So are those going to be penalized as well?

 

The only way people knew Lexi accidentally moved the ball a 1/4" was because of a closeup and fluidity of her marking the ball. Had she backed off for 10 seconds and had placed the ball down a full 1", no one would have known.

 

Bottom line, unless every player, in every round, has every shot, with every putt, with every ball marked, streamed live then no one should be able to call in. The game loses integrity by allowing this to happen. The PGA, LPGA, Web.com, as well as the players need to take a stand on allowing viewers and video tape to determine breaking rules. Eff the USGA and their stance as well as the R&A. Those organizations are archaic.

[warfelg]

Makes me wonder if cheating was more prevalent or if at least golf needed more protection from it in the past with the DQ penalty.

 

I always thought it was harsh especially if a player was not aware.

 

I think this is also a discussion of the "intent of the rule" and "application of the rule".

 

Personally I think the intent of 6-6d was supposed to me for guys in local events signing, then someone else pointing it out. Basically, IMO, the intent was to keep each other honest through the DQ of the event being the penalty.

 

I don't think this rule was ever written with a thought that people would one day watch golf on TV and call in/write in about rules violations. So, that's why I think the rule is now out of date for various tours. For local golfers it's still 100% current. But for tours and televised event's it's out of date IMO.

[deadsolid...shank]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

yes but the scorecard that was turned in was the correct scorecard when it was turned in. And the argument is about how it is accenine that someone from home can make a call or email to affect the outcome. No other sport even comes close to that period.

 

 

The scorecard was not correct. She incurred a 2 stroke penalty on #17 the moment she lifted the ball and replaced it 3/4 of an inch to the side.

 

Exactly. The penalty was incurred during her third round & her scorecard did not reflect it, so her scorecard was incorrect when she signed it. Her scorecard did not become incorrect only when the penalty was discovered & the LPGA was alerted to it.

 

Perhaps the LPGA, PGA, European & any other tours which are routinely televised should adopt a "local rule" or Condition of Competition whereby they allow a signed scorecard to be amended without penalty for these types of situations. Until & unless they do, something of this nature is likely to happen again...

 

No, the infraction occurred in the third round. The penalty was incurred or assessed on Sunday.

 

If it's not called, it's not a penalty. It didn't become a penalty until Sunday.

 

But I agree 100% that there should be a provision to resign the card if it is amended at a later date. Because the card was correct when she signed it.

[dpb5031]

Most agree there was rules violation. Pretty easy to see. Really no way to determine intent without an admission in this case, but that's inconsequential to my argument. Rules officials decided it was not intentional. If determined that it had been intentional to gain advantage (cheating), she would have been DQd for a serious breach.

 

The problem I think many of us have with this is that the rules in this case present a cruel paradox:

 

- At the conclusion of a single round, the competitor signs her attested and tallied card with great care. There is a sense of finality, as once it is signed, you're done, and on the hook for what you've signed.

 

yet...

 

- In subsequent rounds and until the tournament is completely over, the competition is deemed to still be "open," therefore allowing call-in penalties to be retroactively applied to previous rounds...even after cards have been signed...PLUS...risk of an additional 2 stroke penalty for having signed an incorrect card.

 

This is where there's a gap in logic and common sense. If the completed and signed card at the conclusion of a single stipulated round is is so sacred and "final," that should be it. No retroactive penalties should be allowed. Period.

 

...or

 

since the competition is considered "open" until the final player completes her 72nd hole, players should sign for their entire 72 hole tournament score (going over all 4 cards) at that point.

 

...or...

 

simply add a stipulation that allows players to amend any score during a tournament (signed for or not) without penalty, for any rules violations which in good faith they were previously unaware, but may be brought to their attention by the rules committee after the fact, but before the conclusion of competition (72 holes).

 

Either of the above would eliminate the "double jeopardy" scenario that is not sitting well with most. It would not surprise me to see a change along these lines and I don't believe it's a heavy lift.

 

Rules and laws generally have a foundation in logic, and there's a glaring deficiency in logic and common sense surrounding this particular set of rules and how they're applied.

 

 

The 2 shot penalty is only 2 years old. Before that it was a straight DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard, whether you knew it was incorrect or not when you signed it. So she got off lucky...

 

I know it's only 2 years old and that prior to then the penalty would have been a DQ. I dont care how old a rule is if its asinine. And exactly why/how does that maker her "lucky?"

 

They partially fixed a problem, which demonstrates that rules CAN be changed and/or amended from time to time.

 

It needs further fixing IMO. The double jeopardy in this case defies logic, is nonsensible, and avoidable with a rules amendment or modification.

