How could anyone be a fan of Patrick Reed?

[Shilgy]

7 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

The chance of the ball embedding in someone else’s pitch mark after a bounce in the rough is essentially impossible. The chance that Reed didn’t like his lie and picked his ball up before anyone else could see it is a million times more likely. 

So you’re saying there’s a chance?  Maybe a slight depression caused by an old divot made him think it was embedded.  Whatever.  This whole thing is a witch  hunt imo.  
  Im done with the conversation until someone can find proof one way or another. Should take another 20 pages of drivel before it ends. I’ll do the right thing and just not click on it again.

[Holy Moses]

3 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

I agree, did you read my post. What was unclear.?

 

I DO NOT THINK IT WAS ALTERED.

Not disagreeing with you. Just laying out the scenario.

[Holy Moses]

Just now, Shilgy said:

So you’re saying there’s a chance?  Maybe a slight depression caused by an old divot made him think it was embedded.  Whatever.  This whole thing is a witch  hunt imo.  
  Im done with the conversation until someone can find proof one way or another. Should take another 20 pages of drivel before it ends. I’ll do the right thing and just not click on it again.

Reed is a witch. He always has some excuse. Again, he knows if he gets caught he can play it up because it’s him against the world. He wants the bad publicity because he thrives on it and he has to be laughing at his defenders who are clueless. 

[Holy Moses]

2 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

So you’re saying there’s a chance?  Maybe a slight depression caused by an old divot made him think it was embedded.  Whatever.  This whole thing is a witch  hunt imo.  
  Im done with the conversation until someone can find proof one way or another. Should take another 20 pages of drivel before it ends. I’ll do the right thing and just not click on it again.

We have proof he’s a cheater. But it was edited witch hunt video or something. 

[miamistomp]

7 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

So you’re saying there’s a chance?  Maybe a slight depression caused by an old divot made him think it was embedded.  Whatever.  This whole thing is a witch  hunt imo.  
  Im done with the conversation until someone can find proof one way or another. Should take another 20 pages of drivel before it ends. I’ll do the right thing and just not click on it again.

 Dude, the other guy just hates on Capt America

 Reed has hands of gold around the greens- a pleasure to watch and he doesn't appear to be a drunk or a druggie

[Holy Moses]

4 minutes ago, miamistomp said:

 Dude, the other guy just hates on Capt America

 Reed has hands of gold around the greens- a pleasure to watch and he doesn't appear to be a drunk or a druggie

Great family life too

[bscinstnct]

7 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

We have proof he’s a cheater. But it was edited witch hunt video or something. 

 

Have you ever lied?

 

Of course. We all lie on a daily basis. If we didn’t, people would know we think they are total idiots 🤣

 

But it doesn’t make you a “liar”

 

Now, my take is…PR has flaws. He may have broken a rule. I mean, that sand thing, that was bad. 
 

But, I disagree with this wholesale “branding” angle. He’s legit. He won the masters and is a top player without cheating. But I think he better keep his nose clean for sure. He screws up again like that and nobody will be able to back him up anymore.

 

I mean, unless he wins like 2 majors a years for a while and destroys the tour. . Then he can get away with couple oscillations and bad drops ; )

[bladehunter]

16 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

Reed is a witch. He always has some excuse. Again, he knows if he gets caught he can play it up because it’s him against the world. He wants the bad publicity because he thrives on it and he has to be laughing at his defenders who are clueless. 

Whats laughable are the Twitter stalkers who have nothing better to do.  One day they claim that Patrick is controlled by his in laws/wife.  Now they’re saying that he’s responsible for the narrative being put out , sorta like  a godfather figure.  He’s running the woodlands Texas I guess.  😂….. the Reed crime family.    
 

trouble is it can’t be both.  
 

Im sorry guy. I enjoy your posts mostly. But good grief. At some point hate is a shade that doesn’t look good on anybody.  
 

I’ve been guilty of this too. Which is why I can spot it. It’s a bit creepy at this point.  

[miamistomp]

[Holy Moses]

6 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Have you ever lied?

 

Of course. We all lie on a daily basis. If we didn’t, people would know we think they are total idiots 🤣

 

But it doesn’t make you a “liar”

 

Now, my take is…PR has flaws. He may have broken a rule. I mean, that sand thing, that was bad. 
 

