Patrick Reed's lawyer tried to silence Brandel Chamblee (NO POLITICS)

[Jagpilotohio]

Just daydreaming.....

 

id love to see see this settled in the octagon. Anyone remember celebrity death match??

 

“Lets’s get it on!!”

[RP40]

“Everyone involved agrees that Mr. Reed acted unintentionally, and the tape of the incident fully supports that conclusion.”

 

This is the part I find so comical us that: 1) everyone doesn't agree, 2) Reed did in fact act intentionally, 3) tape of the incident fully supports the previous statement.

[Man_O_War]

i bet OJ started with moving sand in the bunker...

[kmbean]

If the sand does move you must conclude.

[bladehunter]

Curious subject to me. So don’t take this as an attack ( it isn’t) but I must ask. What constitutes “ severe abuse “ in your eyes ? Are we talking physical , mental or neglect ? Or all or ?

I ask as person who’s basically done the same. If I ran across them in target I’d speak cordially , but I live 10 minutes away from my biological dad and haven’t spoke to him in 4-5 years. He texts sometimes. But I just don’t want to be included in his ways. So I abstain. It’s a constant merry go round of him enabling my dope head brother , and then poor mouthing everytime he gets in trouble as if I’m supposed to pay for his actions. Did the controlling guilt trip cycle for 35 years. And finally decided I didn’t have to. So I stopped. Best decision I ever made for my own happiness . Besides. I was raised by my grandparents who are gone now. I mourned my parents when they died.

 

Point is you dont know that entire story. And the fact that neither side has spilled those beans means there is one. Likely a very cringe worthy one at least.

[bladehunter]

I said traits. I never said a diagnosis.

 

you don’t think tiger exhibited same in his youth ? Please. He just has a better PR firm and was willing to kiss the public’s arse if need be. Which is also a trait. And I’m a huge tiger fan.

 

Phil ? Lol. He loves him some Phil.

its a myth that you can’t have empathy for others and be on that spectrum. Plenty have the ability to turn it on or off or have selective empathy ( women and children ) etc. but make no mistake. When it’s time for war they will crush skulls without worry of who’s they are. You cannot be meek and worry about your brother competitor and be great. Can’t be done. Jack maybe the best attempt ever. But Barbara deserves a lot of that credit I’d say. She balanced that PH perfectly.

[Long Shot]

I agree with your points here. My theory is all conjecture and speculation anyway, based on what has been heard, no personal insight.

[jholz]

For those of you arguing the "fact vs. opinion" angle, I think you are getting your "facts" and "opinions" confused.

 

It is utterly incorrect to say that Chamblee's is somehow distorting "facts" by calling Patrick Reed's actions in the bunker at the Hero World Challenge "cheating." That idea is being supported by an equally incorrect idea, namely (and to paraphrase): "Reed didn't cheat because the PGA Tour determined he didn't cheat." When you say something like that, all you are really saying is that you privilege the PGA Tour's opinion over Chamblee's

 

And that's because the PGA Tour's determination is, itself, an opinion, not a "fact." Because it is an opinion, it is open to the kind of questioning and criticism that Chamblee offered. Just because an organizing body says it's true, it don't make it true.

 

While I agree that contemporary journalism thrives on blurring the line between "fact" and "opinion," I would also argue that news has been and always will be a mixture of the two. Every event in life is. Back when journalists cared more about these kinds of things, they used to say and write a lot less - because they were being careful - and the news was really, really boring.

 

[bladehunter]

I long for the days of “ boring “ news.

 

And yes. I get what you’re saying. But where the line for fact ? Is it closer to the ruling bodies “ opinion “ or Brandels ? If the latter then why don’t we appoint him the USga rules czar and let him fix everything ?

[RP40]

But he's a commentator, his job is to give his opinion. ... It goes without saying.

And you keep mentioning how far apart they are, and they're not.

