Tours need to make “The Reed rule”…..

[bulls9999]

58 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

If you are saying that in this case tourney footage for the official to review wouldn't be much help in actual ball identification, no doubt, even if they used footage to identify the proper tree.  At least getting the starting point right would have been of use in this particular case.  Mandatory video review, given the numbers of rules situations players resolve on their own and those involving refs that we never see in a 72 hole event, would, IMO, seem unnecessary and a big delay causer for 99% of the rules situations, so I don't think mandatory is the answer.

 

IMO, this ref didn't ask enough questions and I think he will next time.  I think certain situations call out for asking for TV views and maybe that's just some "point of emphasis" like when NCAA basketball decides to enforce certain rules every few years or so, lol.  Maybe it is already, I don't know what the Tour's view is on encouraging officials to gather more info and when, but I think more is better, just not always.  Again, totally IMO.

No, I would have liked if they had someone in the TV trailer like they do on the PGA tour that can quickly follow the video and get word back quickly to the official of what they see on Video.  I don't know why that is so difficult.  That is a premiere flagship tournament of DP World Tour, you'd think at least at that place they'd have extensive video replay capability to assist when needed. If they can show the flight of the ball into the 1st tree as they did later on, no reason they couldn't have shown that when needed.... just call to the trailer and ask them if they can follow the ball.... "Oh, Patrick, our video replay shows the ball flying into the 1st tree".... oh well, then yes, I see it now, that ball I said was mine in the 3rd tree was probably from a practice round.  Yep, that little mark in on the ball in the 1st tree is definitely mine, i'm pretty sure, uhh no, I'm 100% sure, sort of."

[One Putter]

He cheated. But only technically. The camera shows the ball going into the tree. He's only allowed a drop if he can identify his ball. He knew his ball was in one of the trees, but couldn't identify it, so he lied.

 

It's definite cheating. But only technically. You can't prove it's not his ball unless you get up in the tree and find it.

 

I personally am of the belief that since we have the camera shot showing where the ball went, it isn't "lost". We know the ball's in the tree. But again, unless we can get up there and find it, we can't identify. Reed took a few liberties here but honestly, i'm not as upset at this one as i was about the others. I would say that he simply used the rules to his advantage here.

 

If you want to clarify the rule where the "identification" of a ball has to be a little more concrete, and you can't just look 30 feet up into a tree and say "yep, that's mine!", that would be how you stop this. But until they do that, i just think that any pro golfer would be smart to do what Reed did here. Obviously you'll get away with it.

Edited February 1, 2023 by One Putter

[Ferguson]

10 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Was waiting for someone to mention this.

 

Do we value the game or the personalities who play that game? 

 

These days, it seems we value the latter. I, personally, value the former.

 

 

 

You shouldn't draw that line in the sand.  The behavior of random people moving the rock for Tiger did not violate any rule, therefore Tiger did not violate any rule.  Those actions added value to the sport.  It was a remarkable and memorable event in golf.  

 

Value the game?  The professional game is embodied by the personality of players.  

 

[Cliffy2020]

MYSTERY SOLVED!!!  
 

Heres a new pic of the ball in the tree with the small arrow identifying it as Reeds ball.

 

 

Here is a new pic of a provisional ball from Reeds bag confirming his mark.

 

After the round, the ball was retrieved and another mark was discovered on the other side of the ball!!!!  

 

 

[IndyArcher]

25 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Was waiting for someone to mention this.

 

Do we value the game or the personalities who play that game? 

 

These days, it seems we value the latter. I, personally, value the former.

 

 

 

Of that, there's no question. Both positive and negative. We blindly promote those we do like and ruthlessly attack those we do not. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

33 minutes ago, One Putter said:

He cheated. But only technically. The camera shows the ball going into the tree. He's only allowed a drop if he can identify his ball. He knew his ball was in one of the trees, but couldn't identify it, so he lied.

 

It's definite cheating. But only technically. You can't prove it's not his ball unless you get up in the tree and find it.

