USGA PR team to Justin Thomas: "We need to talk"

[bladehunter]

 

 

well this is interesting.

 

 

Well. I respect them a touch more for admitting that and backing the bus up. I said to myself that a retraction was in order if indeed it was false. I can understand being professionally “hurt” by a false allegation and putting myself into those shoes I thought . “ the only way to undo this is to publically retract the lie “. And I’m the type that would forgive and forget that. So long as it didn’t happen again. Glad to see they did just that.

[nsxguy]

bladehunter more than gets it ... I have no idea who sets up the course for the Open ... but i hear/see mike davis being interviewed every year ...

 

some people know it's not about them ... mike davis and the usga do not, imo ...

 

It's really incredible the lengths some people will go to diss someone.

 

So the media wants comments from the USGA.

 

Who should give them ? The office secretary administrative assistant ? :cheesy:

 

an interview is not a few comments ... one organization gives a few comments and then gets out of the way ... the other wants to make itself part of the stage ...

 

OK then, so an "interview". To-MAY-to To-MAH-to.

 

Who are you, bladehunter ? :lol:

[Darth Putter]

The players seem to know the rules well enough when they want to get relief from something.

 

https://www.golf.com/tours-news/2017/09/17/watch-sergio-spends-nearly-half-hour-receiving-ruling-18th-hole-makes-par-anyway

 

https://www.pga.com/news/golf-buzz/how-understanding-rules-and-options-saved-jordan-spieth-open-championship

[bladehunter]

 

 

well this is interesting.

 

The replies to the @USGA_PR's tweet are hilarious. Not a good look for the USGA at all.

 

I have to admit. That maybe the funniest set of replies I’ve ever read.

 

“ put it in reverse terry “!

 

Another guy says “ how do I apply for the pr position that obviously just became open “ ?

 

 

[Ashley Schaeffer]

"He cancelled every meeting with us!"

-USGA

 

"No, we guess he didn't avoid discussion nor cancel any meetings. That was a misstatement. We apologize."

-Also USGA

[Darth Putter]

 

 

well this is interesting.

 

The replies to the @USGA_PR's tweet are hilarious. Not a good look for the USGA at all.

 

I have to admit. That maybe the funniest set of replies I've ever read.

 

" put it in reverse terry "!

 

Another guy says " how do I apply for the pr position that obviously just became open " ?

 

The photo of Joe West....

 

I'm trying to imagine HIM as a golf official, UGH!!!

[Darth Putter]

USGA PR social media officer.......

 

[davep043]

 

 

well this is interesting.

 

 

Well. I respect them a touch more for admitting that and backing the bus up. I said to myself that a retraction was in order if indeed it was false. I can understand being professionally "hurt" by a false allegation and putting myself into those shoes I thought . " the only way to undo this is to publically retract the lie ". And I'm the type that would forgive and forget that. So long as it didn't happen again. Glad to see they did just that.

I agree, when two sides are chest to chest, someone has to back away first. Monahan's letter kind of put some of these boys in a corner, saying essentially "YOUR organization has been in this all along, you have no excuses", and now the USGA has eased the pressure a bit by backing off. The adult thing for Justin to do would be to backtrack a bit himself, maybe admit that there are a lot of the new rules he thinks are just fine, even if he still has problems with a few.

[Rangeballz]

I've been patient with the USGA. I stopped the $10 a year deal they had ( got a hat and a copy of the rules, not bad value IMHO) after they signed the massive new TV deal with FOX. Figured they didn't need my money anymore.

 

Given the events of recent history (Oakmont, Shinnecock, Diana Murphy, and now the current rules events, etc.), how does Mike Davis still have a job?

[BrianMcG]

I can't believe grown a** adults are pretending these changes are hard to adapt to especially for freaking pros traveling around with their caddie, coach, trainer, personal assistant and a rules official available at all times.

 

*you can leave the flag in

*bend at the waist and drop from knee height

*move your caddie to the side

 

How is anyone supposed to remember all that? It's just so unfair for this multi-millionaires that travel the world playing golf.