 

Let me put a different spin on rulings in recent years to maybe help clean up the difference. ... A few years ago Dustin Johnson got caught at a major, and later penalized, for grounding his club in what he "thought" was a waste area - confused by the fact that spectators had walked in the area and there were visible footprints, along with the fact that the course had other similar waste areas. Rules officials later penalized him due to the fact that said area had been deemed instead an actual sand trap. He admitted he didn't know (again, because the course did have other waste areas), he was penalized, end of story. ... Whereas what Reed did, and he'd been called out for the exact same violation in 2015 at the exact same event, is that he placed his club behind the ball (which would not be a rules violation) and then proceeded to swing back during a practice swing removing sand from behind his ball, not once but twice, thereby improving his lie and ability to make clean contact with his ball - WHICH IS a rules violation regardless if it's a waste area, the rough, or anywhere else on the course. There was no confusion here, it IS the rule, it's always been the rule, and to suggest a golf professional did not know it was a rule - or to suggest he didn't know it was the rule, and/or didn't know he was doing what he did is preposterous.

And frankly, he could have cleared this all up, and it would have gone away by now, if he'd just manned up and admitted he screwed up. But no, he refused to take responsibility for what he clearly did at the time (blaming it on camera angle), and is now doubling-down by sicking his lawyer on Chamblee and TGC. ... And now, it's like the same kind of repeating of behavior and claiming ignorance that's followed him throughout his golfing life, going back to his time at Georgia when he got caught by teammates cheating on his scorecard, and stealing a putter (and cash, and a watch?) out of the lockerroom, only to deny it after they mysteriously showed up in his own golfbag days later.

 

[jholz]

Yes, I long for boring news too.

 

When you really start parsing out "fact" and "opinion" you start to find that "facts" are very hard to come by.

 

In the Patrick Reed situation, the only "fact" is that Reed moved some sand in the bunker with his club during his practice swings. That's pretty much it.

 

I think Reed should have been more harshly sanctioned - a DQ at the very least - but not because I hold the opinion that he cheated. I know that I am never going to know what was going on in Reed's mind at the moment. We have to realize that even the appearance of cheating is damaging.

 

By doing what he did, Reed put the PGA Tour and all of his fellow players into a very difficult situation and has undermined the integrity of the game. The action displays a lack of respect and care for others that I don't think should be tolerated. On the course, making millions of dollars, it is incumbent upon all of these players to act in a manner that is beyond reproach. I don't think that is too much to expect.

[MtlJeff]

Why can't Brandel just say "my opinion is he was attempting to cheat @ the Hero"

Honestly that's the only distinction I'd want

I just dont agree on principle with journalists of any kind purporting something as fact that cant be proven, theres too much of that. Just say it's your opinion, it's not hard to just do that. Many good journalists do that. Especially on an accusation that is as serious as cheating

[Shilgy]

This could almost make me a Phil phan!

[bscinstnct]

Seems in this case, could be wrong, is that the reason that Reed was not determined to have cheated by the official is because...

 

He said he didn't. Here is what he said,

 

"Reed tried to explain that his ball was sitting in a “pretty good footprint” and on both occasions his clubface was about 4 inches away from the ball when he pulled it back and brushed away “a little sand.” But he added that the only camera angle came from behind the ball, and from his perspective, he was not improving his lie.

“I was far enough away from the golf ball because when I take my practice swings anyways, I don't ever put the club directly behind the ball because I'm always scared of the ball moving,” Reed said. “I'm always going to give myself some room, especially on practice swings. After seeing that camera angle, because it brushed the sand, it's a penalty. … It is a big part, intent, but at the same time, when you only have one camera angle, that's all you can go off of.”"

 

But we see this vid and....to many, that don't look like 4 inches away from the ball. So, where do the facts lie? If you see something and a "ruling body" says you didn't see it, are you convinced you did not? ; )

 

 

 

 

[jholz]

Oh, I agree with you. Journalism is in a bad place these days and I wish they were doing a better job as well.

[RP40]

"While I agree that contemporary journalism thrives on blurring the line between "fact" and "opinion," I would also argue that news has been and always will be a mixture of the two. Every event in life is. Back when journalists cared more about these kinds of things, they used to say and write a lot less - because they were being careful - and the news was really, really boring."

