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

[Holy Moses]

1 hour 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.

 

 

A volunteer admitted it. The video cuts off after Rory’s shot and doesn’t show it being stepped on. A ball being embedded in its own pitch mark in the rough is pretty much impossible. Rory’s was stepped on, Reed’s was pushed in with his hands. Reed will lie straight to your face, ie the Hero sand shot because he thrives on being the enemy.

Edited August 25, 2022 by Holy Moses

[morgan1819]

10 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

A volunteer admitted it 

 

Very interesting that the cameras never showed anyone near the ball.  

 

But extremely convenient for everyone involved for a random volunteer to 'admit' this, after the world saw his ball bounce forward.

[Kenbone]

1 minute ago, morgan1819 said:

 

Very interesting that the cameras never showed anyone near the ball.  

 

But extremely convenient for everyone involved for a random volunteer to 'admit' this, after the world saw his ball bounce forward.

[jmck]

Gonna prove that Reed DIDN"T cheat that one time........by insisting there must have been a conspiracy between the PGA Tour, a tournament volunteer, and a Northern Irish leprechaun.  

 

 

 

 

 

Oh?  Uh, all those other times?  Ummm, let's not talk about all those other times.

[hogans71]

On 8/19/2022 at 4:15 PM, bscinstnct said:

 

Everybody remembers where they were when the white Bronco chase hit the screen!

 

 

Absolutely...

 

Still watching the NBA finals in Lincoln Park, Chicago. With Jordan taking some time off it was far easier to get into the bars...

[Motoboss]

30 minutes ago, morgan1819 said:

 

Very interesting that the cameras never showed anyone near the ball.  

 

But extremely convenient for everyone involved for a random volunteer to 'admit' this, after the world saw his ball bounce forward.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2022 by Motoboss

[carrier street]

I love this thread like a child.

[morgan1819]

1 hour ago, Kenbone said:

 

I think the invisible volunteer may have stepped on your balls as well.

 

 

 

...

Edited August 25, 2022 by morgan1819

[carrier street]

10 minutes ago, morgan1819 said:

 

I think the invisible volunteer may have stepped on your balls as well.

 

 

 

...

[Holy Moses]

4 hours ago, jmck said:

Gonna prove that Reed DIDN"T cheat that one time........by insisting there must have been a conspiracy between the PGA Tour, a tournament volunteer, and a Northern Irish leprechaun.  

 

 

 

 

 

Oh?  Uh, all those other times?  Ummm, let's not talk about all those other times.

All the while the Tour has gone to great lengths to protect Reed and every other player. There is no conspiracy - Reed is just a cheater and a liar. 

[bobfoster]

Apologies, as I am old and infirm. But is Patrick Reed still a "thing" (as my GenZ employees say)? I mean I think I remember that a few years ago he was the "next Tiger" du jour (they all last about two or three years), but thought I heard he was so insecure about his future that he went to that Silly Season tour, where you play on YouTube and sue people as your SOP. Sort of one of the Kardashians of the pro golf world ("famous for being famous").

 

PS. "Not a Lawyer, but I play one on TV" (do a lot of contract work for the company I own), and having a weird, bottom rung ambulance chaser - level guy sue for some kind of obscure defamation for saying Reed is an idiot and a cheater? Well, this thing will be thrown out in a heartbeat in Texas (the most conservative circuit in the US). Not how they roll down there. Tru dat. 

 

Not actually a fan of Chamblee, but he didn't cross any legal lines for goodness sake. Will be kinda fun to watch Reed get humiliated on court. 

[Holy Moses]

3 minutes ago, bobfoster said:

Apologies, as I am old and infirm. But is Patrick Reed still a "thing" (as my GenZ employees say)? I mean I think I remember that a few years ago he was the "next Tiger" du jour (they all last about two or three years), but thought I heard he was so insecure about his future that he went to that Silly Season tour, where you play on YouTube and sue people as your SOP. Sort of one of the Kardashians of the pro golf world ("famous for being famous").

 

PS. "Not a Lawyer, but I play one on TV" (do a lot of contract work for the company I own), and having a weird, bottom rung ambulance chaser - level guy sue for some kind of obscure defamation for saying Reed is an idiot and a cheater? Well, this thing will be thrown out in a heartbeat in Texas (the most conservative circuit in the US). Not how they roll down there. Tru dat. 

 

Not actually a fan of Chamblee, but he didn't cross any legal lines for goodness sake. Will be kinda fun to watch Reed get humiliated on court. 

Reed needs to sue so he can be the enemy. He loves it and on LIV it’s hard to do. This suit won’t even make it to court. 

[tacklingdummy]

What does Chamblee think of Player? 😂

 

 

[Dpavs]

18 hours ago, Holy Moses said:

A volunteer admitted it. The video cuts off after Rory’s shot and doesn’t show it being stepped on. A ball being embedded in its own pitch mark in the rough is pretty much impossible. Rory’s was stepped on, Reed’s was pushed in with his hands. Reed will lie straight to your face, ie the Hero sand shot because he thrives on being the enemy.

