Patrick Reed at it again (*** NO LIV DISCUSSIONS/REFERENCES ***)

[Motoboss]

You need to step into the world of reality 

[Ghost of Snead]

11 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

Social media has made everyone comfortable being a desktop bully. Chamblee is part of that group. If nothing else, I hope the lawyer fees and waste of time is enough to shut him up. Reed lives rent free in his head for some reason. Reed has an uphill legal battle to prove but if he wins, it will change the landscape of how announcers continually antagonize players that aren’t even competing in a given week. The broken records of announcers will stop and they will have to think of something original instead of “he is just a cheater because college kids say so.”

 

I don't believe in multiple coincidences.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

3 hours ago, cardia10 said:

Social media has made everyone comfortable being a desktop bully. Chamblee is part of that group. If nothing else, I hope the lawyer fees and waste of time is enough to shut him up. Reed lives rent free in his head for some reason. Reed has an uphill legal battle to prove but if he wins, it will change the landscape of how announcers continually antagonize players that aren’t even competing in a given week. The broken records of announcers will stop and they will have to think of something original instead of “he is just a cheater because college kids say so.”

 

Which is, of course what is the goal of a nuisance suit called a SLAPP. To shut someone up even if you have no chance of winning.

 

Which is why Texas has an anti-SLAPP law. I'm certain Chamblee's lawyer will file an anti-SLAPP motion, and if it is successful, Chamblee will have minimal legal fees and Reed could even face penalties for filing the lawsuit.

[carrier street]

10 hours ago, cardia10 said:

Social media has made everyone comfortable being a desktop bully. Chamblee is part of that group. If nothing else, I hope the lawyer fees and waste of time is enough to shut him up. Reed lives rent free in his head for some reason. Reed has an uphill legal battle to prove but if he wins, it will change the landscape of how announcers continually antagonize players that aren’t even competing in a given week. The broken records of announcers will stop and they will have to think of something original instead of “he is just a cheater because college kids say so.”

Reed has an uphill battle to not be sanctioned at this point.

[cardia10]

1 hour ago, carrier street said:

Reed has an uphill battle to not be sanctioned at this point.

Sanctioned by who? He will clearly show the history of Chamblee trash him in a very personal way. He is a public figure so that is very hard for Reed to win but it would be even harder for a judge to sanction him if he has any proof that there was intended malice. I’m in no way a Reed fan but even less of a Chamblee fan based on how he talks about players like he knows what is going on. Pretty well known fact that based on what Chamblee is said about Reed and Tiger, the players won’t even interview with him or discuss things. He is no longer one of them and has lost their trust. 

Edited August 24, 2022 by cardia10

[morgan1819]

Reed could also add Golf Channel's Jaime Diaz to the lawsuit (if he hasn't already).   Diaz relentlessly defamed Reed following the sand incident, and especially the embedded ball incident. 

 

I'm not a Reed fan, but I can see having an issue with a TV personality like Diaz/Chamblee constantly calling you a cheater to a rather large audience, over something that was ruled legal by the rules officials (embedded ball).  Also, they completely ignored the fact that Rory M. claimed an embedded ball just minutes later (that bounced and landed several feet away from the original impact).  They never said a word about a much sketchier situation with Rory.  They doubled down later that evening and the following days, dragging Reed through the mud, and conveniently never mentioning Rory.

 

It was pretty biased (and calculated) on their part.  I'm sure they were informed a Reed controversy generated extra hits on their website, so go ahead and push that narrative as hard as you can.

 

 

[carrier street]

3 hours ago, cardia10 said:

Sanctioned by who?  

The court. See Rule 11.

[carrier street]

1 hour ago, morgan1819 said:

Reed could also add Golf Channel's Jaime Diaz to the lawsuit (if he hasn't already).   Diaz relentlessly defamed Reed following the sand incident, and especially the embedded ball incident. 

 

I'm not a Reed fan, but I can see having an issue with a TV personality like Diaz/Chamblee constantly calling you a cheater to a rather large audience, over something that was ruled legal by the rules officials (embedded ball).  Also, they completely ignored the fact that Rory M. claimed an embedded ball just minutes later (that bounced and landed several feet away from the original impact).  They never said a word about a much sketchier situation with Rory.  They doubled down later that evening and the following days, dragging Reed through the mud, and conveniently never mentioning Rory.

 

It was pretty biased (and calculated) on their part.  I'm sure they were informed a Reed controversy generated extra hits on their website, so go ahead and push that narrative as hard as you can.

 

 

[Dutch1008]

4 hours ago, cardia10 said:

Pretty well known fact that based on what Chamblee is said about Reed and Tiger, the players won’t even interview with him or discuss things. He is no longer one of them and has lost their trust. 

I think Chamblee is a bit of a pompous a**, but I do think he provides some interesting analysis on occasion. That said, I don't really want my analysts/commentators to be all buddy/buddy with the players. He should be providing objective analysis and offering his opinion. That should include both praise and criticism. It's not his job to be the players PR rep or brand ambassador.   

