How could anyone be a fan of Patrick Reed?

[mister2cool]

2 minutes ago, illum1na71 said:

 If Reed is convinced that the ball was embedded, then he should have the balls to complete the lift, clean and place and take accountability.  What makes this so shady is that he brought in a rule official AFTER he picked up the ball and placed it.  Then Reed tells the official, "you tell me if it's plugged".. Of course the Rules Official is not going to say it's plugged. Reed moved the freaking ball!  By asking the official to "make the call" relieve Reed of any accountability.  But he's already "contaminated the crime scene".  What's the Rules Official to say?  Rules official should have said, "Patrick, you already picked it up.  You've already determined the ball is plugged.  Thanks."

 

Reed knew exactly what he's doing, he's a sociopath and he's completely fine with that.  He has incredible game.  But, he has no integrity.

Huh? Dude.. do you know what you are talking about? 

[Prut]

14 minutes ago, bigred90gt said:

After the Lexi Thompson debacle, the rules for video footage were changed. This is copied from a foxsports.com article explaining them:

 

"(1) the “naked eye” standard (if video shows the existence of a breach of the Rules based on facts the player was not aware of at the time and that could not reasonably have been seen with the naked eye, there will be no penalty), and (2) the “reasonable judgment” standard (if a player does all that can reasonably be expected in making a determination about a spot, area, point, line, distance or other location in applying the Rules, the player’s reasonable judgment will be upheld even if later shown to be wrong by video evidence or other information.)"

 

and (and the underlined bit is important here)

 

"The Decision does not eliminate the overall use of video review or the practice of fans “calling in” ... but it will be effective in addressing situations where television brings to light evidence that could not have otherwise been known to the player (or anyone else nearby). Such evidence should not be used to hold players to a higher standard than human beings can reasonably be expected to meet."

 

 

Does it say anything about sticking your hand down in the rough to try to create a depression?

[bigred90gt]

Just now, Prut said:

Does it say anything about sticking your hand down in the rough to try to create a depression?

That has nothing to do with the question asked or the answer given. Try and bait someone else dude.

[One Putter]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

I don’t know.  I just literally had to put a stop to “ teammates “ and some pretty bad bullying tactics on my kids school  basketball team.  Teammates connotation doesn’t hold much water in my option.  

You criticize others for assuming things yet here you are doing the same. Guess it's only a negative if someone disagrees with you. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[PJE]

Reed pulled that ball out very quickly and the glimpse I could see when it was initially pulled out was that it was clean.  His haste and the appearance of the ball, coupled with the bounce into the rough, lends weight to the assumption that the ball was not embedded. The rules official could not conclusively determine if  the ball was embedded because he did not have the opportunity to examine the lie with the ball intact.  Reed intentionally prevented such an examination from occurring. 

It cannot be substantiated that Reed cheated but there are no facts which exonerate him from that most grievous offense. 

Who moves a ball and then calls for ruling?  A golfer who is unfamiliar with procedures, or a golfer who inexplicably but innocently takes an imprudent action, or a liar and a cheater. My feeling with Reed that it is the latter. 

 

[SwooshLT]

17 minutes ago, jkumpire said:

There were fans of Ty Cobb, Bill Laimbeer, Conrad Dobler, Sean Avery, Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe Jackson, and many, many other pro athletes who skirted the rules or were vicious players in their sport. There are fans of Vijay Singh too, even with all his troubles.

 

Personally, the person whose behavior people should worry about first are themselves, their family, and to a lessor extent the 'public servants' elected to represent us at all levels of government. Sports stars are fairly low down the list.

What did Pete rose do as a player?

[dropkicked]

No rules were violated by either Rors or Reeed.

Those who are searching for a deeper more nefarious explanation only have to look inwards as to why their lens is jaded.

 

Put your emotions aside and let the rules apply.

[Sean2]

58 minutes ago, jah7838 said:

We don't know the whole story with what's gone on with his family.  There are a lot of people who have strained relationships with their parents and don't talk to them.  I don't think that should be something that should be help against Reed here.  He has his side of the story, which I don't think he comments much on, unless I've missed something over the past few years, and they have their side.  There's a chance that both Reed and his parents are at fault for the relationship they have now.

 

His history at Georgia and his other past transgressions are fair game in terms of criticism.  

 

I just like watching the guy play golf, especially his short game.  Part of me also enjoys seeing people get angry on social media about him winning.  He has a way of ignoring all of it and still manages to win the tournament.  There are some athletes that I don't care for, but I'm not going to lose sleep over them doing well or winning.  I'm also not going to post negative comments about them on social media either.

There is so much we don't know, but that doesn't stop some people from making pejorative statements about PR, as long as those statements conform to their world view. 

 

I can't say anything about his lifestyle, his relationships with his parents, etc., because I simply don't know. Just because you read something on the Internet doesn't make it true, lol. 