[Swisstrader98]

If they wanted support they need to make the process truly open and transparent and over communicate the heck out of it. This is done by working closely with a broad spectrum of people whom not only love the game but make their living playing the game, which should naturally include tour pros past or present. This smells like they rewrote this largely as they wanted and input was perhaps window dressing. BTW I generally am supportive of the changes, but have suspicions about the method.

 

Honestly, I can't imagine how they could have made the process more open and transparent. They wrote drafts, circulated them more than a year in advance, asked for feedback from everybody. And they did change some things in between. IIRC, the original "drop" re-write allowed a drop from any height, which was then changed (based on feedback) to this silly knee-high scenario. I think the flagstick thing also changed a little from draft to implementation.

 

I don't think even Golf Channel would have put the Committee discussions on the air; but I'm not sure how they could have been more transparent.

 

Everyone in the corporate world knows faux transparency when they see it. Faux transparency is when you circulate your intentions and drafts a year in advance and you solicit everyone’s opinion via an online feedback mechanism. Then you pay zero attention to the feedback that is contrary to what you want to do, dismissing it as the bluster of cranks and know-nothings. Then you do what you want to do, and crow about how transparently and fairly you did it. And, to their credit, people that master the art of this process generally a) do what they want, and b) get paid millions for doing it. The USGA’s role in rules-making is a tiny, almost insignificant element of what the organization has become. It is a vehicle for inordinately large compensation and retirement packages for a small group of people and their board-level enablers. Someone splain to me how the head of the USGA should make more money than the CEO of a top children’s hospital. Because, you know, running a golf tournament and making some rules is high order bidness.

 

Somebody tell me I’m wrong, with the backdrop and context of the last 30 years of their actions.

 

POST OF THE WEEK!!

[braincramp52]

 

 

well this is interesting.

 

 

Well. I respect them a touch more for admitting that and backing the bus up. I said to myself that a retraction was in order if indeed it was false. I can understand being professionally "hurt" by a false allegation and putting myself into those shoes I thought . " the only way to undo this is to publically retract the lie ". And I'm the type that would forgive and forget that. So long as it didn't happen again. Glad to see they did just that.

 

You don't honestly believe that the USGA won't screw something else up in the very near future do you blade? :)

[OldTomMorris]

USGA backtracks: JT didn't cancel meetings. Isn't that ironic.

[ebrasmus21]

USGA backtracks: JT didn't cancel meetings. Isn't that ironic.

 

I'm surprised the backtrack didn't say "sorry we're not sorry"

[BlackDiamondPar5]

If they wanted support they need to make the process truly open and transparent and over communicate the heck out of it. This is done by working closely with a broad spectrum of people whom not only love the game but make their living playing the game, which should naturally include tour pros past or present. This smells like they rewrote this largely as they wanted and input was perhaps window dressing. BTW I generally am supportive of the changes, but have suspicions about the method.

 

Honestly, I can't imagine how they could have made the process more open and transparent. They wrote drafts, circulated them more than a year in advance, asked for feedback from everybody. And they did change some things in between. IIRC, the original "drop" re-write allowed a drop from any height, which was then changed (based on feedback) to this silly knee-high scenario. I think the flagstick thing also changed a little from draft to implementation.

 

I don't think even Golf Channel would have put the Committee discussions on the air; but I'm not sure how they could have been more transparent.

 

Everyone in the corporate world knows faux transparency when they see it. Faux transparency is when you circulate your intentions and drafts a year in advance and you solicit everyone's opinion via an online feedback mechanism. Then you pay zero attention to the feedback that is contrary to what you want to do, dismissing it as the bluster of cranks and know-nothings. Then you do what you want to do, and crow about how transparently and fairly you did it. And, to their credit, people that master the art of this process generally a) do what they want, and b) get paid millions for doing it. The USGA's role in rules-making is a tiny, almost insignificant element of what the organization has become. It is a vehicle for inordinately large compensation and retirement packages for a small group of people and their board-level enablers. Someone splain to me how the head of the USGA should make more money than the CEO of a top children's hospital. Because, you know, running a golf tournament and making some rules is high order bidness.

