How could anyone be a fan of Patrick Reed?

[Hawkeye77]

4 hours ago, michigangolfer said:

My issue is this, if he wasn't at least skirting the rules, why did he ask the volunteer if it bounced WHILE he was walking up to the ball? He hadn't even inspected his lie closely when he asked the question. That shows intent in my mind.  

 

Same reasons it was discussed among his group when he hit it ---- conditions that day made it very likely if it didn't bounce it would be imbedded so you sure wouldn't want to just assume it bounced a couple times and walk up and look down into thick rough and assume it's sitting up and not check.  It's entirely possible if the volunteer had said she saw it bounce he would have just played the ball and not bothered to check.

 

Hardly anything sinister about asking someone literally right there vs. relying on observations a hundred or more yards away, that's really a stretch.

 

And since the rules don't require it and his FCs would have very likely said "okay mate" (and Reed or no Reed in those conditions and everyone believing it landed its original pitch mark they would have) he could have just proceeded to take a drop and move on and 100% legal.  But what did he do?  HE CALLED FOR AN OFFICIAL. You want to believe he's "creating" a depression in the ground knowing he's bringing in an official then you believe as a cool movie hillbilly once said, "Anna Nicole married for love."

 

Anyway, sorry about getting carried away with the ballistics guru, but it was prudent for a few good reasons to ask.  Good Lord, if he hadn't asked and then the videotape showed it bounced, and he was claiming to rely on the discussions from afar . . . . . come on folks, his actions from the minute he hit it to the time he got his ruling were fine.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[bigred90gt]

Just now, Potatohead said:

 

Before he even got to the ball he asked the marshall (who was pulling the flag back out of the ground) if the ball had bounced. She said no. 

And her response resulted in his letting the other people in the group know his intentions to lift the ball (which is beyond what he was required to do).

 

I just fail to see the problem with what he did, and I fail to see how people can come to the conclusion that he should have done, or was required to do, anything differently than he did.

[jacobanderson123]

17 minutes ago, Olddoncarlo said:

If he had any doubt as to whether or not the ball was embedded, he should have called for an official BEFORE he felt compelled to touch it. And I don't believe what he did was within the rules, no matter how much you care to pontificate to me about it.

How about the rules officials saying what he did was correct? He literally followed what is in the rule book, and even called over an official despite not having to. He did not have to have an official check, but he did anyways. Rory didn't have an official check what he did. Both of what they did was correct. You're closing yourself off from the truth because you dislike him, you don't have think it was in the rules, but it was within the rules, sorry you have different rules than the PGA, but they follow their rule book and not yours.

[ReidThompson]

7 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

 

Let's get this clear 

 

Faldo, Nobilo, Baker-Finch, Dottie - consummate pros

Kostis is a not a liar.

Reed is shady

 

right?

I would probably revise to this : 

 

Faldo, Nobilo, Baker-Finch, Dottie - consummate pros

Kostis is a not a liar.

Reed is filmed cheater who may have played Torrey by the book but we do not know his intent in this particular situation.  

[jacobanderson123]

Hate to break it to many of you, but the rule book applies the same to every golfer in the tournament, not just the ones you like.

[Olddoncarlo]

1 minute ago, jacobanderson123 said:

How about the rules officials saying what he did was correct? He literally followed what is in the rule book, and even called over an official despite not having to. He did not have to have an official check, but he did anyways. Rory didn't have an official check what he did. Both of what they did was correct. You're closing yourself off from the truth because you dislike him, you don't have think it was in the rules, but it was within the rules, sorry you have different rules than the PGA, but they follow their rule book and not yours.

So you're basically saying that all the uproar is misguided and that, even though the ball clearly popped 2' into the air, it was an embedded ball?

[ProStryker]

33 minutes ago, dlygrisse said:

Everyone DID NOT see his ball pop a foot in the air.  The tournament forecaddie told him it DID NOT

 This is a false statement.  The person said, “I did not SEE it bounce.”  They did not tell him that it did not bounce.