 

I personally am of the belief that since we have the camera shot showing where the ball went, it isn't "lost". We know the ball's in the tree. But again, unless we can get up there and find it, we can't identify. Reed took a few liberties here but honestly, i'm not as upset at this one as i was about the others. I would say that he simply used the rules to his advantage here.

 

If you want to clarify the rule where the "identification" of a ball has to be a little more concrete, and you can't just look 30 feet up into a tree and say "yep, that's mine!", that would be how you stop this. But until they do that, i just think that any pro golfer would be smart to do what Reed did here. Obviously you'll get away with it.

 

Unless they change the rule it's still a bad look. I tend to agree that the virtual certainty applied say for a hazard should probably apply in this case, but it seems doubtful that he actually identified his ball. I think the rule as currently listed does require more than just saying 'that's mine' vaguely to a ball in a tree, coupled with the video showing it went into a different tree leads to people being up in arms about Reed. Reed's statement deferred to an official giving him the ruling, but other players might have more integrity if they can't be sure it's their ball. We will never know the truth of what Reed believes and his track record creates the issue.

[Cliffy2020]

26 minutes ago, One Putter said:

I personally am of the belief that since we have the camera shot showing where the ball went, it isn't "lost". We know the ball's in the tree. But again, unless we can get up there and find it, we can't identify. Reed took a few liberties here but honestly, i'm not as upset at this one as i was about the others. I would say that he simply used the rules to his advantage here.

 

Enter Bryson!  I chose him because he had 2 similar situations that are relatable to this conversation and the player is a constant so we can remove any player-bias.

 

1). Tee shot plugs at the Masters on camera.  He’s just left of the fairway but inside the tree line on the hole in question and an army of people couldn’t find it even though replay could put the searchers within a club length of where the ball went subterranean.  Time expires, lost ball, back to the tee, 2 stroke penalty.  I think the ball was found later which makes the ruling even saltier.   
 

2). Bryson hits tee shot left of left of left on the 18th during the Tour Championship.  You can’t see where the ball lands from the tee and a search ensues (~80people looking).  Time expires but the booth radios down to the official that a shot link camera showed a fan pick a ball up in that area of the 11th hole and Bryson was awarded a free drop even though time had expired and the ball was never identified.  
 

 

 

[TwistedSister]

16 hours ago, Barfolomew said:

How would TV helped.... did they see what tree the ball went in

 

 

So many players/shots to cover.  Happens so infrequent its not even measurable.  Wrong calls happen every 5 minutes in other sports.... you see that foul on Lebron against Celtics in last seconds..... life goes on

 

 

 

 

Or the lack of travelling charges against LeBron every time he has the ball!

[Cliffy2020]

1 minute ago, TwistedSister said:

Or the lack of travelling charges against LeBron every time he has the ball!

Or the lack of holding calls on the Chiefs O-Line Sunday night!
 

Or the amount of strikes called for Mariano Rivera on the “outside black”!

 

 

[jholz]

12 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

You shouldn't draw that line in the sand.  The behavior of random people moving the rock for Tiger did not violate any rule, therefore Tiger did not violate any rule.  Those actions added value to the sport.  It was a remarkable and memorable event in golf.  

 

Value the game?  The professional game is embodied by the personality of players.  

 

 

This isn't about a "specific rules violation." That horse left the barn quite some time ago and isn't really the issue. There's lots of things in life that may be technically "legal" but still don't pass the smell test.

 

When it comes to valuing "personalities," I'd suggest "personalities driving the game" is about the same as having a love affair with a Municipal Bus.

 

There's gonna be another one along in a minute. It will be about the same as the one that just passed, so, who gives a rat's a**?  

 

I want to watch a game. Not some jackass "winning" and then talking about "winning," and then an hour special about how that individual's "winning" is changing the world. I mean, seriously? These people ain't that great. They don't matter that much. We need to get some perspective.

 

And the thing that always kills me the most is that neither Woods nor Reed needs/needed to tilt the field in their favor. They are great golfers with wonderful careers. What more do they think they deserve? How much more money can they spend?