 

To be honest I am not a Patrick or a Rory fan for very different reasons which really aren't important. That said IMO, the whole "he cheated, he didn't" thing is much more about who the public likes and who they don't than anything else in this instance.

 

Here is one quote from Todd Lewis who reported the episode for the Golf Channel.

“Yeah, that same thing that happened to Patrick Reed happened to me on 18,” Lewis said McIlroy told him. “He was very open and honest about it.”

According to Golf Channel reporter Todd Lewis, a marshal pointed out where the ball landed, McIlroy examined the ball to determine whether it was embedded, as allowed under Rule 16.4, and told playing partner Rory Sabbatini that he thought it was. Without calling over a Rules official, McIlroy took a drop and hit his third shot. 

 

Also Reed’s drop on 10 declared ‘textbook’ by a PGA rules official.

 

The whole thing about the ball being stepped on came after the fact when Rory started to doubt whether he had done the right thing or not didn't it? And it was never stated directly to Rory by any volunteer. To me it was just a bunch of BS drummed up by the Tour after the fact (insert not at all shocked if this is true face here). Below is the accounting of what I deem to be a highly suspect add on to the incident.

 

As reported on Golf.Com

“Did I do the right thing? Did I play by the rules? Did I see something that wasn’t there?” McIlroy wondered. “I just started to doubt myself a little bit, which is not like me. But I was convinced that it was an embedded ball.”

 

But then he heard a detail from the PGA Tour that painted the incident in an entirely different manner: On Monday, a volunteer had come forward to say he’d stepped on McIlroy’s ball while trying to find it that afternoon, suggesting that the ball may have embedded from his shoe rather than its own original pitch mark.

 

“The Tour got an email on Monday that it had been stepped on and the volunteer said something like, ‘I’m so sorry that Rory is being dragged into this scenario, but I didn’t tell him that I actually stood on his ball to find it.'”

 

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by Dpavs

[moonshine]

On 8/16/2022 at 7:47 PM, Gdane said:

On-brand for someone that would join the Liv tour.

Wow, so every one of them is a POS no matter what?  Judge much? On subject but old news:  PR is a DB...pic in dictionary by definition.

[So_Cal]

The weird thing is since he left we never see him anymore, almost like he’s not golfing 

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, So_Cal said:

The weird thing is since he left we never see him anymore, almost like he’s not golfing 

This is Correct, I didn't think you had it in you.....(I kid, I kid)

[morgan1819]

2 hours ago, Dpavs said:

To be honest I am not a Patrick or a Rory fan for very different reasons which really aren't important. That said IMO, the whole "he cheated, he didn't" thing is much more about who the public likes and who they don't than anything else in this instance.

 

Here is one quote from Todd Lewis who reported the episode for the Golf Channel.

“Yeah, that same thing that happened to Patrick Reed happened to me on 18,” Lewis said McIlroy told him. “He was very open and honest about it.”

According to Golf Channel reporter Todd Lewis, a marshal pointed out where the ball landed, McIlroy examined the ball to determine whether it was embedded, as allowed under Rule 16.4, and told playing partner Rory Sabbatini that he thought it was. Without calling over a Rules official, McIlroy took a drop and hit his third shot. 

 

Also Reed’s drop on 10 declared ‘textbook’ by a PGA rules official.

 

The whole thing about the ball being stepped on came after the fact when Rory started to doubt whether he had done the right thing or not didn't it? And it was never stated directly to Rory by any volunteer. To me it was just a bunch of BS drummed up by the Tour after the fact (insert not at all shocked if this is true face here). Below is the accounting of what I deem to be a highly suspect add on to the incident.

 

As reported on Golf.Com

“Did I do the right thing? Did I play by the rules? Did I see something that wasn’t there?” McIlroy wondered. “I just started to doubt myself a little bit, which is not like me. But I was convinced that it was an embedded ball.”

 

But then he heard a detail from the PGA Tour that painted the incident in an entirely different manner: On Monday, a volunteer had come forward to say he’d stepped on McIlroy’s ball while trying to find it that afternoon, suggesting that the ball may have embedded from his shoe rather than its own original pitch mark.

 

“The Tour got an email on Monday that it had been stepped on and the volunteer said something like, ‘I’m so sorry that Rory is being dragged into this scenario, but I didn’t tell him that I actually stood on his ball to find it.'”

 

 

Exactly.

 

1)  Interesting how the volunteer managed to somehow not show up on any video ... anywhere.  A borderline miracle with network cameras following every second of Rory's round, plus 1000's of cell phones recording. 

 

2)  Volunteer remains anonymous.  Zero follow-up.  Ever.

 

3)  Rory never mentions anyone going near his ball.  Never even a consideration at any point.  In soggy conditions like they had, it's pretty obvious if someone has left a big a** footprint where your ball is.

 

4)  The invisible 'volunteer' chose not to mention it to anyone at the time that they stepped on the ball ... but decide later on that they should probably say something after the video surfaces of the ball bouncing forward?  Why on earth wouldn't you just say you think you stepped on the ball at the time it happened?

 

Several rather implausible scenarios.

 

 

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, morgan1819 said:

 

 

Exactly.