 

 

[warfelg]

I don't think that is correct. I think Tiger was "saved" because they in error told him that there was no penalty and he acted on that, not because of an untimely ruling.

 

I could be wrong but I think that's the way it went down.

 

I don't think they told him there was no penalty, they as a committee agreed there wasn't one when it was called in. Then after talking to him they decided there was one that occurred. Their reasoning for waiving was they said they made an error for not coming to a determination on the rule until after he signed.

 

I think that the LPGA would have been completely in their rights to say, "Look we made the mistake by not finding out about this sooner. We're waiving the rule because we decided to apply the rule after the fact."

 

Here's the entire story on the Tiger situation. The committee did make a judgement call and issue an exception in this case.

 

http://www.golf.com/...oversial-pardon

 

And this is the part I'm talking about:

Ridley's initial mistake in not spotting the violation was compounded by an even bigger one: Although consulting with a player is standard procedure in such a situation, he chose not to talk with Woods before he signed his scorecard. "I fully expected to see a half-dozen guys in green jackets intercept Tiger as he walked off the [18th] green," says Eger. No one materialized.

 

They didn't consult with Tiger before he signed the card so that's why they chose to issue the exception. LPGA could have easily said the same thing IMO. "We didn't consult with Lexi in time to allow her to correct the mistake so we're issuing and exception."

 

I just want to throw out there I wouldn't be so vocal about this part normally, but it happened to me.

 

Trying out for the high school team my drive on the last hole looked to be close to the line. So I called over another player to confer to see if I needed to retee or if I was good. He said I was good. Recorded the par, went in, signed the card. Well about 5 minutes after I signed, another player (who ironically would be off the team if my score stood) said my ball was OB. He got two other guys to agree with him, and I was DQ'ed because his word was taken over mine and the player I talked to. I got screwed by not having it brought to my attention that I might have been OB there before I signed. Worst part was, the assistant coach was within 25 yards when it happened and didn't say or do anything. My stance was OB, but my ball, determined by the other playing competitor, was deemed in bounds by 2 inches.

[ray9898]

The disagreement is in that she was also assessed for 2 strokes for an incorrect scorecard when she never had a chance to correct it before signing.

 

 

 

The other side of that coin is that she as a player, a pro no less, has a duty to know the rules and abide by them. She is the one above all others who should have realized the infraction and addressed it herself without those on the outside having to "find it".

 

So what your saying is you don't believe her when she says she didn't intentionally do anything and it was an honest mistake she didn't realize the made. That 1/2-3/4 an inch on a 12 inch to 18 inch putt was going to make or break her event?

 

 

Only Lexi knows if she cheated. From my perspective it is obvious the ball was no where close to where she picked it up, it should be even more obvious to the player who is bending directly over it to lift it no more than 2 inches before repositioning it. It is not like she marked, went on a stroll and then later incorrectly replaced it.

 

Lets also not pretend there aren't defects at time on the green that can impact a putt that one would prefer to avoid and this would be the likely way to accomplish that. However, Lexi is the only one that knows that because no one came and stood directly over her line, the integrity aspect of the game expects her to do the right thing.

[Shilgy]

I'm suspecting one player in her group saw the infraction and was afraid to say something at the time because of being on tv. Score cards signed done deal in my opinion. But then here comes the question to the official from the player who saw it happen. Now some bull crap story about a mysterious email arises instead of the truth ......either way shame on the LPGA!!

So you are saying Pettersen waited until the next day to give her an extra two stroke penalty? And the LPGA went along with that lie? No way possible that happened. That would be a serious error on Pettersen's part as well.

[nsxguy]

Why are people jumping On the LPGA as if this is unique to them, or that they have set this precedent?

 

They HAD TO ISSUE THE PENALTY they had to. I'm sure they didn't feel great about it but they absolutely had no choice.

 

Was it a penalty or not? Just because there may be penalties all over the course that are not found doesn't mean that ones that are found should be overlooked. That's ridiculous.

yes but the scorecard that was turned in was the correct scorecard when it was turned in. And the argument is about how it is accenine that someone from home can make a call or email to affect the outcome. No other sport even comes close to that period.

 

 

The scorecard was not correct. She incurred a 2 stroke penalty on #17 the moment she lifted the ball and replaced it 3/4 of an inch to the side.

 

Given that replacing the ball isn't an exact science, how far off can it be before it's a penalty?

 

I know. Let's look at the Rule(s).

 

Oops. Never mind. It doesn't say.

[nsxguy]

I'm suspecting one player in her group saw the infraction and was afraid to say something at the time because of being on tv. Score cards signed done deal in my opinion. But then here comes the question to the official from the player who saw it happen. Now some bull crap story about a mysterious email arises instead of the truth ......either way shame on the LPGA!!