[Ferguson]

1 minute ago, dropkicked said:

No rules were violated by either Rors or Reeed.

Those who are searching for a deeper more nefarious explanation only have to look inwards as to why their lens is jaded.

 

Put your emotions aside and let the rules apply.

 

Jaded?   

 

Wouldn't the lens be reflective? 

 

 

 

 

[stingerfade]

6 minutes ago, SwooshLT said:

What did Pete rose do as a player?

Had more hits than anyone in history 

[Sean2]

3 minutes ago, dropkicked said:

No rules were violated by either Rors or Reeed.

Those who are searching for a deeper more nefarious explanation only have to look inwards as to why their lens is jaded.

 

Put your emotions aside and let the rules apply.

Sometimes facts are irrelevant if they go against the stated narrative. 

[Creedo77]

this made me lol

 

Antifaldo on twitter

We’ve seen him move sand (Albany), tamp down grass (Bethpage), and push a ball down into the mud (Torrey). That is to say, I’m very excited for Patrick Reed’s Moses Moment when he somehow parts the waters at #17 Sawgrass to get up and down for par while missing the green.

[Sean2]

Current Golf Channel headline on their website:

 

'Kind of pisses us off': Players react to Patrick Reed's controversial win

 

Reading that, one would think that the vast majority of players agree with this sentiment, when that isn't the case at all...it's only a couple of players. Irresponsible of GC. 

[RSinSG]

The only time I watch the Golf Channel is to watch a tournament. While flipping through the channels just now I looked at TGC just to confirm what I suspected was on. They didn’t disappoint with 5 talking heads all giving their opinions on the Reed story. I doubt this will drop from page one for awhile which says a lot about the state of golf commentators. 

[Potatohead]

Imagine if Seve played with HD cameras everywhere, covering pretty much every hole instead of just the final nines on the weekend?

Edited February 1, 2021 by Potatohead

[Ferguson]

3 minutes ago, Potatohead said:

Imagine if Seve played with HD cameras everywhere, covering pretty much every hole instead of just the final nines on the weekend?

 

 

They wouldn't have made the GC documentary I assure you. 

[jadedennill]

41 minutes ago, Stanks said:

It’s Mr. Captain America to all of you! And you’ll all be calling him that at Ryder Cup. 
I don’t understand the saltiness. You wanna blame it on Reed but he did it by the book. Then you wanna blame the Tour but the rules are in place and he abides by them. If you wanna blame someone, blame the volunteer or blame the weather for making the grass soft and wet enough where the lawns crew couldn’t mow.

I’m happy he won. The guy has a ton of inner game to deal with garbage tour players talking about him, his family being dinks and the golf fan

base crying because they wouldn’t have played the ball like that. It pays to know the rules. P Reed know that. He just won $$$ because of it.

You honestly believe that every tour player, the fans, his family, and his college teammates are all mistaken and he’s just misunderstood!? Only one common denominator there creating these toxic situations and relationships. 
We’ve also seen him blatantly cheat on TV then flat out lie about it.

In this instance, we also saw him blatantly cheat. No we couldn’t see his lie, but we know that a ball cannot break the ground after a 2’ bounce back into the rough. It’s why he did it before anyone else could see it. The ball wasn’t embedded PERIOD

He does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. 

[Olddoncarlo]

53 minutes ago, bigred90gt said:

After the Lexi Thompson debacle, the rules for video footage were changed. This is copied from a foxsports.com article explaining them:

 

"(1) the “naked eye” standard (if video shows the existence of a breach of the Rules based on facts the player was not aware of at the time and that could not reasonably have been seen with the naked eye, there will be no penalty), and (2) the “reasonable judgment” standard (if a player does all that can reasonably be expected in making a determination about a spot, area, point, line, distance or other location in applying the Rules, the player’s reasonable judgment will be upheld even if later shown to be wrong by video evidence or other information.)"

 

and (and the underlined bit is important here)

 

"The Decision does not eliminate the overall use of video review or the practice of fans “calling in” ... but it will be effective in addressing situations where television brings to light evidence that could not have otherwise been known to the player (or anyone else nearby). Such evidence should not be used to hold players to a higher standard than human beings can reasonably be expected to meet."

 

 

Agree....the evidence was not known to the player. Reed gets a pass on that - he couldn't be expected to see whether or not the ball bounced from 160 or whatever yards away.

But no pass whatsoever on taking the word of a marshal and lifting the ball before an official could get there.

 

And, to be perfectly honest, a little surprised and disappointed in the number of people here giving him a pass.

[Holy Moses]

26 minutes ago, SwooshLT said:

What did Pete rose do as a player?