 

1)  Interesting how the volunteer managed to somehow not show up on any video ... anywhere.  A borderline miracle with network cameras following every second of Rory's round, plus 1000's of cell phones recording. 

 

2)  Volunteer remains anonymous.  Zero follow-up.  Ever.

 

3)  Rory never mentions anyone going near his ball.  Never even a consideration at any point.  In soggy conditions like they had, it's pretty obvious if someone has left a big a** footprint where your ball is.

 

4)  The invisible 'volunteer' chose not to mention it to anyone at the time that they stepped on the ball ... but decide later on that they should probably say something after the video surfaces of the ball bouncing forward?  Why on earth wouldn't you just say you think you stepped on the ball at the time it happened?

 

Several rather implausible scenarios.

 

 

 

Excellent elements for a great conspiracy theory.

 

Kudos. 👍 

[jonsnow]

6 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Excellent elements for a great conspiracy theory.

 

Kudos. 👍 

 

[Holy Moses]

1 hour ago, morgan1819 said:

 

 

Exactly.

 

1)  Interesting how the volunteer managed to somehow not show up on any video ... anywhere.  A borderline miracle with network cameras following every second of Rory's round, plus 1000's of cell phones recording. 

 

2)  Volunteer remains anonymous.  Zero follow-up.  Ever.

 

3)  Rory never mentions anyone going near his ball.  Never even a consideration at any point.  In soggy conditions like they had, it's pretty obvious if someone has left a big a** footprint where your ball is.

 

4)  The invisible 'volunteer' chose not to mention it to anyone at the time that they stepped on the ball ... but decide later on that they should probably say something after the video surfaces of the ball bouncing forward?  Why on earth wouldn't you just say you think you stepped on the ball at the time it happened?

 

Several rather implausible scenarios.

 

 

Pretty sure Golf Channel showed video of the volunteer early on. In the released video, we see the Shotlink and scoring volunteers maybe 10-20 away from Rory’s ball. We know they were near it. 

[morgan1819]

34 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

Excellent elements for a great conspiracy theory.

 

Kudos. 👍 

 

So whats your theory on why the volunteer didn't bother to mention they stepped on a ball at the time they stepped on it?

 

Just figured it was no big deal that they stepped on Rory's ball ... figuring that he probably wouldn't notice?

 

Well thought out on your part.  👍

 

 

[nsxguy]

12 minutes ago, morgan1819 said:

 

So whats your theory on why the volunteer didn't bother to mention they stepped on a ball at the time they stepped on it?

 

Just figured it was no big deal that they stepped on Rory's ball ... figuring that he probably wouldn't notice?

 

Well thought out on your part.  👍

 

 

 

I suggested you had 4 excellent "theories".

 

Never gave much thought to why he(?) waited.

 

Guilt ?

 

But what I DO know is you only have conjecture, and conjecture is not proof/evidence.

 

Then again, conspiracy theories are all the rage for quite a while now.

[morgan1819]

It actually doesn't matter if anyone stepped on his ball or not.  Rory was given a total pass before the random volunteer appeared out of nowhere with the new narrative ... so it's a moot point.  Chamblee and Diaz had a boner for Reed, and were going to get as much mileage out of it as they could.  It's good for business.

 

My 'theory' is that the coverage was biased because they have hate for Reed (because of his past incidents), and love for Rory because he's a likable little guy.

 

Again, not a Reed fan, but the biased coverage was hilarious.  Obviously Reed and his attorneys feel strongly about it.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by morgan1819

[Kenbone]

[Dpavs]

To be fair, I don't think anyone can say conclusively what was in each players mind at the time can we? We know what the players themselves have said and we know that the Tour at the time believed and indicated that each player acted correctly under the circumstances. The rest is all conjecture on our parts isn't it?

 

Also, to be honest, the examining of the circumstances surrounding or under which a statement is made is actually a valid approach in weighing it's potential validity and despite that there is some general misunderstanding of regarding this, circumstantial evidence is still valid evidence. The question always is, does the evidence, circumstantial or otherwise meet a specific required standard of proof. Therein is where the rub comes though right? 😉 The standard of proof in the court of public opinion is not really a standard at all. It is very likely as varied as the number of people who have an opinion one way or the other.

[Motoboss]

2 hours ago, morgan1819 said:

It actually doesn't matter if anyone stepped on his ball or not.  

 

 

 

 

[tacklingdummy]

I think Reed may have a case because Chamblee is singling out Reed as a cheater, but nobody else. Tons of players have had blatant rules infractions, but Chamblee hasn't called them cheaters?  If Chamblee referred to all the players that have had blatant rules infractions as cheaters, then there would be no issue. 

[Motoboss]

You fit your screen name……….

[Valtiel]

12 minutes ago, tacklingdummy said:

I think Reed may have a case because Chamblee is singling out Reed as a cheater.

It only takes a quick google search on the requirements of a defamation case to see that "singling out" has nothing to do with anything legally. Plus, several requirements must be met in order to prove any kind of defamation, chief among them that the statement must be false, which I don't see how Reed and Co would ever be able to prove.