Rahm f'd up and should've been penalized

[BlackDiamondPar5]

how much did the ball move from where it should have been played from? an inch?

 

He did not attempt to put it in the same location which is where the violation occurs. Its not exact but you have to at least try. Rahm did not try and then tried to justify it along with help from the rules official.

 

i was curious to know how much everyone thought was the difference, 2 inches?

 

About 1/2 a ball closer, plus on a slightly different line.

 

Larry you did nice work yesterday overlaying the pictures and I don't intent to diminish it. However a word of caution about doing that in case you don't know. If the camera moved, which it could if it were a boom camera instead of a tower camera, it would induce some distortion making the ball look like it was placed in a different location relative to the hole. Also where there is definitely some deceptive distortion is when you talked about needing to adjust pictures due to different zoom. In photography there is something known as "lens compression" that can cause objects to appear to move relative to another when they don't actually move. While the zoom in the case of these pictures didn't change dramatically from one picture to the other, it certainly could account for some of the apparent ball location discrepancy in your photo overlay.

[callawayjay]

how much did the ball move from where it should have been played from? an inch?

No one will ever know because as soon as a marker is moved using the club head vectored to a distant object the original location is lost.

 

There you go again with your ridiculous micrometer talk. BS. Its been done this way forever but somehow because its not down to a tenth of a millimeter exact location you try to act as if it doesn't matter. Next time you play in an event try not marking your ball and explain to them that its pointless because of the irregularities of the current marking system but you will be sure to replace it somewhere in the neighborhood. Also see if the proshop has any extra rules of golf free handouts lying around.

 

You can keep talking your ridiculous nonsense but it doesn't change that Rahm skirted the rules either willingly or by forgetting and then justified it by either lying or playing dumb and then tried to make it sound as if it wasn't that important anyway because it was a one foot putt. This should give everyone an idea of just how loose some tour players are with the rules. He thought nothing of it because he has probably been doing it for years and getting away with it.

 

Don't believe it, talk to Phil

 

https://www.thesun.c...ark-their-ball/

 

Mickelson said "A number of guys on tour are loose with how they mark the ball and have not been called on it.

 

Another caddie said that one player in particular has a reputation for marking his ball illegally.

 

"Everyone knows it," the caddie said. "The way he marks his ball, he'll turn a 23-inch putt into a 21-inch putt, which is huge psychologically."

 

Back to what Phil said. I'd say there are maybe 20 guys who deliberately fudge their mark within a half-inch. It's hard to be definitive because the guys who do it are very good at it. Besides, I'm busy reading my putt. Even if you're paying close attention, it's difficult to call someone out when the area of contention is the width of a penny. You can tell an official to watch a guy, but only in the majors do we have an official with every group.

 

 

Exactly. Rahm seems like the type of guy who wants it to be closer because right now he's a mental midget.

 

I play with a guy regularly who does this. It's a total D move. And he knows he does it

 

I'm reasonably sure Rahm does too.

 

If you clowns can speculate he had no intent then I can assume he's a horse's arse based on his temper tantrums

And if Phil know they are doing so and does not call them out on it he is to blame as well.

 

PS Rahm is a mental midget? 8th in the world with just 27 events to make points? Who will save the rest of the lads if he every gets to be a mental giant?

 

You can be a great golfer and also a mental midget. See DJ

 

 

[Shilgy]

 

You can be a great golfer and also a mental midget. See DJ

Two different things. DJ is not a mental midget on the course. And imo he's not one off it either but some like to denigrate the man on top however they can. This is not directed at you but why/how do we make fun of Phil and Jack for being FIGJAM and Carnac AND make fun of guys for being mental midgets? Either it's good to be smart or not and yet folks make fun of both ends of the spectrum.

[callawayjay]

Being immensely talented doesn't mean smarts and intelligence are directly related.

[KyGolf]

The somewhat exact measurement from the 3:00 to the 6:00 position on a quarter sized object is 11/16" (17.45mm). From the 4:30 position to 6:00 is 1/4" (6.35 mm). I didn't have the tools or inclination to measure the angles, but if a 4" putter head is angled a few degrees toward 3:00 the measurement diminishes quickly.

 

A golf ball has a diameter of 1.68" (42.67 mm).

 

McFee spoke of this when he was talking about positions on clock face and said there was a 1 or 2 "hour" difference in the position of the ball. Despite the optics of the situation, the ball was place nearly in the same spot or with in reasonable judgment range.

 

Math!!!

 

Much ado about nothing in this instance. And Shamblee is a blathering idiot.