But, I disagree with this wholesale “branding” angle. He’s legit. He won the masters and is a top player without cheating. But I think he better keep his nose clean for sure. He screws up again like that and nobody will be able to back him up anymore.

 

I mean, unless he wins like 2 majors a years for a while and destroys the tour. . Then he can get away with couple oscillations and bad drops ; )

He is a top player, no doubt. Great short game, great putter. I enjoy watching him. I’ve cheated yes. Don’t know what that has to do with the numerous times Reed has cheated. 

[Holy Moses]

6 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Whats laughable are the Twitter stalkers who have nothing better to do.  One day they claim that Patrick is controlled by his in laws/wife.  Now they’re saying that he’s responsible for the narrative being put out , sorta like  a godfather figure.  He’s running the woodlands Texas I guess.  😂….. the Reed crime family.    
 

trouble is it can’t be both.  
 

Im sorry guy. I enjoy your posts mostly. But good grief. At some point hate is a shade that doesn’t look good on anybody.  
 

I’ve been guilty of this too. Which is why I can spot it. It’s a bit creepy at this point.  

The only reason I’ve dragged it out this long is for some reason people don’t want to admit what is quite plain to see. Not sure if it’s a pride thing or they want to root for the guy who plays me against the world golf. All that’s fine. Just say you like the guy despite the fact that him and his family are pathological liars. I don’t use that word lightly. But the video editing twitter post is evidence enough that this is pathology. 

[CCTxGolf]

All I known is this thread has made the choice pretty easy between who I would want to hang with more, HM or Patrick Reed. 😂 Reed seems way more laid back

Edited November 2, 2021 by CCTxGolf

[tacklingdummy]

On 11/1/2021 at 10:47 AM, Holy Moses said:

It wasn’t embedded though. Balls don’t bounce and embed after the first bounce in the rough. 

 

The key to that was that he never saw the ball nor got any information of the video of the ball bouncing. The marshal that saw the ball land said that the ball did not bounce when he asked her. The entire interaction was on video. 

 

19 hours ago, Holy Moses said:

It’s easy to screw up when you shovel sand behind your crappy lie in a bunker in order to get it out more easily

 

Obviously, he committed a big infraction, but is totally strange that he would blatantly break the rules when a cameraman was right there.

 

He is not some amateur playing the local muni practicing on the course. 😜😂

Edited November 2, 2021 by tacklingdummy

[Holy Moses]

11 minutes ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

The key to that was that he never saw the ball nor got any information of the video of the ball bouncing. The marshal that saw the ball land said that the ball did not bounce when he asked her. The entire interaction was on video. 

 

 

Obviously, he committed a big infraction, but is totally strange to be that he would blatantly break the rules when a cameraman was right there.

 

He is not some amateur playing the local muni practicing on the course. 😜😂

As I said, he just doesn't care. If he gets caught, oh well. He'll use it as ammunition. He's done it brilliantly throughout his career. Brooks does the same thing too. Find something where someone has slighted you and use that as a jumping off point. Michael Jordan and a lot of the greats do this. The only thing that is different is that Patrick is using his own cheating moments as a rallying cry. 

[bscinstnct]

Oh, food break pics from tonight for @Shilgy
 

This is like Colombian home style. Is rotisserie with those bananas, rice with an egg, and beans. And a chorizo link on the side! And this a closeup of this hunk of fried bacon to round off the fatty goodness. 

 

And this a wood burning pizza joint we went to get espresso and ice cream cause Colombian place espresso machine was supposedly busted  lol. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by bscinstnct

[Holy Moses]

38 minutes ago, CCTxGolf said:

All I known is this thread has made the choice pretty easy between who I would want to hang with more, HM or Patrick Reed. 😂 Reed seems way more laid back

I'm sure Reed family gatherings are tons of fun. Just don't bring your sticks with you and if you do make sure your car doors are locked. 

 

 

[tacklingdummy]

43 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

As I said, he just doesn't care. If he gets caught, oh well. He'll use it as ammunition. He's done it brilliantly throughout his career. Brooks does the same thing too. Find something where someone has slighted you and use that as a jumping off point. Michael Jordan and a lot of the greats do this. The only thing that is different is that Patrick is using his own cheating moments as a rallying cry. 

