Kenny Perry: Caught Cheating or Not?

[bjw181]

Has Sabbo cheated?

No Rory is just a jerk. I remember a while back him getting pissed at another golfer for "messing up his round" while he was on the green and a ball was hit near him. He turned around and started acting like a baby, yelling at the other golfer back down the fairway. And I don't even think the ball landed on the green.

Also I believe he has been accused of walking/moving around alot while others are trying to putt. He just seems like a jerk to me as wearing that stupid belt buckle. Same goes for Anthony Kim...

[WhiteSlice]

No thats not cheating really. Everyone does it, once in a while even on the tour. He was just really obvious about it which hurt him.

[Laxplayer201092]

No thats not cheating really. Everyone does it, once in a while even on the tour. He was just really obvious about it which hurt him.

so if your sneaky about it its fine?

As for Sabbo i do agree with that, but he does seem to have turned cheek a bit so to say.. And belt buckles? its a young gun thing, what they wear isnt a problem as long as they got the game to back it up :)

[Trav]

No, that's why we have the Rules of Golf, so golfers can follow them - and call penalties on themselves when appropriate - without the "need" for officials.

I agree the primary burden is with players to enforce the rules on themselves and when they call an official over, the official is assisting them in applying the rules.

However, officials can act as referees in some ways. Perhaps you are referring to the duties of a specific sub-category of officials such as those on the course during play, but if "rules officials" (speaking generally here, as I don't know all the distinctions of officials' categories and their roles) are not supposed to do enforce the rules when a player ignores/breaks them, there would have been no inquiries after the fact of any incident, such as about McElory's swings in the sand or when somebody watching TV calls in to claim they saw a violation.

[Tulsa]

No thats not cheating really.

so if your sneaky about it its fine?

That's how my ex-wife justified it!

About Perry, it appears to be a very subjective video, from that back view you can certainly see more ball once he's done addressing the ball, repeatedly. From the final shot from the front, you can also see there is still grass behind that ball as well, so if his lie improved, it wasn't by much.

[Chas]

For obvious reasons, the view from the back is much more revealing that the view from the front. I suppose we cannot be absolutely, 100% sure that he was intentionally trying to improve his lie.

99% is good enough for me, but it's beside the point. As someone else has commented, it isn't a matter of intent anyway, it's a matter of what actually happened. An obvious lie improvement and no confession. 100 demerits.

[zeg]

I still think it's hard to tell from the camera shot. The grass obscuring the ball is simply in line between the ball and the camera. From the projection into the 2D camera image you can't tel whether it's right up against the ball or far enough off that he is neither affecting the lie nor his stance. The reason I think the last shot is important is that it doesn't look to me like there's a tamped down region up against the ball. I think there's a good chance the improved view of the ball in the long shot is simply a camera trick. Certainly, I think it's likely enough that I would not call a man a cheater based on it (in the absence of a shady history, and especially when the rules officials seem satisfied after discussing it with him).

[iacas]

I still think it's hard to tell from the camera shot. The grass obscuring the ball is simply in line between the ball and the camera. From the projection into the 2D camera image you can't tel whether it's right up against the ball or far enough off that he is neither affecting the lie nor his stance.

The area touched was not 12-18 inches behind the ball. Watch where Kenny's feet are when he taps down on the grass, then watch where he puts his feet when he finally hits the shot - it's in the same spot. The extended clip shows this quite clearly, and I think all doubt as to the "camera angle" has been put to rest by that longer video.

Combined with David Feherty describing a clump right behind Perry's ball and then stuttering a bit as Perry taps down said clump, is about all I need. There's no camera trick. Watch where his feet are - same position.

[mad max]

I was part of the group that thought he broke the rules and should have incurred a penalty but would stop short of calling the man a cheater. That was until I saw the longer video. The way he went up to the ball and tamped it down and took a rather abrupt practice swings well before he was planing to play his shot tells me that he knows that he is not allowed to do this and has developed a clever way getting away with it without people noticing. This never would have been seen had he been just part of a full field but he was in a playoff with only one other golfer for the cameras to focus on so it was one of the few times what he does when he first arrives at his ball two minutes before he hits his shot has been televised. This leads me to believe that he does this all the time and gets away with it. I hope this forces the PGA to send out a memo to all golfers that this will not be tolerated and they should not do anything to the grass in front or in back of the ball in their pre shot routine. If the player would like to get a feel for the grass or the rough they should do this well away from their intended swing path i.e. to the side where almost everyone takes their practice swing.

[Chas]

Nice post max. Yes, all of his behavior was consistent with intent to deceive, including the little dance after the fact (of lie improvement). If he wasn't conscious of what he was doing it's even worse. It would mean it was second nature to him and he didn't even have to think about it.

The memo is a great idea. If it happened, our cheat won't be doing THAT again in the near future anyway, and hopefully nor will anyone else. There's a lot at stake for the game of golf, time to adopt the Giuliani strategy. These guys make a lot of money at the game, the least they can do is take the rough with the smooth when it comes to where the ball happens to end up. For Pete's sake, any decent golfer would see it as a challenge.