[PoolPond]

4 minutes ago, Dutch1008 said:

I think Chamblee is a bit of a pompous a**, but I do think he provides some interesting analysis on occasion. That said, I don't really want my analysts/commentators to be all buddy/buddy with the players. He should be providing objective analysis and offering his opinion. That should include both praise and criticism. It's not his job to be the players PR rep or brand ambassador.   

I agree.  I find Chamblee to be a bit like Adam Carolla in that you may not like them, or like everything they say but, while everyone else is watching every word they say for fear of something, the two of them say it like it is, call a spade a spade, are rarely wrong in the end and do provide both good entertainment and solid relevant information. Brandel blows a lot of other golf commentators out of the water on, not all, but many levels. The majority don't hold a candle to his; 1)knowledge of the game and history, 2) playing experience (it's crazy how many long time golf analysists have never played professionally, 3) entertainment value.  I don't particularly care for Brandel but I can listen to him talk about golf, the history of golf and the players all day long. There are no doubt other great commentators but many who are a joke such as Jaime Diaz, Damon Hack, Matt Ginella etc.. the list is long of tv dopes commentating on professional golf. 

 

As far as the commentators and players being buddy buddy.  Most are all buddy buddy out there on tour. It's a travelling circus and as soon as the sun goes down the vast majority of them are drinking together, hanging out together, eating meals together and travelling together. That goes for the players, the caddy's, the CEO sponsors, the medial people, the equipment people, the teachers etc..

[skyking]

So many times we seem to look at right\wrong, good\bad, nice\mean versus THE LAW. There was a recent case where a well known political pundit was sued for slander. His attorney filed a motion for summary judgement (drop the case),arguing [isn’t]  'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' The judge granted the motion… Commentary is just that. Reed won’t get a dime…right or wrong and it will actually cost him in attorney fees. Did you like the attorney use of the phrase non-literal commentary? I don’t know what the attorney charged but it was worth it just for that phrase alone!

Edited August 24, 2022 by skyking

[Dutch1008]

58 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

As far as the commentators and players being buddy buddy.  Most are all buddy buddy out there on tour. It's a travelling circus and as soon as the sun goes down the vast majority of them are drinking together, hanging out together, eating meals together and travelling together. That goes for the players, the caddy's, the CEO sponsors, the medial people, the equipment people, the teachers etc..

I get that and if it doesn't effect their job I have no problem with it. But if Brandel stops being critical or Rory's wedge play, focus, or whatever because he wants to stay on Rory's good side, that's a problem. His job is being an analyst not a cheerleader.  

[cardia10]

2 hours ago, carrier street said:

The court. See Rule 11.

So-based on Rule 11, a summary below, how again would he be sanctioned based on the years of Chamblee's verbal abuse and possible other proof Reed may have? This rule is even harder to enforce or "sanction" than the original case. I'm betting it would have never been filed if they didn't think they had evidence and proof. Rule 11 prevents the filings for frivolous reasons or filing for no reason at all.

1. it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
2. the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
3. the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
4. the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

 

[carrier street]

23 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

So-based on Rule 11, a summary below, how again would he be sanctioned based on the years of Chamblee's verbal abuse and possible other proof Reed may have? This rule is even harder to enforce or "sanction" than the original case. I'm betting it would have never been filed if they didn't think they had evidence and proof. Rule 11 prevents the filings for frivolous reasons or filing for no reason at all.

1. it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
2. the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
3. the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
4. the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

 

 

Please google the name Larry Klayman.

[jmck]

26 minutes ago, carrier street said:

 

Please google the name Larry Klayman.

Wild isn’t it?

 

”There’s NO WAY this could possibly be a frivolous lawsuit!!!”

-more than one golfwrx dot com poster 

 

”Hi everybody! My entire schtick is filing frivolous lawsuits!”

-Reed’s lawyer

[BlackDiamondPar5]

11 minutes ago, jmck said:

Wild isn’t it?

 

”There’s NO WAY this could possibly be a frivolous lawsuit!!!”

-more than one golfwrx dot com poster 

 

”Hi everybody! My entire schtick is filing frivolous lawsuits!”

-Reed’s lawyer

Oh careful with that post or you may offend a certain poster, whom recently underwent a transition to a new user name 🙂

[ray9898]

I think Patrick or his one of his entourage is in here!😃

 

"bash....make accusations....trash....verbal abuse"

[skyking]

1 hour ago, ray9898 said:

I think Patrick or his one of his entourage is in here!😃

 

"bash....make accusations....trash....verbal abuse"

Yep…easy to spot these days…with the way our world is.

[mitchl]

Did PReed say why he withdrew from the Korea event last weekend?    When it was announced he would play the Asian events it was Singapore Aug12 weekend and Korea Aug 19 weekend.