 

But your first point of him cheating on the embedded ball incident was not cheating. The marshal said the ball did not bounce when she was asked by PR and the rules official (who did not get information on the video either) deemed it embedded. The rules official makes the final decision on what information is available at the time. Then one of the head rules officials summarized the entire situation as legal under the rules of golf. Here is the entire video. 

 

 

[Holy Moses]

9 minutes ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

But your first point of him cheating on the embedded ball incident was not cheating. The marshal said the ball did not bounce when she was asked by PR and the rules official (who did not get information on the video either) deemed it embedded. The rules official makes the final decision on what information is available at the time. Then one of the head rules officials summarized the entire situation as legal under the rules of golf. Here is the entire video. 

 

 

What he is told doesn’t really matter when it comes to the court of public opinion. We do know that it’s nearly impossible for a ball to bounce and end up embedded in the rough. Reed either lied and said his ball was embedded when it wasn’t or Patrick pushed the ball into the ground to make it embedded. The question isn’t what he was told or not by those who saw the ball land. The question is was his ball actually embedded. And I don’t think it was. 

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

The key to that was that he never saw the ball nor got any information of the video of the ball bouncing. The marshal that saw the ball land said that the ball did not bounce when he asked her. The entire interaction was on video. 

 

 

Obviously, he committed a big infraction, but is totally strange to be that he would blatantly break the rules when a cameraman was right there.

 

He is not some amateur playing the local muni practicing on the course. 😜😂

 

Ive said it at least twice in this thread

 

that is NOT what the marshal said.

 

she said ‘I didn’t SEE it bounce’ 

 

Reed then lied and told his partners it didn’t bounce. 

 

Everything else, embedded, old ball mark, etc etc.. doesn’t matter to me, it goes on all the time. Mcilroy did the same.. but he didn’t lie about what a bystander told him.

[bladehunter]

7 hours ago, Holy Moses said:

What he is told doesn’t really matter when it comes to the court of public opinion. We do know that it’s nearly impossible for a ball to bounce and end up embedded in the rough. Reed either lied and said his ball was embedded when it wasn’t or Patrick pushed the ball into the ground to make it embedded. The question isn’t what he was told or not by those who saw the ball land. The question is was his ball actually embedded. And I don’t think it was. 

 The court of public opinion ?  Good gosh  man. We’re talking the sheeple ? Group think tank ?    I’m 100 % for doing the opposite of whatever they say.  Sort of like a magic 8 ball. Let’s shake them up in a bag and see what they say.  Then do the opposite.  

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

Ive said it at least twice in this thread

 

that is NOT what the marshal said.

 

she said ‘I didn’t SEE it bounce’ 

 

Reed then lied and told his partners it didn’t bounce. 

 

Everything else, embedded, old ball mark, etc etc.. doesn’t matter to me, it goes on all the time. Mcilroy did the same.. but he didn’t lie about what a bystander told him.

This is maddening to me.  If I ask you a question about what you saw and you answer  anything other than “ I don’t know or I didn’t see the incident “ then I take your answer to mean that you did witness it.   So then I take that answer literally.  “ I didn’t see it bounce” to me says “ I was here. I was watching and I didn’t see a bounce “.   Ergo - it didn’t bounce. If it had I’d have seen it. 
 

you make the decision based on the info you have.  All he has for info was seeing the ball.  And the ladies response.  She should have said “ I never saw anything “.  Or “ my back was turned “ 
 

stretching this to Lying is a bit of a bridge too far  in itself.  It’s just trying to confirm one’s own bias.  

Edited November 2, 2021 by bladehunter

[bladehunter]

8 hours ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

The key to that was that he never saw the ball nor got any information of the video of the ball bouncing. The marshal that saw the ball land said that the ball did not bounce when he asked her. The entire interaction was on video. 

 

 

Obviously, he committed a big infraction, but is totally strange to be that he would blatantly break the rules when a cameraman was right there.

 

He is not some amateur playing the local muni practicing on the course. 😜😂

Yes. This is the conundrum.  
 

i agree. Absolutely an infraction.  Penalize him to the highest level of the rules.  DQ if needed. BUT-

 

how do we say it was on purpose ?  With a camera 6 feet away ???  That part doesn’t float.  I mean this isn’t even close to something that might not be noticed.  So show us motive …. Something. Maybe he thought it was a natural area and not a bunker ? And then was too proud to admit the bone head move ?    Otherwise it’s a brain fart of some sort that he deserves a penalty for.  