[Vindog]

The USGA is really screwing up lately with the verbiage in their rules, they may think they are making the game easier or friendlier but instead they are creating more problems than we started with.

 

I don't disagree with this, and in the back of my mind I feel that some folks should be careful what they wish for as some of these modernizations might not be for the players benefit in the end.

 

That said, clearly this rule change was promoted by both ruling bodies, as it is an actual rule and not just a local rule or condition of competition.

[Vindog]

You can be a great golfer and also a mental midget. See DJ

Two different things. DJ is not a mental midget on the course. And imo he's not one off it either but some like to denigrate the man on top however they can. This is not directed at you but why/how do we make fun of Phil and Jack for being FIGJAM and Carnac AND make fun of guys for being mental midgets? Either it's good to be smart or not and yet folks make fun of both ends of the spectrum.

 

Because you don't have to be smart to have an internet connection.

[CCTxGolf]

I bet Rahm would have lost the tournament if he was penalized.

[RobS14526]

The USGA is really screwing up lately with the verbiage in their rules, they may think they are making the game easier or friendlier but instead they are creating more problems than we started with.

 

I don't disagree with this, and in the back of my mind I feel that some folks should be careful what they wish for as some of these modernizations might not be for the players benefit in the end.

 

That said, clearly this rule change was promoted by both ruling bodies, as it is an actual rule and not just a local rule or condition of competition.

I don't think this rule change is to make the game easier or friendlier. They are trying to avoid being crucified in a world of high definition, which I totally understand.

[bscinstnct]

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/unpenalized-rahm-stands-ball-mark-mechanics/

 

""When he put the ball back down, he said, 'I think I made an effort to put it back to the side,' which tallies with what I see on the pictures," McFee said. "Because if he didn't, he'd be putting it back immediately in front of the marker, and he didn't. He moved it slightly to the side."

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

[sekrah]

I bet Rahm would have lost the tournament if he was penalized.

 

Bet accepted. Pay up.

[hurricanes7]

does john seem slightly angry all the time

[Shilgy]

I bet Rahm would have lost the tournament if he was penalized.

 

Bet accepted. Pay up.

 

"no you pay up"

"no you pay up"

"no you pay up"

"no you pay up"

"no you pay up"

"no you pay up"

[CCTxGolf]

I bet Rahm would have lost the tournament if he was penalized.

 

Bet accepted. Pay up.

 

He runs to hot. Would have definitely been interesting to see how he would have handled it. I think he would have blown it.

[CCTxGolf]

does john seem slightly angry all the time

 

Yes. But he is just Kid. Maybe he will grow out of it.

[Vindog]

The USGA is really screwing up lately with the verbiage in their rules, they may think they are making the game easier or friendlier but instead they are creating more problems than we started with.

 

I don't disagree with this, and in the back of my mind I feel that some folks should be careful what they wish for as some of these modernizations might not be for the players benefit in the end.

 

That said, clearly this rule change was promoted by both ruling bodies, as it is an actual rule and not just a local rule or condition of competition.

I don't think this rule change is to make the game easier or friendlier. They are trying to avoid being crucified in a world of high definition, which I totally understand.

 

I absolutely think it's friendlier. Just ask John Rahm.

 

I also think that the local rule regarding ball moved accidentally on green is easier and friendlier, maybe a little too friendly in my opinion.

[RobS14526]

The USGA is really screwing up lately with the verbiage in their rules, they may think they are making the game easier or friendlier but instead they are creating more problems than we started with.

 

I don't disagree with this, and in the back of my mind I feel that some folks should be careful what they wish for as some of these modernizations might not be for the players benefit in the end.

 

That said, clearly this rule change was promoted by both ruling bodies, as it is an actual rule and not just a local rule or condition of competition.

I don't think this rule change is to make the game easier or friendlier. They are trying to avoid being crucified in a world of high definition, which I totally understand.

 

I absolutely think it's friendlier. Just ask John Rahm.

 

I also think that the local rule regarding ball moved accidentally on green is easier and friendlier, maybe a little too friendly in my opinion.

I completely agree it's friendlier (too friendly), my comment was to the motive. I don't believe they're making this change for the good of the game. They're making the change to avoid controversy on hi-def second guessing.

[Shilgy]

 

I completely agree it's friendlier (too friendly), my comment was to the motive. I don't believe they're making this change for the good of the game. They're making the change to avoid controversy on hi-def second guessing.

