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

[Cali_Stinger77]

What if Reed loses, Tiger/Rory countersue and win, and the judge orders Reed to pay Tiger/Rory a million each. Does that technically mean they took LIV money?

[hunterdog]

7 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Just FYI, the lawyer who filed PR's suit (Larry Klayman) has also filed a class action suit against the PGA Tour itself. I believe the desire to depose Woods and McIlroy flow from that suit, not from the PR defamation case. Because the PR was more recent and caught the media's attention, I think a lot of people had forgotten about Klayman's other suit or assumed that this was related to PR. 

 

I made this same point upthread that it's insane to try to tie the players' meeting to PR, and then corrected myself when I remembered the other suit. 

Interesting. Is there a copy of the subpoena online? I was unable to find it. The subpoena would have the case caption.

[szaino]

Reed has always appeared to be a likable guy. 

 

When you have the whole cheating thing following you like a cloud, the last thing you want to do is bring more attention to it- the lawsuit does just that. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

On 8/28/2022 at 12:35 AM, Chunkitgood said:

A close family member who is a “public figure” recently was defamed by a newspaper and sued, so I got to see what the law is, at least in one state.  He won and is waiting to see how much damages he will get.

 

Calling someone a cheater seems to be what they call defamatory per se.  The fact that the people who run the tour have publicly ok’d whatever he did could easily be taken as proof he did not cheat, and Chamblee knew it, which means he called Reed a cheater in reckless disregard of the truth, just like the people on this forum are doing.

 

Calling someone a cheater over a particular incident is not the same as expressing an opinion about someone’s character in strong terms by using a metaphorical pejorative term.

 

Reed may get a more sympathetic hearing in Texas than people think. Unlike some, a lot of people in Texas do not swallow whatever the media tries to feed them.

I should hope they simply follow the law rather than be more sympathetic to one side or the other. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[Dicka]

9 hours ago, carrier street said:

Ok. We all play golf here, right? How is this not by definition "cheating"?

 

 

 

"Your honour...I present into evidence, Exhibit A".

 

Case closed.

[tiderider]

5 minutes ago, Dicka said:

 

"Your honour...I present into evidence, Exhibit A".

 

Case closed.

[drbonesvt]

2 hours ago, Cali_Stinger77 said:

What if Reed loses, Tiger/Rory countersue and win, and the judge orders Reed to pay Tiger/Rory a million each. Does that technically mean they took LIV money?

If they wanted to keep their pimp hands strong , rors/ tiger take that counter suit dollars and give it to the 9/11 , first responders families fund 

[sg91]

6 hours ago, hunterdog said:

Interesting. Is there a copy of the subpoena online? I was unable to find it. The subpoena would have the case caption.

Yeah it’s on his organisation’s website

[carrier street]

15 hours ago, Cali_Stinger77 said:

What if Reed loses, Tiger/Rory countersue and win, and the judge orders Reed to pay Tiger/Rory a million each. Does that technically mean they took LIV money?

[Holy Moses]

On 8/28/2022 at 12:35 AM, Chunkitgood said:

A close family member who is a “public figure” recently was defamed by a newspaper and sued, so I got to see what the law is, at least in one state.  He won and is waiting to see how much damages he will get.

 

Calling someone a cheater seems to be what they call defamatory per se.  The fact that the people who run the tour have publicly ok’d whatever he did could easily be taken as proof he did not cheat, and Chamblee knew it, which means he called Reed a cheater in reckless disregard of the truth, just like the people on this forum are doing.

 

Calling someone a cheater over a particular incident is not the same as expressing an opinion about someone’s character in strong terms by using a metaphorical pejorative term.

 

Reed may get a more sympathetic hearing in Texas than people think. Unlike some, a lot of people in Texas do not swallow whatever the media tries to feed them.

You don’t understand what the word “defamation” means. It goes way beyond just saying someone is a cheater. 

[carrier street]

On 8/28/2022 at 1:35 AM, Chunkitgood said:

A close family member who is a “public figure” recently was defamed by a newspaper and sued, so I got to see what the law is, at least in one state.  He won and is waiting to see how much damages he will get.