[ReidThompson]

5 minutes ago, jacobanderson123 said:

Hate to break it to many of you, but the rule book applies the same to every golfer in the tournament, not just the ones you like.

I am coming around to this point in regards to the Rory thing, but you have to have a microscope on Reed because he is a known cheater. 

[Potatohead]

6 minutes ago, ProStryker said:

 This is a false statement.  The person said, “I did not SEE it bounce.”  They did not tell him that it did not bounce.

 

She said "No, I didn't see it bounce." The way she said it was definitive, I would have taken it to mean it did not bounce either. I think most people who aren't lawyers would have. 

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Potatohead

[Hawkeye77]

2 minutes ago, ProStryker said:

 This is a false statement.  The person said, “I did not SEE it bounce.”  They did not tell him that it did not bounce.

Irrelevant. 
 

And if it did it may still have been embedded or ended up on any of a few hundred thousand indentations on the course that may have caused someone to question if it was embedded. 

[Golfrnut]

12 minutes ago, Olddoncarlo said:

So you're basically saying that all the uproar is misguided and that, even though the ball clearly popped 2' into the air, it was an embedded ball?

 

It could have very well have landed in a previous impression.  So could Rory's.  The info they had was that the ball wasn't seen bouncing and a ball that was apparently in an impression when it was found.  Two different balls, two different golfers, same outcome.  The only uproar is coming from those that have an axe to grind because of the individual that was involved, as far as the rules of golf go....there were zero infractions.  The fact that replays were available that the players did not have at the time STILL doesn't change any of that.

 

Edit:  'wasn't seen bouncing'

Edited February 1, 2021 by Golfrnut

[PoolPond]

I could not care less about Patrick but I did happen to catch his conversation with the official live as I was walking by my tv and one thing really struck me.  I wish I had the video but during their conversation, Patrick revealed exactly how he is as a human jack leg. The official, kind of strangely but overly politely, asked Patrick if he could feel the indent. Instead of Patrick simply saying "sure, yes, please etc." he makes a snarky reply along the lines of "well I don't know how else you'd determine." He just left off the "you effing idiot" part because the cameras were on him.  That right there sums up his character. Very simple and low key but says it all to me. 

[Golfrnut]

3 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

I could not care less about Patrick but I did happen to catch his conversation with the official live as I was walking by my tv and one thing really struck me.  I wish I had the video but during their conversation, Patrick revealed exactly how he is as a human jack leg. The official, kind of strangely but overly politely, asked Patrick if he could feel the indent. Instead of Patrick simply saying "sure, yes, please etc." he makes a snarky reply along the lines of "well I don't know how else you'd determine." He just left off the "you effing idiot" part because the cameras were on him.  That right there sums up his character. Very simple and low key but says it all to me. 

 

 

Yeah, no, you didn't listen that well.  He asked if he could stick his finger in there.  Reed replied, yeah, I don't know how else you would determine whether there was an indention or not.  It was in rough, obviously not easily visible.  If it says it all to you...it's only because you wanted it to.  The video is all over the place, you can hear the context of that conversation easily.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Golfrnut

[dlygrisse]

5 minutes ago, ProStryker said:

 This is a false statement.  The person said, “I did not SEE it bounce.”  They did not tell him that it did not bounce.

PR  "Did it bounce?"

Person:  "uh, no, i didn't see it bounce"

 

[jacobanderson123]

6 minutes ago, ReidThompson said:

I am coming around to this point in regards to the Rory thing, but you have to have a microscope on Reed because he is a known cheater. 

But this time he didn’t break any rules, so the point is moot.

[mizuno player]

First. Patrick's arrogance is mind boggling. He knows , whether he wants to admit it, his reputation is one that plays lose with the rules. So, why in the world would he put himself in a position to be so closely scrutinized? 

 

He might not have done anything wrong but perception says otherwise die to his past. 

