Player survives First stage of Q-school but calls PGA TOUR office to Disqualify Himself - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

Did the article say how long he took to decide AFTER finding out it was a 2 stroke penalty instead of the 1 stroke that he immediately assessed on himself?  I saw that it was 6 days after the event that he made the call to DQ himself and that he slept on it, etc. but did not notice if it said exactly when he realized the mistake.

He slept on it for a few days, I seem to remember reading.

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf 

The NFL isn't golf, in the NFL  there are referees who's job it is to enforce the rules and make these calls. Golf holds its participants to a higher standard that the other pro sports.  If you don't understand the moral and ethical obligation one has to playing the game by the rules then you're missing out on a big part of what golf is about imo. 

i disagree for two reasons:

1. he wasn't sure he touched the leaf.  it's a half-full/half-empty sort of thing here IMO.  if there is a 50% chance he didn't think he touched the leaf, then saying he didn't touch the leaf is not dishonest.  or if you want to slant slightly negatively, it's only as dishonest as it is honest since they both have a 50% chance of being true.  i work in math/statistics, so i've got to side with math here.  the guy was dumb for faulting himself in a situation where he had an equal chance of being completely wrong as he did being completely right.  it really has nothing to do with your conscious--if wrong and right are equal resolutions, pick the one in your favor.

2. in regards to the comparison of golf vs. the NFL, i think golf has way too many silly rules to begin with.  it's not like barely touching a leaf sitting on your ball--to the point of not actually knowing if you touched it or not--is going to impact your shot any whatsoever physically speaking.  so, if golf wants to have all their silly rules like this, they should hire a hell of a lot more ref's to enforce the rules in my honest opinion.  if there is a 50% chance he did/did not touch the leaf, then it shouldn't be up to him to make that ruling if no one else nearby could make it for him.  now if its a blatant screw-up and he removed the leaf and lit it on fire and did a crazy indian rain dance, then yeah, i think it'd be justifiable if he faulted himself.

My understanding is that he called the penalty on himself, but it was not properly applied (one stroke instead of two). In that case, he has a responsibility to DQ himself.

If the question was whether he actually broke the rule by touching the leaf, I would have less of a problem if he sought the counsel of his caddie and others and presumed that he did not break the rule. Play on.

He didn't even have to have a rulebook in the bag. He could've asked the scorer before signing, just put a 4 with an asterisk or something on the card. 

Making up a penalty on the spot in the biggest tournament of your life is unnecessary. If you don't know the rule, look it up or discuss it with an official later in the round or at the scorer's tent. The only one who's a bigger bonehead than the player is his caddy; it's the caddie's responsibility to prevent the player from doing something stupid like this, as Happy Gilmore taught us. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

 

I disagree with this a bit...2 of the 6 guys that found out after the fact that they had advanced to stage 2 instead of missing by a shot are back in Europe and withdrew from the 2nd stage.  For a journeyman European pro, last minute flights across the pond might not be cheap.

 

Lefebre and Derkson are both winners on the Euro Tour who have won plenty of cash (both more than €4.5m), don't worry about them going broke.

I think it should be investigated. Illegal betting?

And as of Lafeber (dutch): why did he enter in the first place? He still needed a money-score to secure his European card 2013, which he managed yesterday.

IMO.. This is a class example why some rules need to be revised..  Technically the USGA / PGA rules live in a vacuum.. Take me for example.. I live in Ohio and enjoy fall golf as weather permits, but IF you think I'm going to take penalty strokes because I'm moving leaves on my swing.. FORK THAT.. Do you know how often a ball can roll under some leaves in a bunker in the Ohio autumn? Often I lose balls because of the leaves.. ha ha.. The only way I can find them is to MOVE the leaves.. (penalty stroke)?  I think not.. It's one thing when a loose object can honestly physically change the swing or position of the ball, but touching a 2 foot long weed? or moving a leave is just silly stupid rules..
 

True, the issue is not what caused the penalty but that he called it wrong and then signed the card. DQ, take it on the chin and move on.

As for the penalty itself, I would agree with some above, I live in a place where there are plenty of leaves laying around, touch a leaf on a practice swing, yeah penalty, but touch a leaf on the backswing, I have already comitted to the shot, what diference does it make, if I called a penalty on every 50/50 chance I may as well add 10 shots to every round.