 

Calling someone a cheater seems to be what they call defamatory per se.  The fact that the people who run the tour have publicly ok’d whatever he did could easily be taken as proof he did not cheat, and Chamblee knew it, which means he called Reed a cheater in reckless disregard of the truth, just like the people on this forum are doing.

 

Calling someone a cheater over a particular incident is not the same as expressing an opinion about someone’s character in strong terms by using a metaphorical pejorative term.

 

Reed may get a more sympathetic hearing in Texas than people think. Unlike some, a lot of people in Texas do not swallow whatever the media tries to feed them.

Imma just leave this here. Again. 

 

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

On 8/27/2022 at 10:35 PM, Chunkitgood said:

 

 

Calling someone a cheater seems to be what they call defamatory per se.  The fact that the people who run the tour have publicly ok’d whatever he did could easily be taken as proof he did not cheat, and Chamblee knew it, which means he called Reed a cheater in reckless disregard of the truth, just like the people on this forum are doing.

 

Calling someone a cheater over a particular incident is not the same as expressing an opinion about someone’s character in strong terms by using a metaphorical pejorative term.

 

 

Calling someone a cheater is by definition an opinion. The difference between making a mistake, getting caught, and resulting in a penalty and cheating, getting caught, and resulting in a penalty is *INTENT*. 

The facts are undisputed. Reed (in that incident) moved sand away from behind his ball twice, and the Tour penalized him for improving his lie. Whether he *intended* to improve his lie is where the allegations of cheating come in.

 

The Tour has a high bar to clear to DQ someone for cheating--they are unlikely to do so even if they believe someone had ill intent, unless it was so clear that it simply couldn't be denied. A quick google search suggests that a few instances of supposed cheating resulting in DQ (Wolff masters 1992, Vijay Asian tour 1985) were instances where an incorrect scorecard was submitted. In those cases, whether the player intended to submit an incorrect card or not doesn't matter--both are grounds for DQ. Another was the Hideki DQ for material on a clubface; intent is unnecessary because he hit a ball during a round with a nonconforming club. Those don't require having suspicion of intent to act, whereas Reed's rule violations would. 

 

The only person who knows whether Reed deliberately improved his lie--i.e. knowingly cheated--is Reed. It is by definition unknowable to anyone outside his head. Which means Chamblee can't prove he cheated; but also means Reed can't disprove he cheated. Reed could have done it deliberately and then lie about his intent. In fact, that's what you'd expect a cheater to do, rather than admit it.

 

Chamblee *believes* that Reed's intent was to cheat and improve his lie and not get caught. That is expressing opinion. 

 

[subrew]

Not trying to #whataboutism on this subject, but during the coverage from Sunday, they showed Scottie Sheffler making a putt.  Somewhere early on in the back 9.  His ball had rolled just over the back of the green, thru the narrow first cut, and just into the second cut.  So the ball was in the taller grass, and the announcers even commented it could be a problem.  I forgot what hole, and I can't find any "full day coverage" on YT to search for it.  And I don't have it dvr'd.

 

The TV camera was zoomed in a bunch, basically showing his ball in the second cut, with a fair bit of tall grass immediately behind it.  Scotty very clearly set his putter behind the ball, and pushed down on the club which flattened the grass a bit, right behind his ball.  He made his stroke pretty quickly after that, irrc.

 

I know that you can place your club behind the ball, and the weight of the club can impact a change to the grass, and that is legal.  But you can't put extra force on the club, essentially tamping down the grass.  I had found this from a golf.com article:

 

Quote

A player is allowed to lightly ground the club right in front of or behind the ball, which means just setting it down enough to support its weight. If that’s all a player’s doing, even if it creates an improvement to the lie there is no penalty — see Rule 8.1b. If, however, a player goes beyond that (say, from light tapping to mush-mush-mushing) and creates an improvement, under Rule 8.1(a) it’s the general penalty of two strokes in stroke play and loss of hole in match play.