 

Somebody tell me I'm wrong, with the backdrop and context of the last 30 years of their actions.

 

Very well said! The USGA did the same thing when they conjured up the need for the world handicap system. They sent one email, just one, asking for input from GHIN members, they got a <1% response rate and then conclude there was "overwhelming support" for it.

 

So now we have the USGA backing off its comments about JT canceling meetings (they lied), we have a delusional Mike Davis saying the new rules roll out is going great, yet the RA and the tour players seem to be signaling the exact opposite. As usual "the usga rejects reality and substitutes their own."

[North Texas]

If they wanted support they need to make the process truly open and transparent and over communicate the heck out of it. This is done by working closely with a broad spectrum of people whom not only love the game but make their living playing the game, which should naturally include tour pros past or present. This smells like they rewrote this largely as they wanted and input was perhaps window dressing. BTW I generally am supportive of the changes, but have suspicions about the method.

 

Honestly, I can't imagine how they could have made the process more open and transparent. They wrote drafts, circulated them more than a year in advance, asked for feedback from everybody. And they did change some things in between. IIRC, the original "drop" re-write allowed a drop from any height, which was then changed (based on feedback) to this silly knee-high scenario. I think the flagstick thing also changed a little from draft to implementation.

 

I don't think even Golf Channel would have put the Committee discussions on the air; but I'm not sure how they could have been more transparent.

 

Everyone in the corporate world knows faux transparency when they see it. Faux transparency is when you circulate your intentions and drafts a year in advance and you solicit everyone's opinion via an online feedback mechanism. Then you pay zero attention to the feedback that is contrary to what you want to do, dismissing it as the bluster of cranks and know-nothings. Then you do what you want to do, and crow about how transparently and fairly you did it. And, to their credit, people that master the art of this process generally a) do what they want, and b) get paid millions for doing it. The USGA's role in rules-making is a tiny, almost insignificant element of what the organization has become. It is a vehicle for inordinately large compensation and retirement packages for a small group of people and their board-level enablers. Someone splain to me how the head of the USGA should make more money than the CEO of a top children's hospital. Because, you know, running a golf tournament and making some rules is high order bidness.

 

Somebody tell me I'm wrong, with the backdrop and context of the last 30 years of their actions.

 

Very well said! The USGA did the same thing when they conjured up the need for the world handicap system. They sent one email, just one, asking for input from GHIN members, they got a <1% response rate and then conclude there was "overwhelming support" for it.

 

So now we have the USGA backing off its comments about JT canceling meetings (they lied), we have a delusional Mike Davis saying the new rules roll out is going great, yet the RA and the tour players seem to be signaling the exact opposite. As usual "the usga rejects reality and substitutes their own."

 

As usual "the usga rejects reality and substitutes their own."

 

Not unlike a lot people who view the USGA as the "villain".

 

As they say, the truth is pretty much always in the middle. Neither the USGA nor the players are totally right nor totally wrong.

[ray9898]

"Hey we are real athletes" one minute...."It is impossible to drop an object from knee height" the next.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

"Hey we are real athletes" one minute...."It is impossible to drop an object from knee height" the next.

 

"Hey we've been a guardian of the game for over a century and are the last authority on the rules in North America" one minute . . . "We're gonna make up some FLAT OUT lies about a superstar" the next. "We will admit that we lied, but we're not apologizing" the one after that.

[lowheel]

I've been patient with the USGA. I stopped the $10 a year deal they had ( got a hat and a copy of the rules, not bad value IMHO) after they signed the massive new TV deal with FOX. Figured they didn't need my money anymore.

 

Given the events of recent history (Oakmont, Shinnecock, Diana Murphy, and now the current rules events, etc.), how does Mike Davis still have a job?

 

they never have

[BlackDiamondPar5]

If they wanted support they need to make the process truly open and transparent and over communicate the heck out of it. This is done by working closely with a broad spectrum of people whom not only love the game but make their living playing the game, which should naturally include tour pros past or present. This smells like they rewrote this largely as they wanted and input was perhaps window dressing. BTW I generally am supportive of the changes, but have suspicions about the method.

