Mickelson hitting putt while ball was still moving?

[Porker]

Never liked Phil, always been biased towards him because I believe he is rated to high in the all time greatest ... But now I think I'm changing my mind! Phil took a stand against a course set up with unplayable greens .... The powers that be are set on making the US Open the toughest challenge in world golf ... I have no problem with that in principle but ridiculous green speeds is not the way to go. Is the spirit of the game not to give all contestants a fair chance to win? If not, why invite amateurs at all to the tournament?

 

Phil took one for the team... Sure he was wrong, should possibly withdraw as I can't see him focus on the 4th round after this, he sent a message that would probably be supported by other tour players and it will be interesting to see the comments going forward. Will be interesting to see where Phil will be rated among the all time greatest in the years to come, and if this incident will affect such.

[vman]

Dear Phil, you know you shouldn't have, it was a bit silly, but you did........I forgive you.

[Fade]

I will be playing in these this afternoon! New to me course, I hope they won't be too strict with their no-spikes policy.

 

[sphna12d]

1. Phil is a legend in this game.

 

2. Despite what some are saying he will be remembered by lots for this.

 

3. It’s not the USGA’s fault for his actions.

 

4. This goes against the basics of the game....hit the ball, find it and hit it again.

 

5. I hate this “it’s someones else’s fault” for your actions. This is all on Phil.

 

6. We all have moments of complete and utter breakdown..also not an excuse.

 

7. Where does this slippery slope end? Don’t know...I suspect a rules change upcoming.

 

 

 

Those that love Phil will defend, those that dislike will roast and others will see the facts and say logically how did one of the greatest golfers of all time get involved in a rules issue and not do the right thing?

 

I feel like he should have been DQ’ed....saying what he did is ok because of the wording of a rule may be technically accurate but what he did wasn’t golf, it was more like hockey..

 

Pretty much my thoughts verbatim. The adjustment to the moving ball rule is coming.

[naval2006]

Phil’s by far my favourite pro to watch. And he is a great golf ambassador. But yesterday’s play was a complete lack of style, especially by a guy like him. I guess he did that out of long time frustration and he must have reacted that way facing the fact the time for the US Open is gone for him. If it had been a rookie or unknown pro or an international player, he may have been DQ’d because it was a clear confrontational move against the tournament organiser. Anyways we all make mistakes but as a whole Phil has shown great integrity as a golfer throughout his career.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Where the hell is Ferguson in all of this? Phil's move must have made his blood instantly vaporize. Did he pass out and still not come to?

[jerebear21]

what's the problem? He got penalized and moved on.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

what's the problem? He got penalized and moved on.

Exactly. But remember the new national past time for many is to go to the internet and be offended.

[BreakingPar]

This should be a retrospective DQ because in golf, intent counts.

 

Story time: remember 3 or 4 years ago when TW got that 2 stroker from ANGC on Sunday after he gave an interview saying he went back a couple paces from where he played his initial shot to get a better yardage (which basically put him out of the running for the tournament)? They had given him a pass on Saturday after reviewing it because they couldn't determine motive, and accessed him the 2 strokes Sunday because he ADMITTED what the intent was.

 

DQ all day in my book. And also in the USGA's rules handbook.

[budnc6721]

DQ'd, no. Spectator sports are about entertainment and a DQ robs everyone of seeing him do something ridiculously stupid/amazing/controversial today. Since everyone here belongs to super elite clubs I'm sure it has provided tons of bar talk fans r everyone so far.

[warfelg]

Do I think any less of Phil because of what he did? No. Like JS last year at the Open Championship he knows the rules and took advantage of that aspect. Can't blame him for doing so.

 

Do I think any less of the USGA for ignoring the intent and just applying the 2 stroke as opposed to DQ'ing? Yes. Like Tiger at the Masters a few years ago, the tournament rule committee in charge were looking for the loophole to keep him around.

 

So my $0.02 is don't blame the player for knowing rules and using them to his advantage, blame the ruling body for using a different rule to protect a player.

[Fairwindsgolfer]

would have been better if he did a Daly...actually leave the tournament...disgraceful

?I fully agree

[Fairwindsgolfer]

This should be a retrospective DQ because in golf, intent counts.

 

Story time: remember 3 or 4 years ago when TW got that 2 stroker from ANGC on Sunday after he gave an interview saying he went back a couple paces from where he played his initial shot to get a better yardage (which basically put him out of the running for the tournament)? They had given him a pass on Saturday after reviewing it because they couldn't determine motive, and accessed him the 2 strokes Sunday because he ADMITTED what the intent was.

 

DQ all day in my book. And also in the USGA's rules handbook.

