ANA rules issue (Merged)

[Strike Force]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

She should be banned. Utter disgraceful from a so called athlete. Disgraceful

 

Lexi was robbed by a stupid LPGA Rules Committee. The 2 stroke penalty for returning an incorrect scorecard should be reversed and Lexi should be awarded the ANA Inspiration trophy.

 

Some people don't know much about the Rules, but nevertheless have strong opinions.

 

"Frequently wrong, but never in doubt"

 

Jack Nicklaus and Phil Mickelson!

[Goldenchang]

 

 

No way! On an 18" putt.

 

Lexi has missed those putts before

[youraway2]

Another competitor won the Championship.

Negative, another competitor was handed the Championship. She did not WIN jack sh!t.

 

I think we should let Jordan take a mulligan on 12 at 7:30am tomorrow and when he makes par he becomes 2 x defending champ.

 

Lexi should have been DQ'd

 

Under what rule should she have been DQ'd?

 

If the Committee decided she had committed a serious breech that gave her a significant advantage, she would have been disqualified. Since the Committee decided her actions did not provide her with a significant advantage, then she wasn't disqualified. She only received the appropriate penalty.

[bladehunter]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

 

 

and 2 other players 3 caddies and the rest of the free world missed it while watching live... and oh yea a walking ref and whomever kept her score ( peterson maybe) signed it as correct .... F-me ...man such huge huge event...lol but wait.. if we hit enhance 12 times, change the lighting and mark the ball with a 4 pixel blue blurb and play it back slowly , the blue blurb isnt in the right place.. GTFO.... some of us play golf and strike a ball ...and some of us worship the rule book...

[Strike Force]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

[bladehunter]

are you shi**** me ?

[sui generis]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

 

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

[Seamus_McDuff]

She wasn't playing with Pettersen when it happened. She was playing with So Yeon Ryu and Sung Hyung Park. Don't know which one had Lexi's card.

 

Not sure about Ryu or Lexi's caddies, but Park's has been out there forever. He used to caddy for Annika and then Creamer. I'm surprised one of them didn't catch it at the time...or maybe one of them did.

[chris975d]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

 

Is this real??

[milesgiles]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

[ghostrider]

guessing with not real since LPGA has said that after Sunday you could send them all the video you want but nothing will happen. First three days - we can go back and add whatever we feel like to your score at any time we feel like it but last day - nothing allowed

[milesgiles]

 

Another competitor won the Championship.

Negative, another competitor was handed the Championship. She did not WIN jack sh!t.

 

I think we should let Jordan take a mulligan on 12 at 7:30am tomorrow and when he makes par he becomes 2 x defending champ.

 

Lexi should have been DQ'd

 

Under what rule should she have been DQ'd?

 

 

No way! On an 18" putt.

 

Those are the ones its easy to decelerate on. If the ball was in a little hole, a slowly struck ball is going to be deflected more than if you were putting from further away.

[North Texas]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

[milesgiles]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

 

[North Texas]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

I don't see it as being picked on.

 

It does seems that there has been a strange silence from other LPGA players in support of Lexi other than an initial handful of American players when it first happened. Some of you may be able to read through the lines on what I just wrote.

[warfelg]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

Ah the golden question so many of us want the answers to. What, why, and where from did this tip come?

 

Let's say someone she played with Saturday thinks she saw something. Didn't say anything. That night asked someone to look at it. Didn't email until Sunday. What's that say about the player?

 

Same situation but a rules official. What's that say about them?

 

I'll be honest I was shown the original without being alerted as to what happened, just that she was penalized. I had no clue that she moved it. Looked like she just aligned it and putted. Someone was, in my opinion, alerted to what to look for.

[bscinstnct]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

I don't see it as being picked on.

 

It does seems that there has been a strange silence from other LPGA players in support of Lexi other than an initial handful of American players when it first happened. Some of you may be able to read through the lines on what I just wrote.

 

Yup, could have been a set up.

 

[milesgiles]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

Ah the golden question so many of us want the answers to. What, why, and where from did this tip come?

 

Let's say someone she played with Saturday thinks she saw something. Didn't say anything. That night asked someone to look at it. Didn't email until Sunday. What's that say about the player?

 

Same situation but a rules official. What's that say about them?