Can you imagine Tiger pulling a stunt like this? Heck no, he'd come up a way to get the ball to end up on the green without benefit of backspin, and prolly sink the birdie putt to boot.

[Trav]

Can you imagine Tiger pulling a stunt like this? Heck no, he'd come up a way to get the ball to end up on the green without benefit of backspin, and prolly sink the birdie putt to boot.

Right after fans moved the large rock sitting in front of his ball .......

Just kidding, mostly - I also don't see Tiger doing what Perry did.

[Guest]

Nope - he's fine.
If you look on the final frame when it zooms in (14 sec) there is still a lot of grass behind the ball. A good inch or two.

[iacas]

If you look on the final frame when it zooms in (14 sec) there is still a lot of grass behind the ball. A good inch or two.

That doesn't mean there wasn't once MORE grass behind the ball. Grass he tapped and pressed down to get out of the way. Where's the "clump" David Feherty's referring to?

Plus, watch the longer video.

[DaveLeeNC]

That doesn't mean there wasn't once MORE grass behind the ball. Grass he tapped and pressed down to get out of the way. Where's the "clump" David Feherty's referring to?

I have no idea where 'the clump' that Feherty referred to is/was either before or after the shot. I also have no idea where Feherty was when he made the reference (he sure wasn't anywhere in any of the video's that I've seen including the longer one referenced here).

Somewhere in one discussion of this incident was a post by someone who has actually acted as a rules official on the PGA Tour. His statement was that KP's actions were common and accepted on the tour. If someone wants to make an issue of this I'll go find it - not sure if it was on this board or another. I do believe that this is the 'in the rough version' of a practice that EVERYBODY that I am aware of uses regarding the implementation of Rule 13-4 prohibiting testing of a hazard. Is there a golfer anywhere who doesn't test the bunker by settling their feet in the sand. Of course this is "OK" because setting your feet in the sand is a normal and legal thing to do. But the purpose (as is routinely taught at all levels) has only a little to do with your feet/stance. And if I were to do this and find the sand surprisingly firm I would, without hesitation, go back and put my SW away and return with my 60*/8* bounce LW in most cases. Does anyone really have an issue w/that? Similarly setting your club behind the ball is "OK" if it is part of addressing the ball. It would appear that KP had no intention of actually addressing the ball, but that is just an appearance. If he had simply stepped up and addressed the ball before stepping back, then I would assume this is undeniably legal (with no change in the situation). If the PGA Tour wants to prohibit this action then all you'll get is a bunch of choreographed ball addressing (until/unless the players themselves decide that it is out of hand at which point it would probably stop - but they don't seem to feel that it is a problem in general). And one of the two relevant views of the ball - the blurry/fuzzy one right after KP's taps his club - the relatively detailed one from a different angle at the end of the short video is very misleading - I have no idea which one. dave

[Chas]

The view from a different angle is almost useless of course, because you cannot compare "before" and "after" the lie improvement (sorry, I should have said the "testing" of the grass) as well as you can when the lens hasn't shifted an inch. This is simple geometry.

I don't see the point of your bunker analogy, indeed it's totally irrelevant to the present case. If anything, the same logic applies: you break the rules with respect to how you address the ball, you should pay the penalty. Btw, what exactly IS the penalty for improving your lie? I can never remember these things ....

Why does it matter exactly when he improved his lie before taking his shot? According to you, if I find myself with a nasty great clump of grass right behind my ball and really need a ton of backspin to stay on the green (fast green, pond in back, downslope to pin, championship on the line .... ), I can beat down on the clump all I like as long as I claim to be "addressing the ball". Anyway, as you point out this is irrelevant - HE WASN'T ADDRESSING THE BALL AT THE TIME.

Look, the guy obviously improved his lie, the disappearing grass after his "tests" proves it rather conclusively. As to your argument citing how common this practice is: if 50% of tour players do this in such a situation, then 50% of tour players should fess up to it and move on. Let's hope that isn't true, but if it is we need to clean things up a bit.

I'd like to hear Faherty candidly talk about what he saw. I doubt he'll do it, he's involved in enough "controversy" right now as it is and won't want to be causing another stir I would imagine. Politics will intervene, and it's politics which is keeping this hush at the moment probably.

Some of you guys would make good counsels for the defense, I'll give you that. However, present evidence suggests .... Guilty As Charged!

[Leftygolfer]

Is this still going on????

[Chas]

Good question.

Let's get a close up view taken (telephoto lens, image stabilized, from the back and sides) of every pro on every shot from the rough. Only then will we find out how much it DOES go on.





[that was sarcasm chaps, in case it isn't evident to y'all ...... ]

[DaveLeeNC]

That doesn't mean there wasn't once MORE grass behind the ball. Grass he tapped and pressed down to get out of the way. Where's the "clump" David Feherty's referring to?

The view from a different angle is almost useless of course, because you cannot compare "before" and "after" the lie improvement (sorry, I should have said the "testing" of the grass) as well as you can when the lens hasn't shifted an inch. This is simple geometry.

Beat the grass?? Where did that come from - not from my post.

"Accepted Practice" is not a vote or a statement of how often something is or is not - it is a statement of whether or not anybody affected raises an issue. "WE" need to clean this up. Hmmmmm. dave