ANA rules issue (Merged)

[jt2gt]

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.

 

Here IS what could have happened along those lines -- Petterson or some other playing partner or caddie had been seeing her do this repeatedly over the course (either out of habit or whatever). Told a friend or someone else in casual conversation like "hey, can you believe this..." Friend or someone else that friend told watches and finally sees it happen on Saturday. Contemplates emailing/calling and finally does on Sun. Entirely possible, no?

[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.

 

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."

 

Those two situations are different as they (the tournament committe) did not have the information like the Masters committee did. The ANA committe would not have been in their rights, by rule.

 

By the way the Masters committe looked really foolish by not initially issuing the penalty which was clearly an improper drop but that's for another thread.

[Roadking2003]

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.

 

Between the shadows and camera angle, it is impossible to tell how much she moved the ball if at all. I'm guessing maybe 1/16th of an inch at most.

[Shilgy]

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.

And you would be dq'd as soon as you left the scorers tent without signing.

 

How'd that work out for ya?

[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?

Define "same place".

 

 

The spot that is not a different place.

So if you miss place your ball by 1 millimeter you should be penalized?

[dpb5031]

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the email came in from another rules official watching from home. Who else would have the email addresses of the officials at the actual tournament. (Or maybe they're just in the same bridge group...lol?)

 

Would be very interesting to know when the individual observed the violation and then how long it took him or her to send the email. Given the state of the current rules, as has been stated, the emailer could have seen it on Saturday, yet intentionally held off her email until Sunday, thus ensuring Lexi received the additional 2 stroke penalty for signing for the incorrect scorecard. I've seen first hand how some rules officials love sharing bad news and seem to relish their role as the grim reaper ?.

 

Either way, it's ugly and makes our sport look petty and foolish.

[Vindog]

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.

So if you miss place your ball by 1 millimeter you should be penalized?

 

Does it say that anywhere?

 

[Golfjack]

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.

 

Between the shadows and camera angle, it is impossible to tell how much she moved the ball if at all. I'm guessing maybe 1/16th of an inch at most.

 

Sorry but it's a lot more than 1/16 inch, and people aren't even debating if she moved it or not (she did). So carry on. BTW I believe that the wording is purposely ambiguous in that golfers will be diligent in placing the ball properly, and not arguing semantics in millimeters.

[Wardman]

People are talking about the viewer input as if it from a person who knows nothing about golf, and/or the rules of golf. The reality is that person knows more about the rules of golf than 90% of the people k this thread. As I suspected initially, it was not some schmoe calling it in.

 

Sucks for Lexi and I feel for her, but was it a penalty or not? It would be worse in my mind if a major was won by a player who clearly broke a rule and should have been penalized. I prefer that golf be far different from other sports in that regard. No tournamnet committe wants that I'd guess.

 

Putting a rules official with every group watching every player isn't practical and then we would hear about how much slower everything is

Tough situation.

 

Did I miss something in the previous 15 pages? You seem to be saying that you know who it was that sent the email. Is that correct?

 

If they are going to allow this type of BS, then put a rules official with every player to monitor; YES. Otherwise don't allow the calls/emails, nor the after the round score card error. She signed what she thought was right and was not approached that day by ANY official. Maddening!

[SteelPride]

You cannot hide behind "the rules are the rules" when they clearly are not.

 

Every single shot recorded and reviewed by video officials, or NONE. Period. Anything else undermines the game.

 

You must also go further and address the concept of the scorecard signing. If it isn't going to be a game premised on sportsmanship and the player and competitor keeping each other honest, but technical video review of everything, penalizing someone for something they are completely unaware of, plus a technicality, just makes your organization look bush league.

 

This is all that really needs to be said. If you can't video tape and dissect every single shot, drop, replay, putt; practice swing, stance, etc., then what they have in place is inherently unfair.

 

I don't expect the goddamn idiots running the PGA and LPGA to understand that, though.

[SteelPride]

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?

 

You should tweet this to Lee Westwood, who has probably done this 1000 times.

[Vindog]

People are talking about the viewer input as if it from a person who knows nothing about golf, and/or the rules of golf. The reality is that person knows more about the rules of golf than 90% of the people k this thread. As I suspected initially, it was not some schmoe calling it in.

 

Sucks for Lexi and I feel for her, but was it a penalty or not? It would be worse in my mind if a major was won by a player who clearly broke a rule and should have been penalized. I prefer that golf be far different from other sports in that regard. No tournamnet committe wants that I'd guess.

 

Putting a rules official with every group watching every player isn't practical and then we would hear about how much slower everything is

Tough situation.

 

Did I miss something in the previous 15 pages? You seem to be saying that you know who it was that sent the email. Is that correct?

 

Somewhere in one of these threads or maybe buried in this merged one it has come out that the person involved is a rules official, or a person who is a tournament official, or someone else with a bit of knowledge and/or clout.

[legitimategolf]

The rules serve the professional game well, about 99% of the time. 1% of the time you get a weird situation like Lexi's. That's a pretty good success rate, not perfect but probably better than most armchair rules critics could achieve if they were in charge. The idea that the ruling bodies are out to get people, or out to turn people off to the game is kind of irrational.

[jt2gt]

People are talking about the viewer input as if it from a person who knows nothing about golf, and/or the rules of golf. The reality is that person knows more about the rules of golf than 90% of the people k this thread. As I suspected initially, it was not some schmoe calling it in.

 

Sucks for Lexi and I feel for her, but was it a penalty or not? It would be worse in my mind if a major was won by a player who clearly broke a rule and should have been penalized. I prefer that golf be far different from other sports in that regard. No tournamnet committe wants that I'd guess.

 

Putting a rules official with every group watching every player isn't practical and then we would hear about how much slower everything is

Tough situation.