 

I'll be honest I was shown the original without being alerted as to what happened, just that she was penalized. I had no clue that she moved it. Looked like she just aligned it and putted. Someone was, in my opinion, alerted to what to look for.

 

More plausible that it's a gambling connection than another player but it really doesn't change anything. If I was being beaten by someone doing that, yeah call it in a day later make it 4 shots, good.

[warfelg]

Yup, could have been a set up.

 

 

If it was and can be proven, whoever did it deserves a ban for being a (prophane version of crappy) person.

[warfelg]

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

Ah the golden question so many of us want the answers to. What, why, and where from did this tip come?

 

Let's say someone she played with Saturday thinks she saw something. Didn't say anything. That night asked someone to look at it. Didn't email until Sunday. What's that say about the player?

 

Same situation but a rules official. What's that say about them?

 

I'll be honest I was shown the original without being alerted as to what happened, just that she was penalized. I had no clue that she moved it. Looked like she just aligned it and putted. Someone was, in my opinion, alerted to what to look for.

 

More plausible that it's a gambling connection than another player but it really doesn't change anything. If I was being beaten by someone doing that, yeah call it in a day later make it 4 shots, good.

 

And that's a f-ed up move that's even worse. Your admitting to cheating the system to win. Glad I don't play anything for money with someone like you.

[milesgiles]

 

 

Amusing but untrue.

 

Yes, I knew what I was looking for, but I could see it perfectly well on an iPad at normal speed. And that's side on, not from behind or in front where it would be most obvious.

 

Do you think the rules guy that called in zoomed in and slo mo'd it? There's really only two possibilities. It didn't look right to him (which is possible) or..she has a 'reputation' and he was keeping an eye open..

 

Exactly. You knew what to look for. And that's my point. Unless you knew to be looking for something, nothing would have jumped out at you.

 

Yes, I absolutely do think that whoever called it in had the capability to zoom in and slow mo it. And I think that somebody alerted him to look for it because they knew he had that capability. And, as I have said, whoever alerted him to look for it was someone close to the action such as a fan, a caddie, a player, or someone who had something to gain.

 

She was being picked on then? Why?

 

If everyone was at it, should be pretty easy to come up with a few examples from that days play alone..

 

 

More plausible that it's a gambling connection than another player but it really doesn't change anything. If I was being beaten by someone doing that, yeah call it in a day later make it 4 shots, good.

 

And that's a f-ed up move that's even worse. Your admitting to cheating the system to win. Glad I don't play anything for money with someone like you.

 

I could easily live with myself in that situation. It's not by any definition cheating the system, unless I was marking her card.

[KyGolf]

Are home TVs even capable of zoom in high def? I don't think either one of mine are.

[bladehunter]

Are home TVs even capable of zoom in high def? I don't think either one of mine are.

 

 

im not certain "hi def" in its actual state is whats being refered to as "hi def" here.... does the usga even have hi-def? i doubt it .. i took it to mean zoom of a certain power...and as usual that power is totally undefined

[tstephen]

Here's the best thing about all of this.

 

This was such a blatant act of cheating by Lexi that it takes a zoomed in, slow version video of it in order to detect it. Think about that.

 

 

 

and 2 other players 3 caddies and the rest of the free world missed it while watching live... and oh yea a walking ref and whomever kept her score ( peterson maybe) signed it as correct .... F-me ...man such huge huge event...lol but wait.. if we hit enhance 12 times, change the lighting and mark the ball with a 4 pixel blue blurb and play it back slowly , the blue blurb isnt in the right place.. GTFO.... some of us play golf and strike a ball ...and some of us worship the rule book...

 

And with snowflakes like you we should allow any cheating because they're only cheating themselves.

 

Phil and Brandel suck if they didn't act when seeing other players replace their ball in a better position.

 

I like the fact that players can be busted by armchair referees since the players allow too much leniency.

 

Ian Baker Finch has remarked several times how players help each other by not marking their ball near the hole when the other player is still playing from off the green and the unmarked ball becomes a potential backstop. I've noticed this for nearly 20 years now.

 

When polling caddies on tour there has always been 50%+ admission of witnessing their player cheat in the previous year.

 

I think the fact that a player could be a camera now at any time(cell phone videos) should lower this number, but players policing themselves in a manner like Jack talked about(very low key) is most important. Along with disqualifications when deemed necessary.