I admire the guys integrity, but calling a penalty on yourself because you may have brushed a leaf is just ridiculous in my opinion. He certainly didn't gain and sort of advantage in his lie, which is the intent of the rule.

I wonder if he would turn himself in for jaywalking, or spitting on the sidewalk?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strike One 

I admire the guys integrity, but calling a penalty on yourself because you may have brushed a leaf is just ridiculous in my opinion. He certainly didn't gain and sort of advantage in his lie, which is the intent of the rule.

I wonder if he would turn himself in for jaywalking, or spitting on the sidewalk?

If jaywalking or spitting on the sidewalk was covered under the Rules of an honorable game (because it would affect his "score" in that game) then yes, he should.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThominOH 

IMO.. This is a class example why some rules need to be revised..  Technically the USGA / PGA rules live in a vacuum.. Take me for example.. I live in Ohio and enjoy fall golf as weather permits, but IF you think I'm going to take penalty strokes because I'm moving leaves on my swing.. FORK THAT.. Do you know how often a ball can roll under some leaves in a bunker in the Ohio autumn? Often I lose balls because of the leaves.. ha ha.. The only way I can find them is to MOVE the leaves.. (penalty stroke)?  I think not.. It's one thing when a loose object can honestly physically change the swing or position of the ball, but touching a 2 foot long weed? or moving a leave is just silly stupid rules..
 

This is why it is important to know the rules.  Because there is no penalty stroke for moving the leaves in order to find your ball in a bunker.  You just have to move them back after you find your ball but before you make your stroke.  And if the ball was completely covered you are permitted to leave a small part of the ball visible. (12-1b)  There is also no penalty for touching the sand while probing for your ball under leaves.  Sometimes the rules that seem silly or unreasonable aren't the actual rules.

Quote:

Originally Posted by In The Hole 

True, the issue is not what caused the penalty but that he called it wrong and then signed the card. DQ, take it on the chin and move on.

 

As for the penalty itself, I would agree with some above, I live in a place where there are plenty of leaves laying around, touch a leaf on a practice swing, yeah penalty, but touch a leaf on the backswing, I have already comitted to the shot, what diference does it make, if I called a penalty on every 50/50 chance I may as well add 10 shots to every round.

If you are hitting into 10 bunker every round then I don't think moving a loose impediment on your backswing is your biggest problem.  There is only a penalty for moving a loose impediment if you are in a hazard.  And if you are not in a hazard you can touch all of the leaves you want on a practice swing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer 

After hearing about his history, it sounds like a fear of success.

I read the article, but don`t know anything about the guy otherwise...what history are you referring to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas 

 

If jaywalking or spitting on the sidewalk was covered under the Rules of an honorable game (because it would affect his "score" in that game) then yes, he should.

In the example above, the player could have retained his honor by ignoring the fact he brushed a leaf because he didn't violate the intent of the rule. He gained no advantage, even though he technically violated the rule. The intent of the rule is what counts in my opinion.

In theory, the laws (rules) of this country are also supposed to be honorable, but we all know how true that is. People lose respect for the law because those who make the rules have very little, or any, honor. There are so many ridiculous laws that people are forced to decide which ones to follow and which ones to ignore. Consequently, honor takes a back seat to practicality. You can be quite an honorable person and still not honor every law.

Golf is one of the last bastions of a moral code which used to be quite common. In our society, honor is fine for the other guy, but winning is the most important thing. Sponsors don't endorse the most honorable players, only those who win. There is no tangible reward for being honorable. It therefore becomes a liability when the end goal is the lowest score.

The player in question obviously derives motivation from his faith. His strict moral code forbids him from violating even the most trivial infraction of a rule. Is this really practical, or even reasonable? What purpose does it serve other than to relieve a guilty conscience? How about the player who only finds honor in winning, and where losing is shameful? Should his code of ethics be any less valid?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer 

After hearing about his history, it sounds like a fear of success.

This guy has won 4 of 6 NGA Tour events he has entered.  Not sure he fears success....  He obviously has the skill and will find a way back.

http://www.ngatour.com/general/news/release_988.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer 

After hearing about his history, it sounds like a fear of success.

LOL... He is 22 yrs old.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strike One 

In the example above, the player could have retained his honor by ignoring the fact he brushed a leaf because he didn't violate the intent of the rule.

There's no "intent" in that rule. You brush the leaf, you've violated the Rules.

It's really that simple.