Edited November 2, 2021 by bladehunter

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

This is maddening to me.  If I ask you a question about what you saw and you answer  anything other than “ I don’t know or I didn’t see the incident “ then I take your answer to mean that you did witness it.   So then I take that answer literally.  “ I didn’t see it bounce” to me says “ I was here. I was watching and I didn’t see a bounce “.   Ergo - it didn’t bounce. If it had I’d have seen it. 
 

you make the decision based on the info you have.  All he has for info was seeing the ball.  And the ladies response.  She should have said “ I never saw anything “.  Or “ my back was turned “ 
 

stretching this to Lying is a bit of a bridge too far  in itself.  It’s just trying to confirm one’s own bias.  

 

you're leaving out the bit where he asked her did you SEE it bounce. Why not ask her 'did it bounce?'

 

You, I, and everyone else itt know perfectly well she wouldnt have even understood the relevance of the question, and she answered exactly how we all would have done. She didnt know it was going to be an 'incident'

 

He made it an incident when he told his partners a whopper. Then compounded it by moving it.

 

If there had been no audio of the marshal, he'd have stuck to his story and branded her a liar.  

[snagy2000]

44 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

you're leaving out the bit where he asked her did you SEE it bounce. Why not ask her 'did it bounce?'

 

You, I, and everyone else itt know perfectly well she wouldnt have even understood the relevance of the question, and she answered exactly how we all would have done. She didnt know it was going to be an 'incident'

 

He made it an incident when he told his partners a whopper. Then compounded it by moving it.

 

If there had been no audio of the marshal, he'd have stuck to his story and branded her a liar.  

SMH, these haters will twist anything and make wild assumptions to fuel their PReed cheater narrative. Enjoy your miserable Brandel lives! 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, milesgiles said:

 

you're leaving out the bit where he asked her did you SEE it bounce. Why not ask her 'did it bounce?'

 

You, I, and everyone else itt know perfectly well she wouldnt have even understood the relevance of the question, and she answered exactly how we all would have done. She didnt know it was going to be an 'incident'

 

He made it an incident when he told his partners a whopper. Then compounded it by moving it.

 

If there had been no audio of the marshal, he'd have stuck to his story and branded her a liar.  

Maybe this is a queens English disconnect? Seriously.  
 

id have asked the exact thing.  She can’t possibly know either if she didn’t see it.  That’s the most direct question.  She can’t know if it bounced if she didn’t see it.  

[milesgiles]

15 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Maybe this is a queens English disconnect? Seriously.  
 

id have asked the exact thing.  She can’t possibly know either if she didn’t see it.  That’s the most direct question.  She can’t know if it bounced if she didn’t see it.  

 

'I didnt see it bounce' is not the same thing as 'it didnt bounce' in any language. 

 

Ask yourself if that would have stood up in a court of law

[CCTxGolf]

2 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

'I didnt see it bounce' is not the same thing as 'it didnt bounce' in any language. 

 

Ask yourself if that would have stood up in a court of law

I think posing the same question in multiple ways is really over thinking it and grasping for something here.

 

this all happened in a matter of minutes.

 

they aren’t out there playing freaking word games.

[dropkicked]

4 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

'I didnt see it bounce' is not the same thing as 'it didnt bounce' in any language. 

 

Ask yourself if that would have stood up in a court of law

Common mate, it's a rules infraction not a murder trial... 😅

 

I'm just happy we aren't ripping on Rors..😅🖖🏼

 

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/rory-mcilroy-that-same-thing-happened-patrick-reed-happened-me/

 

[milesgiles]

18 minutes ago, dropkicked said:

Common mate, it's a rules infraction not a murder trial... 😅

 

I'm just happy we aren't ripping on Rors..😅🖖🏼

 

https://golf.com/instruction/rules/rory-mcilroy-that-same-thing-happened-patrick-reed-happened-me/

 

 

did Rory try and drop an innocent volunteer in it as well?

[milesgiles]

27 minutes ago, CCTxGolf said:

I think posing the same question in multiple ways is really over thinking it and grasping for something here.

 

this all happened in a matter of minutes.

 

they aren’t out there playing freaking word games.

as a wise man once said to me, you can only lose your reputation once