So you are saying Pettersen waited until the next day to give her an extra two stroke penalty? And the LPGA went along with that lie? No way possible that happened. That would be a serious error on Pettersen's part as well.

 

That's an interesting conspiracy theory.

 

Of course then Pettersen gets herself in hot water (again), this time for not calling the penalty when she saw it. i.e. not "protecting the field".

[KyGolf]

How about when your playing partner asks you to move your coin because it's in his way? Generally we all use the putter head as the distance to move the coin but the angle of how we use that putter head can always change. I try to find a tree or something to line up the putter and do the same when I put the coin back. But I know I may not always get the exact position of where the original coin was let alone where the ball sat at the beginning. Thoughts?

 

 

There is leeway in that situation because there is time between when your mark is moved and replaced. If you make your best effort to replace your mark exactly where it was lifted then there is nothing amiss.

 

Now try this. Place your mark beside your ball, lift it and immediately replace your ball directly in front of your mark. Is it in the same place it was when you lifted it?

Define "same place".

 

 

The spot that is not a different place.

[Shilgy]

Ray - I can't agree about delayed penalties. For a start, in matchplay, as soon as you tee off on the next hole, the score at the last hole is final and cannot be altered. Here, there was 14 holes and 24-odd hours before a very severe penalty was imposed. For that key passage of play, all the leaders (not just Lexi) were strategizing and playing under assumptions of the state of play, which was suddenly altered - altered very significantly. Players were misled, uncertain and unsure - not to mention the spectators & fans - in the final stages of a major tournament. And I am damn sure that I don't want to see another tournament go down this road! Scores need to be finalised so that players, caddies, officials, spectators, fans - everyone - know where they stand. It is farcical that players play 12 or more holes with one tourney score sheet, only for it to be torn up & trashed with a few holes to play, and then face a very different situation - it has to stop. No other sport would put up with it!

 

 

....but this isn't match play. It is a cumulative event where the strokes on Thursday are just as important as the last stroke on Sunday. If it was a mistake then it is unfortunate how it played out. If it was deliberate she is lucky it is no longer a DQ. We can't read her mind so we will never know.

 

One thing is certain, the rest of the field pays the price when an organization says "this player committed an obvious violation which by rule attaches penalty strokes to their final score but we choose to ignore it".

Sorry - I can't agree.

If it was obvious, it would have been picked up immediately - at the time it happened. Players, caddies, officials, cameramen and TV commentators, hundreds of spectators - they were all at the 17th but no-one saw it there and then? Obvious - no way. It was picked up 24+ hours later on high definition, zoomed-in slow motion video replay by an anally retentive nit-picking fanatic whose brain is rooted in the rulebook. And what did we see? A ball misplaced by maybe 5mm laterally by a young lady trying desperately to win a major golf tournament. So what are you "protecting the field" from? A 5mm lateral ball marking error? That has no bearing on Lexi holing that putt? And imposing it late in the final round? On the say-so of an anonymous email? 24+hours later? With 2 EXTRA penalty strokes? This is nonsensical and making golf an absolute laughing stock! At least the proposed 2019 rules will fix this ridiculous scenario.

 

isnt that like half inch snead?

move the ball when putting it forward half an inch?

golfers cant cheat either intentional or by mistake today.

she broke the rules and she paid the price and she couldn't handle it.

If it had happen to another player not american you guys wouldn't have said anything.

I believe it was the woman from your neck of the woods that could not handle it. Lexi did fine. She went from two up to two down and was -2 under the last six holes to tie for the lead. Pettersen was -14 (the score that would would have put her in the playoff) through 11, and went +1 the last 7 holes to miss the playoff. So yeah, she broke the rules and paid the price. However she handled it quite well in spite of her obvious distress. Pettersen on the other hand??

[Roadking2003]

How about when your playing partner asks you to move your coin because it's in his way? Generally we all use the putter head as the distance to move the coin but the angle of how we use that putter head can always change. I try to find a tree or something to line up the putter and do the same when I put the coin back. But I know I may not always get the exact position of where the original coin was let alone where the ball sat at the beginning. Thoughts?

 

 

There is leeway in that situation because there is time between when your mark is moved and replaced. If you make your best effort to replace your mark exactly where it was lifted then there is nothing amiss.

 

Now try this. Place your mark beside your ball, lift it and immediately replace your ball directly in front of your mark. Is it in the same place it was when you lifted it?

 

Leeway due to time?????? who made that rule?

 

I suspect that a huge number of ball marks on the tour do not return the ball to exactly the same position.