Used greenies

[ProStryker]

2 hours ago, KRAMER1997 said:

Does Reed have golfwrx account

I’m sure that Justine has multiple Golfwrx accounts.  All the people on here defending Reed are really Justines burners.

[Potatohead]

1 minute ago, jadedennill said:

You honestly believe that every tour player, the fans, his family, and his college teammates are all mistaken and he’s just misunderstood!? Only one common denominator there creating these toxic situations and relationships. 
We’ve also seen him blatantly cheat on TV then flat out lie about it.

In this instance, we also saw him blatantly cheat. No we couldn’t see his lie, but we know that a ball cannot break the ground after a 2’ bounce back into the rough. It’s why he did it before anyone else could see it. The ball wasn’t embedded PERIOD

He does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. 

 

A) you don't know the ball wasn't embedded

B) Did Rory (and likely three dozen other guys not on camera) also cheat?

 

[bigred90gt]

1 minute ago, Olddoncarlo said:

Agree....the evidence was not known to the player. Reed gets a pass on that - he couldn't be expected to see whether or not the ball bounced from 160 or whatever yards away.

But no pass whatsoever on taking the word of a marshal and lifting the ball before an official could get there.

 

And, to be perfectly honest, a little surprised and disappointed in the number of people here giving him a pass.

There is literally nothing to "give him a pass" for. What he did was within the rules. You "give a pass" to someone who has done something that is contrary to the rules. when you are within the rules, there are no passes to give. Is it really that hard for some people to understand?

 

He lifted the ball before he called the official, so I'm kind of confused by the statement of "lifting the ball before an official could get there". If he had not lifted the ball, there would have been no reason to call the official. It HAD to happen first.

Edited February 1, 2021 by bigred90gt

[dropkicked]

1 minute ago, Olddoncarlo said:

Agree....the evidence was not known to the player. Reed gets a pass on that - he couldn't be expected to see whether or not the ball bounced from 160 or whatever yards away.

But no pass whatsoever on taking the word of a marshal and lifting the ball before an official could get there.

 

And, to be perfectly honest, a little surprised and disappointed in the number of people here giving him a pass.

Technically the rules of golf, validated both Reed and Rors.

[jadedennill]

14 minutes ago, Sean2 said:

Current Golf Channel headline on their website:

 

'Kind of pisses us off': Players react to Patrick Reed's controversial win

 

Reading that, one would think that the vast majority of players agree with this sentiment, when that isn't the case at all...it's only a couple of players. Irresponsible of GC. 

If they weren’t muzzled by the tour in regards to what they can say about another member, they’d hear almost all of the players say what a POS he is. Everyone can read between the lines here, and if you have ever talked to any of them candidly about him you’ll hear the actual truth. The only person who likes him is his wife and her brother and that’s because they make money off of him. 
Unfortunately golf is stuck with him cause he’s so damn good!

[ProStryker]

16 minutes ago, Sean2 said:

Current Golf Channel headline on their website:

 

'Kind of pisses us off': Players react to Patrick Reed's controversial win

 

Reading that, one would think that the vast majority of players agree with this sentiment, when that isn't the case at all...it's only a couple of players. Irresponsible of GC. 

I was honestly curious about this when I read it. Was he saying that being put in the position of having to answer questions about it pisses them off, or did Patrick Reeds actions piss them off?  A huge difference 

[dropkicked]

What I personally find odd, is how many bring up his family situation.. Family, should be off limits. Period.

[ReidThompson]

Just now, dropkicked said:

Technically the rules of golf, validated both Reed and Rors.

I think he knew his lied sucked, marked it, pressed down the dirt while "checking" to if there was a plug mark and did swiftly with a new rules guys that didnt ask for film.  Did he ever mark before lifting ball? Its a plausible scenario because we all know he is a cheater (Bahamas, announcers saying lies magically got way better, etc. 

[jadedennill]

2 minutes ago, Potatohead said:

 

A) you don't know the ball wasn't embedded

B) Did Rory (and likely three dozen other guys not on camera) also cheat?

 

A) Of course you know the ball wasn’t embedded! You wouldn’t even need to have ever played golf to know a ball can’t plug from 2’ in the air! Come on buddy! 
B) Rory’s situation is not in question here. He hasn’t blatantly cheated multiple times and lied about it. If Rory says it was plugged, it was plugged. If Reed says his was plugged, he’s lying and cheating! Haha

[jadedennill]

2 minutes ago, dropkicked said:

What I personally find odd, is how many bring up his family situation.. Family, should be off limits. Period.

It’s a character reference. The guy conducts himself the same way off the course as he does on it. Like a POS

[ProStryker]

2 minutes ago, dropkicked said:

What I personally find odd, is how many bring up his family situation.. Family, should be off limits. Period.

I agree about his parents being off limits.  But not his neurotic controlling wife that’s in the middle of all this with her burner Twitter accounts.