 

Honestly, I can't imagine how they could have made the process more open and transparent. They wrote drafts, circulated them more than a year in advance, asked for feedback from everybody. And they did change some things in between. IIRC, the original "drop" re-write allowed a drop from any height, which was then changed (based on feedback) to this silly knee-high scenario. I think the flagstick thing also changed a little from draft to implementation.

 

I don't think even Golf Channel would have put the Committee discussions on the air; but I'm not sure how they could have been more transparent.

 

Everyone in the corporate world knows faux transparency when they see it. Faux transparency is when you circulate your intentions and drafts a year in advance and you solicit everyone's opinion via an online feedback mechanism. Then you pay zero attention to the feedback that is contrary to what you want to do, dismissing it as the bluster of cranks and know-nothings. Then you do what you want to do, and crow about how transparently and fairly you did it. And, to their credit, people that master the art of this process generally a) do what they want, and b) get paid millions for doing it. The USGA's role in rules-making is a tiny, almost insignificant element of what the organization has become. It is a vehicle for inordinately large compensation and retirement packages for a small group of people and their board-level enablers. Someone splain to me how the head of the USGA should make more money than the CEO of a top children's hospital. Because, you know, running a golf tournament and making some rules is high order bidness.

 

Somebody tell me I'm wrong, with the backdrop and context of the last 30 years of their actions.

 

Very well said! The USGA did the same thing when they conjured up the need for the world handicap system. They sent one email, just one, asking for input from GHIN members, they got a <1% response rate and then conclude there was "overwhelming support" for it.

 

So now we have the USGA backing off its comments about JT canceling meetings (they lied), we have a delusional Mike Davis saying the new rules roll out is going great, yet the RA and the tour players seem to be signaling the exact opposite. As usual "the usga rejects reality and substitutes their own."

 

As usual "the usga rejects reality and substitutes their own."

 

Not unlike a lot people who view the USGA as the "villain".

 

As they say, the truth is pretty much always in the middle. Neither the USGA nor the players are totally right nor totally wrong.

 

I generally agree, but on the USGA's tweet and then retraction, After further and more direct conversations with @JustinThomas34, we realize he did not avoid a discussion with the USGA nor cancel any meetings. So it's tough to see something in the middle of that particular issue.

[Swisstrader98]

"Hey we are real athletes" one minute...."It is impossible to drop an object from knee height" the next.

 

"Hey we've been a guardian of the game for over a century and are the last authority on the rules in North America" one minute . . . "We're gonna make up some FLAT OUT lies about a superstar" the next. "We will admit that we lied, but we're not apologizing" the one after that.

 

Please stop...almost choked on my steak?

[Hawkeye77]

Thomas and Fowler just look silly with the whining and frankly, come off pretty spoiled and "entitled". Just leveraging their own perceptions of their popularity and getting in their licks.

 

The rules are so hard (excuse us we haven't bothered to read or learn them even though they govern our sport), wah, wah.

 

Having said that, someone at the USGA looking about as dumb as Ted Bishop taking after Poulter a few years ago.

 

Even the USGA apparently has to learn that when you are mostly on the right side of the issue (at least with these two) it is still a good idea to stick to the high ground.

[beluga99]

Be cool if the players boned up on the rules and had a limit on the amount of times they were allowed to call a rules official per season. Maybe 6 times? Once they're used up, they have to apply the rule as they know it. I would also like to see the word "infraction" used a lot more.

[pstmstr]

It’s their job to know the rules of the game they play. I think dropping from the knee is stupid and I think they should enforce slow play more firmly. The bottom line is whether we agree with rules or not we have to follow them and perhaps lobby for changing some of them.

[ebrasmus21]

Thomas and Fowler just look silly with the whining and frankly, come off pretty spoiled and "entitled". Just leveraging their own perceptions of their popularity and getting in their licks.

 

The rules are so hard (excuse us we haven't bothered to read or learn them even though they govern our sport), wah, wah.