 

Deep down he absolutely loves being the bad guy. The one everyone dislikes. Loves having these situations that everyone is talking about. If not? Nothing  makes sense as to why. 

 

 

 

[Potatohead]

Meanwhile a guy like Ernie Els everybody loves and the dude got a free drop he probably shouldn't have and then won the US Open. There are so many examples of this type of thing. The only reason this is even a story is because it's Reed. 

 

And he won by five shots. Not one. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Potatohead

[Ghost of Snead]

1 minute ago, Potatohead said:

Meanwhile a guy like Ernie Els everybody loves and the dude got a free drop he probably shouldn't have and then won the US Open. There are so many examples of this type of thing. The only reason this is even a story is because it's Reed. 

 

 

 

True but you reap what you sow ... 

 

https://golf.com/news/tournaments/a-brief-history-of-patrick-reeds-highs-and-controversial-lows/

Edited February 1, 2021 by Ghost of Snead

[ReidThompson]

1 minute ago, mizuno player said:

First. Patrick's arrogance is mind boggling. He knows , whether he wants to admit it, his reputation is one that plays lose with the rules. So, why in the world would he put himself in a position to be so closely scrutinized? 

 

He might not have done anything wrong but perception says otherwise die to his past. 

 

Deep down he absolutely loves being the bad guy. The one everyone dislikes. Loves having these situations that everyone is talking about. If not? Nothing  makes sense as to why. 

 

 

 

Yeah, if I were him and finally realized I needed to not cheat, I would stand 10 feet away from the ball say "tell me what to do.  I dont want to do anything wrong"

[Potatohead]

Just now, ReidThompson said:

Yeah, if I were him and finally realized I needed to not cheat, I would stand 10 feet away from the ball say "tell me what to do.  I dont want to do anything wrong"

 

lol

 

That's what he thought he was doing by calling over the rules official. 

 

I mean if every instance was like Hovland taking twelve minutes to "place" the ball, each round would take seven hours. 

 

 

 

[mizuno player]

2 minutes ago, ReidThompson said:

Yeah, if I were him and finally realized I needed to not cheat, I would stand 10 feet away from the ball say "tell me what to do.  I dont want to do anything wrong"

Makes you wonder about him mentally doesn't it? 

[golfday]

19 minutes ago, bigred90gt said:

If you watch the video, as soon as Reed got to his ball and looked down at it, the first thing out of his mouth was to his playing competitors that he was going to lift the ball and check it. They could have asked him to wait till they got there, but they didn't. Truth be told, he wasn't even required to do that. People are really fishing here.

 

Only he (and maybe his caddie) knows if cheated or not, because no one else took a look at the ball. If you're right and he told his group he thought it was plugged and they said ok, then I'd put him in the clear completely. He gave two competitors a chance to look, if they didn't see the need to look then I'm good with it. I didn't see that happen in the clip, but I'll check it again.

 

The officials that cleared him also had no choice but to clear him. Only he saw the ball and he said it was plugged... so the rules officials must assume that it was plugged. 

 

Side note / rules question:

Correct me if I'm wrong, because this may be somewhere that I'm off on the rules - but I thought once you have lifted it... you've lifted it. You can't then say oh whoops, it's not embedded and put it back. So once he lifted it he either has to say it's embedded and drop, or take a penalty for moving his ball. I.E. you can't move a ball to see if it's plugged.

[ReidThompson]

1 minute ago, golfday said:

 

Only he (and maybe his caddie) knows if cheated or not, because no one else took a look at the ball. If you're right and he told his group he thought it was plugged and they said ok, then I'd put him in the clear completely. He gave two competitors a chance to look, if they didn't see the need to look then I'm good with it. I didn't see that happen in the clip, but I'll check it again.

 

The officials that cleared him also had no choice but to clear him. Only he saw the ball and he said it was plugged... so the rules officials must assume that it was plugged. 