 

Both seem to have a deep, dark chasm in their hearts that no amount of pleasure or success will satisfy and they tend to damage everyone and everything around them.

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, Cliffy2020 said:

MYSTERY SOLVED!!!  
 

Heres a new pic of the ball in the tree with the small arrow identifying it as Reeds ball.

 

 

Here is a new pic of a provisional ball from Reeds bag confirming his mark.

 

After the round, the ball was retrieved and another mark was discovered on the other side of the ball!!!!  

 

 

 

It's funny, so well played, but no, I don't hate Patrick Reed at all.  Even defended him on occasion. 

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

15 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

 

 

When it comes to valuing "personalities," I'd suggest "personalities driving the game" is about the same as having a love affair with a Municipal Bus.

 

There's gonna be another one along in a minute. It will be about the same as the one that just passed, so, who gives a rat's a**?

 

 

 

Well, if one bus has Reed's picture plastered all over it and my favorite bus has Kate Jackson's picture . . . .

[Cliffy2020]

I put this latest Reed infraction right up there with any other Pro that shells their tee shot into absolute jail and claims they were going to hit this nifty 125 yard stinger with a 40 yard hook, from a buried lie, over the water, to a tucked pin but the grandstands or scoreboard off to the right now comes into play instead of punching out.  Rules Official has to take their word for it when everybody else on the planet {minus the caddy} knows he would never try that shot from that lie, and grants relief.  Player conveniently gets a free drop a few yards away in a nice trampled down area and hits a completely different shot than described because he had NO intention of hitting said described and intentionally used the rule to his advantage.

 

Liar? Cheater? Or just using the rules to your advantage?

 

It gets ugly when players start gaming the rules instead of playing the game.
 

 

 

 

[golfortennis]

16 hours ago, Krt22 said:

Unless of course he lied that the ball was marked the same as his. 

 

I think the issue with using TV footage to make rulings, is not every shot from every player is on film. So it can either be an advantage or disadvantage depending on how the ruling goes.

 

I would not mind another reed rule however, that each pro should mark all of their balls the same and have one marked ball in the bag at all times such that an official can verify the markings are correct. 

 

I hear this "not every shot is on film" argument brought up, yet whenever someone made an ace or did something remarkable, lo and behold there is footage.  I think the reduction of tv usage was not about "reducing unfairness", it was about increasing the level of "well they weren't punished so it couldn't have been cheating."

 

Kind of like a holding penalty where the ref didn't throw a flag.  Just he wasn't called doesn't mean he didn't commit a penalty.  Golf isn't supposed to be like the other sports where "you got away with one" if a ref didn't call you on it, but sadly it seems to be headed in that direction if not already there. 

[Ferguson]

Wonder what kind of reception Reed will receive at the United States Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia, hosted by the Augusta National Golf Club, come the first full week of April, 2023? 

 

[jholz]

18 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

Wonder what kind of reception Reed will receive at the United States Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia, hosted by the Augusta National Golf Club, come the first full week of April, 2023? 

 

 

I always like to think that there is a reckoning coming for all these folks - they do tend to flock together, don't they?

Experience and history has shown me it is about an even bet. We will have to see what happens.

 

Ultimately, I'd love to see the crowd at Augusta be the arbiter of truth and bash P. Reed unmercifully - but then, can we trust the "crowd" at Augusta?

 

Lot's of "mashed potato" clowns out there too.

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by jholz

[farmer]

It's too late, but Reed would have somewhat redeemed himself if he had said "I can't see my ball", and gone back to the tee.

[bscinstnct]

20 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

Wonder what kind of reception Reed will receive at the United States Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia, hosted by the Augusta National Golf Club, come the first full week of April, 2023? 

 

 

Well, they banned MCCord for the bikini wax comment 

 

Reed puts a step out of line (like tossing tees and then calling the person he tossed the tee at an immature child)

 

And We may have the first player booted off the course in ANGC history!