 

Did I miss something in the previous 15 pages? You seem to be saying that you know who it was that sent the email. Is that correct?

 

Somewhere in one of these threads or maybe buried in this merged one it has come out that the person involved is a rules official, or a person who is a tournament official, or someone else with a bit of knowledge and/or clout.

 

If that is true...then I bet someone playing with her complained and they were looking for this. Very hard to just see out of the blue without looking for it or slowing it down. That's one reason it never gets called out on the Tours.

[warfelg]

People are talking about the viewer input as if it from a person who knows nothing about golf, and/or the rules of golf. The reality is that person knows more about the rules of golf than 90% of the people k this thread. As I suspected initially, it was not some schmoe calling it in.

 

Sucks for Lexi and I feel for her, but was it a penalty or not? It would be worse in my mind if a major was won by a player who clearly broke a rule and should have been penalized. I prefer that golf be far different from other sports in that regard. No tournamnet committe wants that I'd guess.

 

Putting a rules official with every group watching every player isn't practical and then we would hear about how much slower everything is

Tough situation.

 

Did I miss something in the previous 15 pages? You seem to be saying that you know who it was that sent the email. Is that correct?

 

Somewhere in one of these threads or maybe buried in this merged one it has come out that the person involved is a rules official, or a person who is a tournament official, or someone else with a bit of knowledge and/or clout.

 

If that is true...then I bet someone playing with her complained and they were looking for this. Very hard to just see out of the blue without looking for it or slowing it down. That's one reason it never gets called out on the Tours.

 

It does but it's usually a very subtle thing that one will say to the other between holes.

[wmblake2000]

The key questions are:

 

1) Should outside agencies via TV evidence be able to initiate a rules violation inquiry when not everyone is subject to the same level of scrutiny?

 

2) If so, how should signed scorecards be handled?

 

I think the tours should have an official watch tv broadcasts and only they should be able to call penalties. Like in other sports, if they miss it, they miss it. Should the official spot an infraction not reported by the player there should be an additional stroke penalty so that players remain obligated to self report penalties.

 

The time frame for calling a penalty should not be the end of the tournament but the start of play the next day.

 

The one question this raises is what happens if the violation is recognized during play. Should the violation be immediately discussed with the player during the round? If so, is there still an additional stroke penalty? This seems messy and no solution I can imagine is really clean.

 

 

[llewol007]

The fairness factor of not calling her on it the day of the violation before signing her card and assessing the violation a day after the fact. Keep in mind also that not every player is on television being watched in 10000K resolution. Why in the world have rules officials walking the grounds if they allow people from home calling in violations.

[heavy_hitter]

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.

 

Had you seen it live in real time would you have noticed? You would have not and are lying if you said you would have. It took an extreme closeup to even see. It is ridiculous to even be having this debate. If you can't see it in real time, it isn't a penalty.

 

BTW... It was close. As well as mathematically speaking you change the angles when you blow up the picture. This wasn't cheating and wasn't a penalty to begin with.

[heavy_hitter]

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the email came in from another rules official watching from home. Who else would have the email addresses of the officials at the actual tournament. (Or maybe they're just in the same bridge group...lol)

 

Would be very interesting to know when the individual observed the violation and then how long it took him or her to send the email. Given the state of the current rules, as has been stated, the emailer could have seen it on Saturday, yet intentionally held off her email until Sunday, thus ensuring Lexi received the additional 2 stroke penalty for signing for the incorrect scorecard. I've seen first hand how some rules officials love sharing bad news and seem to relish their role as the grim reaper .

 

Either way, it's ugly and makes our sport look petty and foolish.

 

Either this or a Korean looking for a way to get an Asian/Korean to win.

 

No one could tell what she did in real time. I honestly don't even think a rules official would have noticed. It had to of been someone looking for something.

[golfandfishing]

LOL at the hardos saying "if it were me I wouldn't sign my card until after the 4th round". Good luck with that. When you show up on day 2 to find yourself with no tee time and a NC next to your name let us all know what movie you went to see while the rest of the field played golf.

[eebomb]

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.

not true. Scorecard was not incorrect until sunday when the email was sent and rule infraction was decided.

[nix]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

[nsxguy]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

The ironic(?) thing is replay is used in all other sports to "get it right".

 

In golf it's to catch someone "doing it wrong".

[deadsolid...shank]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

Boy,would that be wrong. I don't like the second half of this ruling (the incorrect scorecard) at all, dislike the calling in part of the first........and absolutely HATE all the replay going on in other sports. My wish is for zero replay. Call is made and the game goes on.

 

There is no flow or rhythm to games any more. Too many stoppages.

[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".

 

 

The spot that is not a different place.

With some simple measuring tools, I can prove you replace it in a different spot EVERY TIME.

[QEight]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

The ironic(?) thing is replay is used in all other sports to "get it right".

 

In golf it's to catch someone "doing it wrong".

 

One's wrong is other's right.

[QEight]

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.

With some simple measuring tools, I can prove you replace it in a different spot EVERY TIME.

 

And?

[nsxguy]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

The ironic(?) thing is replay is used in all other sports to "get it right".

 

In golf it's to catch someone "doing it wrong".

 

One's wrong is other's right.

 

Very profound !!!

[QEight]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

The ironic(?) thing is replay is used in all other sports to "get it right".

 

In golf it's to catch someone "doing it wrong".

 

One's wrong is other's right.

 

Very profound !!!

 

You can use it! :wave:

[jonsnow]

I would bet big money that the same people complaining about this ruling are all for more replay in other sports.

 

The ironic(?) thing is replay is used in all other sports to "get it right".

 

In golf it's to catch someone "doing it wrong".

 

One's wrong is other's right.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.