 

It was pretty obvious it was a bit "mush-mush-mushy" with regard to the putter tamping down the grass behind the ball.

 

Anyone have the coverage still on dvr?

[Wham49]

I am not a Reed apologist by any means but Chamblee to compare him and the other players as some of the worst people in history, terrible terrible people. Reed and the other players fall short, I am pretty sure, of people who committed horrible atrocities to mankind. Big golf including all the media outfits may want to tread a little easier against people who just left one job for another. I don't like the Liv league but come on.

[carrier street]

11 minutes ago, subrew said:

Not trying to #whataboutism on this subject, but during the coverage from Sunday, they showed Scottie Sheffler making a putt.  Somewhere early on in the back 9.  His ball had rolled just over the back of the green, thru the narrow first cut, and just into the second cut.  So the ball was in the taller grass, and the announcers even commented it could be a problem.  I forgot what hole, and I can't find any "full day coverage" on YT to search for it.  And I don't have it dvr'd.

 

The TV camera was zoomed in a bunch, basically showing his ball in the second cut, with a fair bit of tall grass immediately behind it.  Scotty very clearly set his putter behind the ball, and pushed down on the club which flattened the grass a bit, right behind his ball.  He made his stroke pretty quickly after that, irrc.

 

I know that you can place your club behind the ball, and the weight of the club can impact a change to the grass, and that is legal.  But you can't put extra force on the club, essentially tamping down the grass.  I had found this from a golf.com article:

 

 

It was pretty obvious it was a bit "mush-mush-mushy" with regard to the putter tamping down the grass behind the ball.

 

Anyone have the coverage still on dvr?

 

Oh, Scottie absolutely has a problem with this. Someone pointed it out to me a few months ago, and now I can't unsee it. He does it all the time.

 

Oh, and remember when Nick Price was the best player in the world and he used a big mallet putter, and he would sole it in front of the ball before every putt? I guess he found it useful to align the putter from a completely different position than from where he struck the ball? Or to make sure there were no spike marks in the first few inches of his putt?

 

Also, Patrick Reed is a cheater and this lawsuit is frivolous to the point of being sanctionable. 

[carrier street]

10 minutes ago, Wham49 said:

I am not a Reed apologist by any means but Chamblee to compare him and the other players as some of the worst people in history, terrible terrible people. Reed and the other players fall short, I am pretty sure, of people who committed horrible atrocities to mankind. Big golf including all the media outfits may want to tread a little easier against people who just left one job for another. I don't like the Liv league but come on.

 

He didn't compare PReed or the other players to those people, he compared MBS to those people by asking if PReed and the others would play on a tour organized by those people. Yes, it's a dumb argument for multiple reasons, but also not defamatory. 

[Muffy]

1 hour ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Calling someone a cheater is by definition an opinion. The difference between making a mistake, getting caught, and resulting in a penalty and cheating, getting caught, and resulting in a penalty is *INTENT*. 

The facts are undisputed. Reed (in that incident) moved sand away from behind his ball twice, and the Tour penalized him for improving his lie. Whether he *intended* to improve his lie is where the allegations of cheating come in.

 

The Tour has a high bar to clear to DQ someone for cheating--they are unlikely to do so even if they believe someone had ill intent, unless it was so clear that it simply couldn't be denied. A quick google search suggests that a few instances of supposed cheating resulting in DQ (Wolff masters 1992, Vijay Asian tour 1985) were instances where an incorrect scorecard was submitted. In those cases, whether the player intended to submit an incorrect card or not doesn't matter--both are grounds for DQ. Another was the Hideki DQ for material on a clubface; intent is unnecessary because he hit a ball during a round with a nonconforming club. Those don't require having suspicion of intent to act, whereas Reed's rule violations would. 

 

The only person who knows whether Reed deliberately improved his lie--i.e. knowingly cheated--is Reed. It is by definition unknowable to anyone outside his head. Which means Chamblee can't prove he cheated; but also means Reed can't disprove he cheated. Reed could have done it deliberately and then lie about his intent. In fact, that's what you'd expect a cheater to do, rather than admit it.