 

Side note / rules question:

Correct me if I'm wrong, because this may be somewhere that I'm off on the rules - but I thought once you have lifted it... you've lifted it. You can't then say oh whoops, it's not embedded and put it back. So once he lifted it he either has to say it's embedded and drop, or take a penalty for moving his ball. I.E. you can't move a ball to see if it's plugged.

You can lift a bill to identify and put back but not sure about this example.  I would assume you could. 

[Golfrnut]

2 minutes ago, golfday said:

 

 

Side note / rules question:

Correct me if I'm wrong, because this may be somewhere that I'm off on the rules - but I thought once you have lifted it... you've lifted it. You can't then say oh whoops, it's not embedded and put it back. So once he lifted it he either has to say it's embedded and drop, or take a penalty for moving his ball. I.E. you can't move a ball to see if it's plugged.

 

No, that is not the case.  You are permitted to check, if it's not plugged, it goes back.

[Potatohead]

3 minutes ago, golfday said:

Side note / rules question:

Correct me if I'm wrong, because this may be somewhere that I'm off on the rules - but I thought once you have lifted it... you've lifted it. You can't then say oh whoops, it's not embedded and put it back. So once he lifted it he either has to say it's embedded and drop, or take a penalty for moving his ball. I.E. you can't move a ball to see if it's plugged.

 

That is incorrect. You are allowed to move the ball to see if it is embedded, and if not, you put it back. You just cannot clean it until when/if it is determined to be plugged.  

 

This is not that uncommon. If your ball is close to another players ball (through the green) and you need to move yours, you remove and replace but cannot clean it. 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Potatohead

[bigred90gt]

1 minute ago, golfday said:

 

Only he (and maybe his caddie) knows if cheated or not, because no one else took a look at the ball. If you're right and he told his group he thought it was plugged and they said ok, then I'd put him in the clear completely. He gave two competitors a chance to look, if they didn't see the need to look then I'm good with it. I didn't see that happen in the clip, but I'll check it again.

 

The officials that cleared him also had no choice but to clear him. Only he saw the ball and he said it was plugged... so the rules officials must assume that it was plugged. 

 

Side note / rules question:

Correct me if I'm wrong, because this may be somewhere that I'm off on the rules - but I thought once you have lifted it... you've lifted it. You can't then say oh whoops, it's not embedded and put it back. So once he lifted it he either has to say it's embedded and drop, or take a penalty for moving his ball. I.E. you can't move a ball to see if it's plugged.

Watch the full video, you'll see him let the others know his intention.

 

Rule 16.3 explains the embedded ball, and 16.4 explains that you are allowed to lift and check. No penalty if it's not embedded, it just gets replaced and you carry on.

[phizzy30]

37 minutes ago, Potatohead said:

 

There are many times in the game it is within the rules to move your ball. It is not unusual nor nefarious. If you call for a rules official every time you either need to know the rules better and/or like being on the clock. 

 

Never got a warning for being too slow.  Don't tell me you knew all the rules of golf when you were a college kid.  😉

Edited February 1, 2021 by phizzy30

[golfday]

32 minutes ago, Potatohead said:

 

Before he even got to the ball he asked the marshall (who was pulling the flag back out of the ground) if the ball had bounced. She said no. 

 

Her saying that a ball did not bounce is not her saying that it is plugged. He's the only person that looked at the ball and knows if it plugged.

[golfday]

1 minute ago, Potatohead said:

 

That is incorrect. You are allowed to move the ball to see if it is embedded, and if not, you put it back. You just cannot clean when/if it is determined to be plugged.  

 

 

Thanks and interesting. I knew you could move to identify if it's yours, but I didn't know you could move to check if it's plugged.

[Pepperturbo]

I watched Reed as the event unfolded.  Also watched the rules officials explanation.  In Reeds defense, the rules official said every thing Reed did was correct, yet weak kneed haters pile on.  Some people are pathetic.  Nick Faldo should have kept his old fashion opinion to himself.  Pro golfers should have each other's backs, but many today are weasels.