 

I totally agree.

The fact that he fully and freely admitted to what his intention was should have been grounds for a DQ right on the spot.

 

And in my respectful opinion, this reveals a petulant, trite and juvenile reaction from someone who will be regarded as one of the best golfers of all time.

This was a disgraceful act and it amazes me the leniency that golf fans are giving him on this.

And before you think that I'm some kind of Phil hater, I went to ASU and love the Sun Devils

[puttfordoux]

We tend to forget that at the pro level, sports are more entertainment than sport. Phil is acutely aware of this. All eyes are on him, and he LOVES it. Regardless of why.

[gvogel]

1. Phil is a legend in this game.

 

2. Despite what some are saying he will be remembered by lots for this.

 

3. It’s not the USGA’s fault for his actions.

 

4. This goes against the basics of the game....hit the ball, find it and hit it again.

 

5. I hate this “it’s someones else’s fault” for your actions. This is all on Phil.

 

6. We all have moments of complete and utter breakdown..also not an excuse.

 

7. Where does this slippery slope end? Don’t know...I suspect a rules change upcoming.

 

 

 

Those that love Phil will defend, those that dislike will roast and others will see the facts and say logically how did one of the greatest golfers of all time get involved in a rules issue and not do the right thing?

 

I feel like he should have been DQ’ed....saying what he did is ok because of the wording of a rule may be technically accurate but what he did wasn’t golf, it was more like hockey..

 

The sad part about this is that he stated that he had thought about doing this before.

 

If he had come out of the scoring room and said that he lost his head in the moment, I could have given him a pass. But he said that he did this on purpose. He should have been DQ'd.

[Jimbud]

Joe buck: we'll be sending our commando Curtis strange to extract info from the horrendous villain

 

Lol they are really milking this. Classic Fox

 

Yeah, Doubt we will hear The Golf Channel or anyone else make mention of it. :russian_roulette:

[Lagavulin62]

This should be a retrospective DQ because in golf, intent counts.

 

Story time: remember 3 or 4 years ago when TW got that 2 stroker from ANGC on Sunday after he gave an interview saying he went back a couple paces from where he played his initial shot to get a better yardage (which basically put him out of the running for the tournament)? They had given him a pass on Saturday after reviewing it because they couldn't determine motive, and accessed him the 2 strokes Sunday because he ADMITTED what the intent was.

 

DQ all day in my book. And also in the USGA's rules handbook.

 

I totally agree.

The fact that he fully and freely admitted to what his intention was should have been grounds for a DQ right on the spot.

 

And in my respectful opinion, this reveals a petulant, trite and juvenile reaction from someone who will be regarded as one of the best golfers of all time.

This was a disgraceful act and it amazes me the leniency that golf fans are giving him on this.

And before you think that I'm some kind of Phil hater, I went to ASU and love the Sun Devils

 

 

 

I think there is no question Phil intended to take advantage by redirecting that ball. They didn’t need his input to see that. It should have been DQ if that is how they apply intent. I don’t understand how they can rule it was somehow unintentional. That video tells it all. The officials are the one’s that screwed this up. And I think the rules need to be changed to address this. Or maybe we just need better officiaks because no idea how anyone could question his motive.

 

 

I don’t hold this against Phil because I think he was playing strategically, trying to use the rule to his advantage. What’s wrong with that? But I am not real sure he knows the rule because he admitted what he was doing and believes it’s only a 2 stroke penalty. Well what really is the rule if the officials seem to say one thing about intent being DQ, then can’t apply what is an obvious “stoppage” of ball movement? This whole thing stinks and I don’t think it has anything to do with Phil. Then maybe Phil was TESTING the rule to see how it would actually be applied? Either way I don’t fault Phil one bit. He has pointed out, intentional or not, the idiocy of the officials and the way they enforce the rules. You can’t help but question how this would have gone had it been Bobby McGillikutty instead of Phil.

 

 

 

[Ignatius Reilly]

This should be a retrospective DQ because in golf, intent counts.

 

Story time: remember 3 or 4 years ago when TW got that 2 stroker from ANGC on Sunday after he gave an interview saying he went back a couple paces from where he played his initial shot to get a better yardage (which basically put him out of the running for the tournament)? They had given him a pass on Saturday after reviewing it because they couldn't determine motive, and accessed him the 2 strokes Sunday because he ADMITTED what the intent was.

 

DQ all day in my book. And also in the USGA's rules handbook.

 

That had nothing to do with intent.

 

Up until that point, neither Tiger nor the ROs had noticed he had dropped in the wrong place. Tiger thought he was making a proper drop, so he did. The ROs thought he'd made a proper drop (not that noticeably far off) until he said what he'd done in the presser after, and then one of them realized "that wasn't right".