 

did he decide not to play after his rank dropped 3 spots after playing Singapore?

[Holy Moses]

23 hours ago, morgan1819 said:

Reed could also add Golf Channel's Jaime Diaz to the lawsuit (if he hasn't already).   Diaz relentlessly defamed Reed following the sand incident, and especially the embedded ball incident. 

 

I'm not a Reed fan, but I can see having an issue with a TV personality like Diaz/Chamblee constantly calling you a cheater to a rather large audience, over something that was ruled legal by the rules officials (embedded ball).  Also, they completely ignored the fact that Rory M. claimed an embedded ball just minutes later (that bounced and landed several feet away from the original impact).  They never said a word about a much sketchier situation with Rory.  They doubled down later that evening and the following days, dragging Reed through the mud, and conveniently never mentioning Rory.

 

It was pretty biased (and calculated) on their part.  I'm sure they were informed a Reed controversy generated extra hits on their website, so go ahead and push that narrative as hard as you can.

 

 

No, just no. Rory’s ball was stepped on. In order to win a defamation case, you have to prove that Chamblee and Diaz knew that Reed was not lying and still targeted him.

[carrier street]

9 hours ago, mitchl said:

Did PReed say why he withdrew from the Korea event last weekend?    When it was announced he would play the Asian events it was Singapore Aug12 weekend and Korea Aug 19 weekend.

 

did he decide not to play after his rank dropped 3 spots after playing Singapore?

Maybe he found out how far South East Asia is from his home.

 

 

[bscinstnct]

 

[morgan1819]

1 hour ago, Holy Moses said:

No, just no. Rory’s ball was stepped on. In order to win a defamation case, you have to prove that Chamblee and Diaz knew that Reed was not lying and still targeted him.

 

 

No, just no.  Show me where someone steps on Rory's ball.

 

Here is video proof you are wrong.  5:03 mark.

 

 

 

These guys both did the same thing.  Yes, they were both suspicious.  But it was literally the same.  Rory's ball did not bounce back into the original divot ... watch the video closely.

 

So two guys do the same thing, and they come after one of them with pitch forks.  The Rory drop was treated very delicately by the Golf Channel.  Brushed under the rug, so to speak.  Not so much for Reed.

 

It's just a factual observation.  I could care less about either one of these two.

 

 

Edited August 25, 2022 by morgan1819

[BlackDiamondPar5]

10 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

They should counter sue Larry for being a twisted clown like someone's  sister!😉

[DaddySwagMaster]

On 8/23/2022 at 1:15 PM, cardia10 said:

Watching the tournament this past week, every close up I saw showed guys placing their club behind the ball in the rough pressing down the grass to improve contact on the back of the ball. Chamblee has picked the battles against Reed selectively while letting others slide. Tiger showed Chamblee where he could stick it and if others would refuse interviews until Chamblee is taken care of, this wouldn't be an issue. He is the typical bully but people get all up in arms when the bully gets punched for some reason. Reed isn't a likeable golfer or person but that shouldn't subject him to repeated abuse. It gets old fast and is classless. I'm sorry, but again, brushing sand in the backswing is wrong, but to call that blatant cheating is questionable as we don't know the intent. We can guess but only one person knows that answer and it isn't Chamblee. 

Justine, is that you?

[bscinstnct]

11 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

They should counter sue Larry for being a twisted clown like someone's  sister!😉

 

We have a joke amongst my HS year friends about the name “Larry”

 

There was this kid Larry, could be so lame, like lame music, be into lame everything, say lame stuff

 

So, we’d just start using the word “Larry”  to describe anything weak. Still do 🤣

 

 

Edited August 25, 2022 by bscinstnct

[BlackDiamondPar5]

28 minutes ago, morgan1819 said:

 

 

No, just no.  Show me where someone steps on Rory's ball.

 

Here is video proof you are wrong.  5:03 mark.

 

 

 

These guys both did the same thing.  Yes, they were both suspicious.  But it was literally the same.  Rory's ball did not bounce back into the original divot ... watch the video closely.

 

So two guys do the same thing, and they come after one of them with pitch forks.  The Rory drop was treated very delicately by the Golf Channel.  Brushed under the rug, so to speak.  Not so much for Reed.

 

It's just a factual observation.  I could care less about either one of these two.

 

 

While I'm not a Reed fan, actually I disdain him.  However I strongly believe in being objective, fair and honest regardless of who is involved.  In this case I strongly support Reed in doing nothing wrong.

[PowderedToastMan]

Somewhere, the old boys at Augusta National are thinking of creative ways to allow the likeable past champions back at Augusta and disinvite the unlikeable guys (which will forever be known as the Patrick Reed rule). 

[DatSliceDoe]

24 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

They should counter sue Larry for being a twisted clown like someone's  sister!😉

Reed's law firm must LOVE him.

[carrier street]

When I think about Reed cheating, I think of the time when he cleared a runway behind his ball in a bunker.