 

What much of this conversation rings back for me is my days as a journalist, and the public's general confusion between what was printed on the editorial page (or in sports columns) and what was on the rest of the pages in the newspaper or magazine. ... And later as an editor, I was repeatedly receivied phone calls (and lengthy letters) from readers that were pissed off about an opinion, in an opinion piece or column or editorial on the editorial page of the paper - oftentimes yelling, "that's not a fact," to which I'd respond, "perhaps, but it is the writer's opinion," to which they'd often respond in a much louder voice, "that's not journalism, if it's not a fact it shouldn't be in the paper," to which I'd say, "that's not true, the rules of journalism allow for writers' opinions in columns and such on the editorial page," and depending on my patience and if I was busy or not, this would go on, back and forth, until I tired and would just respond, "I'm sorry you feel that way," before finally hanging up.

Now, has journalism changed and are lines blurred at times in recent years? Sure, but end of the day Chamblee is a commentator, he's paid for his opinions (like a columnist) and isn't bound by the same rules if sticking to the facts as a reporter. Luv him or hate him, if he stuck to the facts he'd be deemed boring and wouldn't have a job for long.

 

[QuigleyDU]

Very un-captain america of him..

[bscinstnct]

I think I recall like half the signers of the Dec of Independence were lawyers so....; )

[jholz]

My brother is a former journalist too - so many of them around these days. Such a pity. And yes, the news has always been the news. It's the presentation that has changed over time (at least in the modern era). If we went back to the late 1800's, American journalism resembled what we have today in a lot of ways.

 

From my perspective, the two biggest changes in the recent past have been the dramatic increase in the volume of "news" programming and publication. There simply isn't enough "news" to fill all of those outlets, so opinion is taking a larger share. Secondly, I think the care with which journalism used to separate "news" from "commentary" or "opinion" has dramatically decreased.

 

And you are right, this is being driven by market forces. Someone like Chamblee wouldn't have a job for very long if he just stuck to facts. We get the "news" that we deserve unfortunately.

 

And finally, my comment about the "news being boring in the old days" was totally in jest. I would take boring any day of the week.

[Destroyer]

He reminds me of Antonio Brown

[bladehunter]

First off I appreciate your level headed conversation. It makes your points twice as strong in my opinion.

 

I 99 % agree right up to the sanctions and DQ part.

 

May I ask if you’re considering the rules and situation in your opinion on that punishment ? As in he was not in an actual bunker. He was allowed to ground his club anywhere including directly behind the ball. He is also allowed to move sand in his backswing or forward swing while practicing in that sandy area. Anywhere except directly addressing the ball. Only because that improves the lie. And another side note You can ground your club at the ball and remove a cubic yard of sand coming back as long as it’s during the actual swing . Thus achieving the same thing he did .

Now before anyone blows a gasket. I agree that he was too close and likely did improve his lie. But .... can we for sure say how close ? As in if that’s a footprint as reported and not a balls crater from landing , then it could be 12 or more inches long. If he’s moving sand from the back lip of the footprint he’s a foot away. All ifs yes. But we don’t have another camera angle. So we don’t know.

What I’m driving at is that he could very well have broken the rule , and not known that he was afoul of the rules. It’s not at al the same as being in a bunker. If he’s in a bunker and does that I’d agree 100 % that he knows he’s breaking a rule. But it’s not a hazard at all. What he’s done is very much akin to moving a couple pine needles with a practice swing. Just that the rules denote “ sand” as soil not a loose impediment legal to move. If the sand is slightly bigger he can literally legally pick it out by hand.

if you take all that into account , I’m not sure how anyone can fee like an automatic DQ is warranted.

 

And i also feel like most folks are judging the situation based on ignorance of the rules and thinking that he’s in a bunker. That is what makes it look like a gross miscarriage of justice. When the reality is , if he does he identical thing 6 inches farther back he’s perfectly legal and not even a rules infraction much less a cheating allegation.

[MtlJeff]

I think it's all the competition and the need to generate "clicks " to be successful.

Chasing clicks/views in a crowded field of media, means you have to lean towards more controversial or inflammatory comments , or use a lot of hyperbole in describing things. This is true in all fields not just sports. You need that hook to make someone click on the link or view the short video . Rational takes rarely do that . Most people dont want to click on a link to see "well we dont know what's going on in Patrick Reeds head" ....they want to hear "THIS MAN IS A CHEATER!!!!"

i am not a fan of this as I've said.