My initial thought was they are getting too lenient. But much like this situation HD replay and viewing makes too many armchair referees out of viewers. I am sure many more call ins than we ever know about but zoom views create a great viewing experience but nightmare for officials. The tours probably get a bunch of calls from viewers saying things like "he replaced the ball too far in front of the mark" without having seen that was the way it was marked in the first place. Much like this one with Rahm where many are too caught up with the method used to replace the ball rather than the ball getting replaced in the same spot. I am as old school as it comes with the rules but some of this gets absurd. The cameras may give us a good picture but the depth and 2D view does not give us a perfect feel for things like ball replacement every time.

[youraway2]

any reason to think he cheated on purpose

No of course not, but he played from the wrong place. Should have received the appropriate penalty.

[KDMullins]

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/unpenalized-rahm-stands-ball-mark-mechanics/

 

""When he put the ball back down, he said, 'I think I made an effort to put it back to the side,' which tallies with what I see on the pictures," McFee said. "Because if he didn't, he'd be putting it back immediately in front of the marker, and he didn't. He moved it slightly to the side."

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

 

It looks to me like he marked it to the left of his marker, i.e. the right-most portion of the ball was placed at about the halfway point of the mark...or even left of that. It's difficult to be more precise because he placed the ball so quickly, and the view is obscured by his arm/hand.

[bscinstnct]

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/unpenalized-rahm-stands-ball-mark-mechanics/

 

""When he put the ball back down, he said, 'I think I made an effort to put it back to the side,' which tallies with what I see on the pictures," McFee said. "Because if he didn't, he'd be putting it back immediately in front of the marker, and he didn't. He moved it slightly to the side."

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

 

It looks to me like he marked it to the left of his marker, i.e. the right-most portion of the ball was placed at about the halfway point of the mark...or even left of that. It's difficult to be more precise because he placed the ball so quickly, and the view is obscured by his arm/hand.

 

To the commentator, as to anyone else, it is clear,

 

"Instead of putting the ball to the left of the marker, he puts the ball in *front* of the marker, and gains about an inch and a half"

 

If he marked it to the side, why did he replace in front?

[Pjpurdy]

If the rules of golf wanted the ball to be played from its original position, they wouldn't allow lift-clean-place. Why let someone pick up their ball if they MUST play from the original position? Either you putt as it arrived on the green - no clean up (dirt and all), or you allow for variance in final position and trust players integrity. Lexi should have tried harder, Rahm should not be punished.

[Terry Gold]

i understand what u are saying as far as the rules go, but i want to know if he did it on purpose

 

Give him a call. He's the only one who would know

 

Other than Phil.

 

I didn't see Phil there

 

Pithy 'joke'/combinatorial reference to the fact that his brother is Rahm's agent, Phil's post-Lexi 'lid-blower' remarks regarding re-marks, and his overall 'know it all' persona.

(I'd rather take the hit of misinterpretation than resort to using an emoji.)

Figured you'd follow me on that one, J. Sonic.

Forget it J....It's Tour Talk.

(Free Ultra ball to anyone that gets that one.)

[KDMullins]

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/unpenalized-rahm-stands-ball-mark-mechanics/

 

""When he put the ball back down, he said, 'I think I made an effort to put it back to the side,' which tallies with what I see on the pictures," McFee said. "Because if he didn't, he'd be putting it back immediately in front of the marker, and he didn't. He moved it slightly to the side."

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

 

It looks to me like he marked it to the left of his marker, i.e. the right-most portion of the ball was placed at about the halfway point of the mark...or even left of that. It's difficult to be more precise because he placed the ball so quickly, and the view is obscured by his arm/hand.

 

To the commentator, as to anyone else, it is clear,

 

"Instead of putting the ball to the left of the marker, he puts the ball in *front* of the marker, and gains about an inch and a half"

 

If he marked it to the side, why did he replace in front?

 

It's not at all clear to me, just as it wasn't to the rules official. Don't get me wrong, that's not the way I would do it, I don't think it was remarked in the same place, and I'm not sure what Rahm was thinking. All I'm saying is the commentators who say the ball was placed incorrectly overstate nearly every move Rahm made. The first mark appears to have been made to the right of the ball and toward the back half. When he replaced it, it appears he place the ball in front of the marker but toward the left. All things considered, I don't think his remark was very far at all from the original mark. Brandel was talking about it being 3-4" away from his orginal spot. I think it could have been less then half a ball width (1/2" or so). And if his story is, "No, I didn't through the exact process to remark the ball that I did marking it, but I estimated where I thought the ball was." It's tough to argue with that. Under the wording of the new rule, the remark doesn't have to be in the same location.

[KyGolf]

i understand what u are saying as far as the rules go, but i want to know if he did it on purpose

 

Give him a call. He's the only one who would know

 

Other than Phil.