 

Chamblee *believes* that Reed's intent was to cheat and improve his lie and not get caught. That is expressing opinion. 

 

I'm just curious.....so did Patrick Reed expose this (i.e. did he go to the rules official and say he inadvertently moved the sand behind he ball), and not sign his card?    If he didn't, and he's obviously looking at the ball and his lie as he swings his club back and forth in the bunker......you may never know his INTENT to improve his lie unless he says so, but it is clear he intended not to reveal what happened.   How can anybody not observe that the ball was a fried egg, then not?    

[Titleist99]

An Arizona judge just struck down a lawsuit similar this one and made them pay lawyer fees. First amendment protection, harassment and groundless were a few of the reasons given.

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, Muffy said:

I'm just curious.....so did Patrick Reed expose this (i.e. did he go to the rules official and say he inadvertently moved the sand behind he ball), and not sign his card?    If he didn't, and he's obviously looking at the ball and his lie as he swings his club back and forth in the bunker......you may never know his INTENT to improve his lie unless he says so, but it is clear he intended not to reveal what happened.   How can anybody not observe that the ball was a fried egg, then not?    

 

This one on YouTube has a little more context than the one posted above... They say that the Tour was reviewing the video. 

 

So I'm assuming that this was not a self-admitted and self-assessed penalty. 

 

 

 

[ahenderX]

1 hour ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

This one on YouTube has a little more context than the one posted above... They say that the Tour was reviewing the video. 

 

So I'm assuming that this was not a self-admitted and self-assessed penalty. 

 

I’m confused. He took a practice swing in the sand.  Is this a bunker or waste area?

 

 

[Muffy]

This is a waste area according to numerous articles. But even in a waste area, you can ground a club, but not "press down or move sand".

 

  Patrick Reed denies cheating after being hit with two-stroke penalty at Hero World Challenge (golfdigestme.com)

 

In this article he said he didn't intend to, he thought he was far enough away (whatever that means), and didn't feel the club brushing the sand.   He did understand that it's a penalty.  

 

At least to me, it is pretty obvious that he could see the ball, the ball's lie was obviously improved, and he didn't declare the penalty.  So you could say he had knowledge (of the rule) and intent (not to declare the improved lie).    

[Dpavs]

The sand thing was definitely a cringe worthy bad look for PR.

To be honest, I also have the same reaction every time I see one of the players firmly ground there club in the rough behind the ball numerous and I mean numerous times. I just find it very hard to believe that the intention in those cases is not to reduce the amount of grass directly behind the ball.

[ExTrumpet]

"...their mission is to destroy a top LIV Golf Tour player, his family..."

 

From what I've read, PR has been trying to destroy his family for years.

[carrier street]

16 minutes ago, ExTrumpet said:

"...their mission is to destroy a top LIV Golf Tour player, his family..."

 

From what I've read, PR has been trying to destroy his family for years.

[jdl]

🤣

 

 

[Holy Moses]

14 minutes ago, jdl said:

🤣

 

 

Oops. Can’t wait for Reed to pay Chamblee’s attorney’s fees after his loss.

[bscinstnct]

19 minutes ago, jdl said:

🤣

 

 

 

Classic! 🤣

 

I wonder if the judge will recuse himself? 

Just imagine his face when they show PRs sand castle footage.

 

He might literally “throw the book” at him!

 

 

[carrier street]

We live in a simulation. I'm now certain of it.

[jonsnow]

1 hour ago, carrier street said:

We live in a simulation. I'm now certain of it.

 

[Duct Tape]

Readers who have followed PR’s career may find some of his comments in the recent golf.com post laughable, straining credulity. 
 

https://golf.com/news/media-black-hat-patrick-reed-lawsuit-liv/?fbclid=IwAR3O3RqM9odYeBQ51R64ub0jRAMskxWMmZcxpuDar0C3j_p6rE2vYienU_I

 

Wonder how his former teammates at Univ of Georgia would respond to knowing “the true me”….?

 

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

 

Said my granddad (as I’m sure did many others), “son, when you’re in a hole, stop digging”.