[Frankensteins Monster]

3 hours ago, One Putter said:

He cheated. But only technically. The camera shows the ball going into the tree. He's only allowed a drop if he can identify his ball. He knew his ball was in one of the trees, but couldn't identify it, so he lied.

 

It's definite cheating. But only technically. You can't prove it's not his ball unless you get up in the tree and find it.

 

I personally am of the belief that since we have the camera shot showing where the ball went, it isn't "lost". We know the ball's in the tree. But again, unless we can get up there and find it, we can't identify. Reed took a few liberties here but honestly, i'm not as upset at this one as i was about the others. I would say that he simply used the rules to his advantage here.

 

If you want to clarify the rule where the "identification" of a ball has to be a little more concrete, and you can't just look 30 feet up into a tree and say "yep, that's mine!", that would be how you stop this. But until they do that, i just think that any pro golfer would be smart to do what Reed did here. Obviously you'll get away with it.

What you’re saying is he may have committed some light cheating.

 

[bulls9999]

3 hours ago, One Putter said:

He cheated. But only technically. The camera shows the ball going into the tree. He's only allowed a drop if he can identify his ball. He knew his ball was in one of the trees, but couldn't identify it, so he lied.

 

It's definite cheating. But only technically. You can't prove it's not his ball unless you get up in the tree and find it.

 

I personally am of the belief that since we have the camera shot showing where the ball went, it isn't "lost". We know the ball's in the tree. But again, unless we can get up there and find it, we can't identify. Reed took a few liberties here but honestly, i'm not as upset at this one as i was about the others. I would say that he simply used the rules to his advantage here.

 

If you want to clarify the rule where the "identification" of a ball has to be a little more concrete, and you can't just look 30 feet up into a tree and say "yep, that's mine!", that would be how you stop this. But until they do that, i just think that any pro golfer would be smart to do what Reed did here. Obviously you'll get away with it.

 

Didn't Faldo once climb a tree at Rivera to find his ball (albeit, tree had a lot of lower branches that he could hold onto) as well as Sergio?  I recall them showing them during the tournament climbing trees to find their ball lodged in the tree.

[jonsnow]

13 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Well, they banned MCCord for the bikini wax comment 

 

Reed puts a step out of line (like tossing tees and then calling the person he tossed the tee at an immature child)

 

And We may have the first player booted off the course in ANGC history!

It wasn't during the tournament, but amateur Frank Stranahan had his invitation revoked in 1948 after playing multiple balls during practice rounds despite being warned to stop the practice. Word is he was also pretty much a jerk & was rude & abusive to employees of the club; say what you want about Clifford Roberts but he totally supported the people who made Augusta National what it was & is.

[Krt22]

It's all good guys, he explains it all here. Formal statement which is a screen shot of a text to someone else. Totally legit

 

 

[jonsnow]

5 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

It's all good guys, he explains it all here. Formal statement which is a screen shot of a text to someone else. Totally legit

 

 

Well, there you have it. Nothing to see here, move along...

[TwistedSister]

2 hours ago, Cliffy2020 said:

Or the lack of holding calls on the Chiefs O-Line Sunday night!
 

Or the amount of strikes called for Mariano Rivera on the “outside black”!

 

 

Are you aware that I was not commenting to anything you wrote?

[naval2006]

3 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

You shouldn't draw that line in the sand. 

 

I agree. It’s against the rules. P. Reed knows about it. 

[Ferguson]

2 hours ago, jholz said:

 

This isn't about a "specific rules violation." That horse left the barn quite some time ago and isn't really the issue. There's lots of things in life that may be technically "legal" but still don't pass the smell test.

 

When it comes to valuing "personalities," I'd suggest "personalities driving the game" is about the same as having a love affair with a Municipal Bus.

 

There's gonna be another one along in a minute. It will be about the same as the one that just passed, so, who gives a rat's a**?  

 

I want to watch a game. Not some jackass "winning" and then talking about "winning," and then an hour special about how that individual's "winning" is changing the world. I mean, seriously? These people ain't that great. They don't matter that much. We need to get some perspective.