 

I didn't see Phil there

 

Pithy 'joke'/combinatorial reference to the fact that his brother is Rahm's agent, Phil's post-Lexi 'lid-blower' remarks regarding re-marks, and his overall 'know it all' persona.

(I'd rather take the hit of misinterpretation than resort to using an emoji.)

Figured you'd follow me on that one, J. Sonic.

Forget it J....It's Tour Talk.

(Free Ultra ball to anyone that gets that one.)

.

 

 

Chinatown

[Sun Devil]

A camera view from a single direction (2 dimensional view) is highly inaccurate. Only cameras views from multiple directions (3 dimensional) can give exact views.

 

 

[Konklifer]

http://www.golfchann...mark-mechanics/

 

""When he put the ball back down, he said, 'I think I made an effort to put it back to the side,' which tallies with what I see on the pictures," McFee said. "Because if he didn't, he'd be putting it back immediately in front of the marker, and he didn't. He moved it slightly to the side."

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

It looks to me like he marked it to the left of his marker, i.e. the right-most portion of the ball was placed at about the halfway point of the mark...or even left of that. It's difficult to be more precise because he placed the ball so quickly, and the view is obscured by his arm/hand.

 

To the commentator, as to anyone else, it is clear,

 

"Instead of putting the ball to the left of the marker, he puts the ball in *front* of the marker, and gains about an inch and a half"

 

If he marked it to the side, why did he replace in front?

 

It's not at all clear to me, just as it wasn't to the rules official. Don't get me wrong, that's not the way I would do it, I don't think it was remarked in the same place, and I'm not sure what Rahm was thinking. All I'm saying is the commentators who say the ball was placed incorrectly overstate nearly every move Rahm made. The first mark appears to have been made to the right of the ball and toward the back half. When he replaced it, it appears he place the ball in front of the marker but toward the left. All things considered, I don't think his remark was very far at all from the original mark. Brandel was talking about it being 3-4" away from his orginal spot. I think it could have been less then half a ball width (1/2" or so). And if his story is, "No, I didn't through the exact process to remark the ball that I did marking it, but I estimated where I thought the ball was." It's tough to argue with that. Under the wording of the new rule, the remark doesn't have to be in the same location.

 

At 0:07 the ball is to the left of the marker. At 0:23, the ball is in front of the marker.

 

Pretty clear to me. He should've been penalized.

[Sun Devil]

To add more information to this topic. I read xrays in my line of work although I am not a radiologist. I do not use a 2 dimensional xray to determine an exact position of a landmark. 2 dimensional xrays are good for evaluating anatomy, size, etc. A 3 dimensional CAT scan will give precise positional information.

 

Again, unless you are using multiple cameras at different levels and positions ...... positional information opined through the use of a single or even two cameras is going to be highly subjective.

[KyGolf]

Not to mention his putter head is the size of a toaster. For the record, I don't think he got it back in exactly the same spot, but it was close enough for reasonable judgment to give him a pass.

[Exactice808]

To add more information to this topic. I read xrays in my line of work although I am not a radiologist. I do not use a 2 dimensional xray to determine an exact position of a landmark. 2 dimensional xrays are good for evaluating anatomy, size, etc. A 3 dimensional CAT scan will give precise positional information.

 

Again, unless you are using multiple cameras at different levels and positions ...... positional information opined through the use of a single or even two cameras is going to be highly subjective.

 

Sun, My apologies, as I am not trying to point out your post, its just the most recent of the same point..... With that...

 

While I understand the basic, scientific, flux capacities, 121 jigawatts of electricity point that the "Camera" view could skew the results.

 

just visually looking at it though seems much more realistic, that it was placed. in error. I mean it seems pretty blatent, regardless of the camera location? Front back, up, down to the side.

 

 

The ball was marked to the side, BUT then was replaced in front...... I personally think it was an honest accident I dont think Rahm did it with malice. I think in the heat of the moment and the urgency to move he forgo,t he marked to the side of the coin. With that...... ignorance of the "law" is no excuse. Just because you didnt know you cant steal a slurpee, does not exonerate you from it.

 

 

So I get it, Its not exact science..... But even the rules officials questioned it. BUT to Shigly's point... the rules official has the option to exercise prudent judgement. While I think that is honestly fair....and helps with the spirit of the game.... to me It just sucks as again, if I was Lexi, I would be PPPPIIISSSSSEEEDDDD!!!

 

 

 

I just hope that a consistency of judgement will be used because honestly with the debate I had with Shilgy OOPSS mah bad! .... you put a lot of power in the rules officials hands....and one day they could feel generous and another day, they can be strict as hell.....YIKES.......