I miss the days a bit pre internet, where there was less competition, so reporters would just report what happened without as much hyperbolic narrative

 

 

 

[bladehunter]

Wrong.

 

Dj was in a bunker. Not waste area. The infinitely wise officials at whistling straights just thought it would be cute to let fans camp in the actual sand traps. That was the cause of confusion. No sane person would think that fans would to walk and stand in hazards in the course during a shot. He couldn’t even see the outline of that bunker as he hit. Watch the video. A real miscarriage of common sense.

 

Care to link us to the proof that they found a stolen putter watch and cash in PRs golf bag ?

 

The UGA coach signed a sworn affidavit that states he had no knowledge of a theft allegation before Patrick left the team.

[Hawkeye77]

I think it would be better but having said that Geraldo always made a point of saying “in my Constitutionally protected opinion” and even back then I thought it was superfluous because it was a given because of the nature of the show it was his opinion.

Even stuff on Firing Line way back when was all opinion, it was the nature of the show just like Brandel is not on there as a reporter of some kind.

 

So maybe I’m not sure it would be better, he’d have to introduce every sentence that way during some segments?

 

This Reed stuff does get interesting even if it’s sometimes still some of the same old stuff (why are we even talking about his family?). I know you aren’t.

[RP40]

"Wrong.Dj was in a bunker. Not waste area."

That's what I said. #readingisfundamental

"Care to link us to the proof that they found a stolen putter watch and cash in PRs golf bag ?

Look it up yourself.

[jholz]

You've got a definite point. Those "bunkers" (more properly waste areas?) are a problem in and of themselves IMHO. I remember watching the footage and wondering what the hell was going on. Why have players hitting from sand that has been walked through by who knows how many people? There were footprints all over the place.

To me, it's a design feature that invites problems with the rules and player behavior - al la DJ at Whistling Straights. But, one might argue that traditional rough isn't any different - like with people patting down the grass behind the ball with a FW before switching to an iron to hit the shot. In any event, I don't like those waste area constructions. If it's got sand in it, just call it a bunker, treat it the same as any other bunker, and call it good. But that's just me.

As to Reed's behavior, I think he should have erred more on the side of caution. Looking at that lie, he should have reasonably seen a possibility of moving sand with a practice stroke. As such, he should have moved "well away" from the ball if he wanted to make a practice stroke. He should have very deliberately and obviously shown everyone watching "hey, I'm not cheating!" It's just like having to chip a ball clinging to a slope. I'm not getting my club head anywhere close to that thing until I actually hit the ball. I err on the side of caution.

If you want to motivate all of the players to begin behaving that way, then you make an example of those who are not. Level a few DQ's, and the players are going to get very cautious very quick.

[MtlJeff]

I just think if you're going to call someone a cheater you should probably do that , at least phrase it a different way

If you're going to say someone choked with a lead or something, I'm not a stickler...I mean no one is going to sue you over that .

 

[jholz]

Hear, hear. I completely agree. All of this is pretty much directly linked to the destabilization of the market by the internet. And it has always been motivated by the need to sell advertising.

[bladehunter]

I don’t disagree with that idea. But I think if youre going to set examples , be ready to do it to the golden children and accept the heat.

Dont wait for the black sheep to step out and hammer him . That’s the easy way out. A lot of them do same thing in the rough. There is plenty of opportunity to hammer a player to set an example. But show no favorites. Do it to Keegan or Webb or Bubba. And then own that decision and explain why. If they’d DQed Reed most would cheer. And learn nothing. They’d just say “ well I never liked him. No shock he’s also a cheat “ and go on about their own habits because “ I’m a good boy who loves him mom and never steps afoul of the rules “. Point being to set an example you have to apply it to all.

[bladehunter]

Lol. First off RIF is my line ! I’m a reading rainbow graduate I’ll have you to know. Lavar Burton came to my Pizza Hut book-it celebration ! ( sarcasm to those without a meter ).

 

yes I read you contradicting yourself. First a waste area. Then a sand trap as I recalll. That’s how things get confused. Call it what it actually is.

 

And no. I already know that information is false. No investigation found stolen items in his bag. You just made that up. Shane Ryan. Is that you ?