 

Having said that, someone at the USGA looking about as dumb as Ted Bishop taking after Poulter a few years ago.

 

Even the USGA apparently has to learn that when you are mostly on the right side of the issue (at least with these two) it is still a good idea to stick to the high ground.

 

Sorry Hawk but I'm still laughing at Rickie threatening to crap that ball back in play.

 

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Thomas and Fowler just look silly with the whining and frankly, come off pretty spoiled and "entitled". Just leveraging their own perceptions of their popularity and getting in their licks.

 

The rules are so hard (excuse us we haven't bothered to read or learn them even though they govern our sport), wah, wah.

 

Having said that, someone at the USGA looking about as dumb as Ted Bishop taking after Poulter a few years ago.

 

Even the USGA apparently has to learn that when you are mostly on the right side of the issue (at least with these two) it is still a good idea to stick to the high ground.

 

That sums it up perfectly.

[North Texas]

Thomas and Fowler just look silly with the whining and frankly, come off pretty spoiled and "entitled". Just leveraging their own perceptions of their popularity and getting in their licks.

 

The rules are so hard (excuse us we haven't bothered to read or learn them even though they govern our sport), wah, wah.

 

Having said that, someone at the USGA looking about as dumb as Ted Bishop taking after Poulter a few years ago.

 

Even the USGA apparently has to learn that when you are mostly on the right side of the issue (at least with these two) it is still a good idea to stick to the high ground.

 

Sorry Hawk but I'm still laughing at Rickie threatening to crap that ball back in play.

 

 

This is what I don't get. There is absolutely nothing funny about this. It's as classless and disrespectful as it gets.

 

And surely not a one of us on here would have thought it was funny if our son had done this playing in a junior tournament. I know I would have yanked my son's a** off the course if he had done this and my dad would have done the same to me.

[beluga99]

It’s their job to know the rules of the game they play. I think dropping from the knee is stupid and I think they should enforce slow play more firmly. The bottom line is whether we agree with rules or not we have to follow them and perhaps lobby for changing some of them.

 

Isn't the purpose of dropping from the knee to prevent the constant placing of the ball which occurs a large percentage of the time dropping from shoulder height? I was astounded Fowler dropped from the shoulder a couple of weeks ago in Mexico.

[bladehunter]

Be cool if the players boned up on the rules and had a limit on the amount of times they were allowed to call a rules official per season. Maybe 6 times? Once they're used up, they have to apply the rule as they know it. I would also like to see the word "infraction" used a lot more.

 

wouldnt that mean that not much gets Called? Can’t use slow mo or zoom anymore to call penalties. So all you catch is the improper drop and what ?

 

Asking players to also be officials is pretty dumb. They don’t call for officials because they don’t know. They call generally to “ certify “ the ruling. Except when the officials in the trailer want to over rule the walking official. Lol. Forcing any group of players to police themselves at any level is literally a recipe for imploding the game itself.

[ebrasmus21]

Thomas and Fowler just look silly with the whining and frankly, come off pretty spoiled and "entitled". Just leveraging their own perceptions of their popularity and getting in their licks.

 

The rules are so hard (excuse us we haven't bothered to read or learn them even though they govern our sport), wah, wah.

 

Having said that, someone at the USGA looking about as dumb as Ted Bishop taking after Poulter a few years ago.

 

Even the USGA apparently has to learn that when you are mostly on the right side of the issue (at least with these two) it is still a good idea to stick to the high ground.

 

Sorry Hawk but I'm still laughing at Rickie threatening to crap that ball back in play.

 

 

This is what I don't get. There is absolutely nothing funny about this. It's as classless and disrespectful as it gets.

 

And surely not a one of us on here would have thought it was funny if our son had done this playing in a junior tournament. I know I would have yanked my son's a** off the course if he had done this and my dad would have done the same to me.

 

I'm not saying I'm "right" or "correct" to think it was funny. I agree it was disrespectful but I thought it was funny at the same time. Maybe similar to a politically incorrect joke.... Idk.