 

And the thing that always kills me the most is that neither Woods nor Reed needs/needed to tilt the field in their favor. They are great golfers with wonderful careers. What more do they think they deserve? How much more money can they spend?

 

Both seem to have a deep, dark chasm in their hearts that no amount of pleasure or success will satisfy and they tend to damage everyone and everything around them.

 

 

You, my friend, need to understand what drives social media. 

If you ain't winning you are NOTHING. 

If you don't drink soy milk and eat artisan bread, you are a loser. 

No shock value = No likes  

 

Social media drives the personality. Yes, I typed that correctly.  Many people in modern society strive to become their online conjured self, rather than just being the person.  Much like many social influencers, the modern golfer prefers to be an image of himself.  The want to live their posted "experiences and pictures."   But, at the end of day, it's the same "scottie scheffler" that started the day.  

It's awful. 

 

Reed and Tiger are just like any other top athlete - gifted with sports talent but lost when it comes to human compassion, integrity and character. 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

[Barfolomew]

4 hours ago, Abh159 said:

 

Yes, the tv replay showed the ball going into one tree, and somehow patty pat pat was able to identify his ball in a different tree.

 

Didnt he play the tougher longer shot from the further tree..... so TV woulda helped him lol

[MikekiM]

Did Patrick really gain much advantage by cheating?

Was his drop by the third tree much better than the drop would have been from the first tree?

 

I realize some of you wanted him to go to the tee and rehit, but if they went to the video replay they would have seen it was stuck in the first tree.  He would have ID'd his ball there, and would have taken a drop. 

Was there that big of an advantage gained by moving up 2 trees?

 

Was it less of an advantage that Rory got when he dropped clear out of the rough?

 

I get that Patrick lied about seeing his ball in the tree it wasn't in, and everyone wants to jump on that aspect.  But there's no denying that his ball was in one of those trees, and he would have likely gotten a drop nearby anyway if they went to the video replay.  Did him lying really gain him that much of an advantage?

Once they saw the video of the ball going into the tree, I bet that regardless of the player they would have received clearance to take the unplayable.

[Abh159]

12 minutes ago, MikekiM said:

Did Patrick really gain much advantage by cheating?

Was his drop by the third tree much better than the drop would have been from the first tree?

 

I realize some of you wanted him to go to the tee and rehit, but if they went to the video replay they would have seen it was stuck in the first tree.  He would have ID'd his ball there, and would have taken a drop. 

Was there that big of an advantage gained by moving up 2 trees?

 

Was it less of an advantage that Rory got when he dropped clear out of the rough?

 

I get that Patrick lied about seeing his ball in the tree it wasn't in, and everyone wants to jump on that aspect.  But there's no denying that his ball was in one of those trees, and he would have likely gotten a drop nearby anyway if they went to the video replay.  Did him lying really gain him that much of an advantage?

Once they saw the video of the ball going into the tree, I bet that regardless of the player they would have received clearance to take the unplayable.

 

I believe you have to be able to identify your ball to be able to take an unplayable lie penalty. That's why you'll see players digging in the sand in bunkers trying to find a ball that buried in the face. If you can't find your ball it's lost (stroke and distance penalty). 

 

By dropping next to the tree he gained at least a 1 stroke advantage by not having to go back and retee. 

 

 

[Krt22]

18 minutes ago, MikekiM said:

Did Patrick really gain much advantage by cheating?

Was his drop by the third tree much better than the drop would have been from the first tree?

 

I realize some of you wanted him to go to the tee and rehit, but if they went to the video replay they would have seen it was stuck in the first tree.  He would have ID'd his ball there, and would have taken a drop. 

Was there that big of an advantage gained by moving up 2 trees?

 

 

They would not have gone to the video replay, he would have had to retee. He gained a 1 stroke advantage by cheating. Realistically speaking he signed an incorrect score card, thus should have been DQd.  I am sure Lucus Herbert who came in 3rd would have enjoyed the extra 400k euros for coming in 2nd instead.