[bullseye26]

As I understand it, when shown the video, Lexi agreed she had placed the ball in the wrong place. She said she didn't realize she had done so at the time. No way to read her mind. Okay, still a 2 stroke penalty.

 

Now I think the proper thing to do would be to ask her to attest to her new scorecard. She has agreed that she did it. I think she would sign the now-corrected scorecard. No penalty. But even though the penalty was after the fact, she was not given the chance to sign her scorecard after the fact. Unfair.

[KyGolf]

As I understand it, when shown the video, Lexi agreed she had placed the ball in the wrong place. She said she didn't realize she had done so at the time. No way to read her mind. Okay, still a 2 stroke penalty.

 

Now I think the proper thing to do would be to ask her to attest to her new scorecard. She has agreed that she did it. I think she would sign the now-corrected scorecard. No penalty. But even though the penalty was after the fact, she was not given the chance to sign her scorecard after the fact. Unfair.

 

 

So if she lifted her ball and moved it over an inch and didn't realize she did it until she was caught, it is a 2 stroke penalty. And if she did it on purpose and didn't admit until she was caught, it is a 2 stroke penalty. Doesn't seem right to me. That is why the 2 strokes for a wrong card is there, to stop the second scenario from happening.

[bullseye26]

As I understand it, when shown the video, Lexi agreed she had placed the ball in the wrong place. She said she didn't realize she had done so at the time. No way to read her mind. Okay, still a 2 stroke penalty.

 

Now I think the proper thing to do would be to ask her to attest to her new scorecard. She has agreed that she did it. I think she would sign the now-corrected scorecard. No penalty. But even though the penalty was after the fact, she was not given the chance to sign her scorecard after the fact. Unfair.

 

 

So if she lifted her ball and moved it over an inch and didn't realize she did it until she was caught, it is a 2 stroke penalty. And if she did it on purpose and didn't admit until she was caught, it is a 2 stroke penalty. Doesn't seem right to me. That is why the 2 strokes for a wrong card is there, to stop the second scenario from happening.

 

I see your point. Here's the problem I've always had with this. If a person intentionally cheats (a dishonorable thing to do), why would they suddenly turn honorable when it comes time to sign their scorecard, and admit that they cheated?

[Strike Force]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

 

Is this real??

 

No, no it is not real? But it just goes to show how stupid this whole thing is with penalties being called in by viewers the following day. Could someone at home challenge the LPGA to give Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' PLUS a 2 stroke penalty for returning an incorrect scorecard? Don't say no! The way the LPGA handled Lexi's penalties - it could absolutely happen... And that is just not right!

[sui generis]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

 

Is this real??

 

No, no it is not real? But it just goes to show how stupid this whole thing is with penalties being called in by viewers the following day. Could someone at home challenge the LPGA to give Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' PLUS a 2 stroke penalty for returning an incorrect scorecard? Don't say no! The way the LPGA handled Lexi's penalties - it could absolutely happen... And that is just not right!

 

You've lost the single crumb of credibilty which some may have gifted you with. How about bowing out and slinking off to some thread about what kind of underpants Ricky Fowler wears.

[Strike Force]

Uh-ho!

 

The LPGA is accessing Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' as reported by a viewer the day following Sunday's final round. Also, Pettersen will be accessed a 2 stroke penalty under Rule 6-6d for 'Returning an Incorrect Scorecard' in Sunday's round due to the Rule 16.1d infraction. A total of 3 strokes will be added to Pettersen's previously recorded 4-day T3 total of 13 under par 275. Pettersen's new total is 10 under par 278, which is a T6 finish with Cristie Kerr.

 

 

Is this real??

 

No, no it is not real? But it just goes to show how stupid this whole thing is with penalties being called in by viewers the following day. Could someone at home challenge the LPGA to give Suzann Pettersen a 1 stroke penalty under Rule 16.1d for 'Testing the Surface of the Green' PLUS a 2 stroke penalty for returning an incorrect scorecard? Don't say no! The way the LPGA handled Lexi's penalties - it could absolutely happen... And that is just not right!

 

You've lost the single crumb of credibilty which some may have gifted you with. How about bowing out and slinking off to some thread about what kind of underpants Ricky Fowler wears.

 

I don't pay any attention to backward-thinking people from the boondocks.