[bladehunter]

Where the hell is Ferguson in all of this? Phil's move must have made his blood instantly vaporize. Did he pass out and still not come to?

 

I already said it. Ferg is phil. I’m convinced of it. Or tiger. One of them. Neither wants to comment right now.

[Fairwindsgolfer]

Joe buck: we'll be sending our commando Curtis strange to extract info from the horrendous villain

 

Lol they are really milking this. Classic Fox

 

Yeah, Doubt we will hear The Golf Channel make mention of it. :russian_roulette:

☝️

Not sure if you saw the 15+minute long commentary on the Golf Channel regarding this?

All four Golf Channel commentators spoke at length about their distaste towards the situation

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Where the hell is Ferguson in all of this? Phil's move must have made his blood instantly vaporize. Did he pass out and still not come to?

 

I already said it. Ferg is phil. I’m convinced of it. Or tiger. One of them. Neither wants to comment right now.

LOL That's a hilarious yet plausible theory :)

[Lagavulin62]

Where the hell is Ferguson in all of this? Phil's move must have made his blood instantly vaporize. Did he pass out and still not come to?

 

I already said it. Ferg is phil. I’m convinced of it. Or tiger. One of them. Neither wants to comment right now.

 

 

Lol. You’re serious? Truthfully those guys troll this at least when they are bored now and then, I’m guessing. Probobly don’t post much.

[Konklifer]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

[bladehunter]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ? I haven’t read it if it does. Very short simple rule.

[golfnoob25]

What do his peers think

[warfelg]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ?

 

No but it's not the only rule you can apply there. I think USGA let it go because he hit towards the hole. Shouldn't matter.

[bladehunter]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ?

 

No but it's not the only rule you can apply there. I think USGA let it go because he hit towards the hole. Shouldn't matter.

 

It is the only one that can apply. You go to the most specifi. One first. If it covers it. That’s it. It does. That’s all. 14-5 says 2 strokes. If the balll had stopped. He ran to it and it started moving after he took the putter back it’s zero penalty. So it’s possible to have done that and received no penalty. If the ball had cooperated.

[Konklifer]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ? I haven't read it if it does. Very short simple rule.

 

14-5. Playing Moving Ball

 

A player must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving.

 

Exceptions:

 

• Ball falling off tee - Rule 11-3
  
• Striking the ball more than once - Rule 14-4
  
• Ball moving in water - Rule 14-6
  

 

When the ball begins to move only after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of his club for the stroke, he incurs no penalty under this Rule for playing a moving ball, but he is not exempt from any penalty under Rule 18-2 (Ball at rest moved by player).

 

(Ball purposely deflected or stopped by player, partner or caddie - see Rule 1-2)

[bladehunter]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ? I haven't read it if it does. Very short simple rule.

 

14-5. Playing Moving Ball

 

A player must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving.

 

Exceptions:

 

• Ball falling off tee - Rule 11-3
  
• Striking the ball more than once - Rule 14-4
  
• Ball moving in water - Rule 14-6
  

 

When the ball begins to move only after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of his club for the stroke, he incurs no penalty under this Rule for playing a moving ball, but he is not exempt from any penalty under Rule 18-2 (Ball at rest moved by player).

 

(Ball purposely deflected or stopped by player, partner or caddie - see Rule 1-2)

 

Thanks for proving my point. 14-5 does not say anything about on purpose. And 1-2 says deflect or redirect. A stroke made proper with a club is not considered a deflect by the rules of golf. If he had kicked it you’d be correct.

[Konklifer]

There is no debate. There isn't even room for interpretation. Look at the video and listen to Phil's own remarks:

 

- The actual act: Phil putts, then runs after the ball and hits it before it rolls any further, breaching Rule 14-5. Rule 14-5 goes on to state, if it's done purposely, see Rule 1-2

 

- Phil's post round remarks:

• "I've had multiple times I wanted to do that, I just finally did it."
  
• "No question it was gonna go down, into the same spot, behind the bunker, was gonna have no shot."
  

A clear breach of Rule 1-2. However, there is a stipulation that the Committee may impose a DQ in the case of a serious breach. Phil's own acts and remarks are clearly a serious breach.

 

The USGA either decided to ignore Rule 1-2 or were just sackless.

 

Does 14-5 say anything specific about doing it on purpose ?

 

No but it's not the only rule you can apply there. I think USGA let it go because he hit towards the hole. Shouldn't matter.

 

Incorrect. At the end of Rule 14-5 it states: (Ball purposely deflected or stopped by player, partner or caddie - see Rule 1-2)