PGA Fiasco

[jamo]

When you hit the ball so far offline it ends up in the gallery.. i know the first thing im thinking is to check if im in a bunker.. Please..lol. Hindsight makes geniuses of us all.

Have you seen pictures of the course? 1,200 bunkers, and most of them are in the areas separating holes from each other and holes from the water. I won't post a picture, but here is a link to an aerial shot of the course:

http://www.wegobomber.com/straits.jpg If you are offline by 50 yards at that course you sure as hell better check to see if you are in a bunker. Especially if your ball is sitting in sand!

[Plox]

It was fit just fine when you realize that the players were warned that some of the bunkers would not be raked and would be trampled down. Again, it was DJs fault for not realizing where his ball was. That one is 100% his and his caddy's fault.

Well done on completely avoiding my point; i.e. if the only way people can spectate properly is to stand in all those 'bunkers', the course is not fit for purpose in hosting a major.

[Plox]

And albatross is in the penalty box for failure to knock off the childish name-calling. If he had stuck to "disagreeing" he'd still be around today.

Where was the chilidish name calling? PM, or another post? Because there was nothing wrong with the one you quoted.

[ctyankee]

Anybody else wondering how short this (and other) threads would be (and how less emotional) if Dustin Johnson had won the tournament and the penalty had happened to Martin Kaymer?

[gmanuel25]

i'm glad two things happened.

1.) DJ missed the par putt ....... seeing a player informed that he didn't win would be awful.

2.) I'm glad Kaymer got up and down for par on 18 in regulation. If not, Bubba would essentially have a perceived asterisk next to his major win, regardless of the rules and circumstances.

[ctyankee]

i'm glad two things happened.

There is a BIG difference between having a tournament handed to you and one where (at best) there would just have been just another player in the playoff with you. Kaymer won beating the young and old Americans on their home turf. How many others 20-somethings have done that in the last 40 years? My take on that putt on 18 of his was that was a Tiger-like big time putt in a big time circumstance. The glass is more than half-full.

I was rooting for Johnson, but Kaymer has a lot of game, is one year younger than Johnson and also played REALLY well in both the U.S. Open and the British Open this year.

[sean_miller]

I don't agree with A at all. If Tiger was out there fist pumping and made the putt (as Tiger would have), I don't see them taking the trophy from him. It would take some balls to do that to the golden goose. Could you imagine the backlash if Tiger returned to the Tiger of old only to have some nerdy rules official take it away (rightly)? Right or wrong the backlash would be 10x what it is now. I picture every RO just praying someone else would make the call.

It's a good question - potentially taking away the trophy from a relative unknown is an easy call for the PGA, but they have a good history of treating everyone with the same. Then again, would anyone else have been allowed to get the gallery to move a boulder in their line?

Regarding ignoring the rules when it matters most, some leagues usually get it right (auto racing, the NFL, Golf) and some leagues are a work in progress (the NBA, the NHL). Every hardcore hockey fan outside Dallas knows Brett Hull's OT winner for the Stars in 1999 (?)should have been called back. Sabres fans are whiners, but that doesn't mean they don't have a really good reason for it. It was a black and white call that had been made all season, and even during that playoff run (e.g. on breakaway goal the Hawks scored against Colorado). There's no way they were calling that goal back after the players poured onto the ice. Spineless.

[sean_miller]

It's a good question - potentially taking away the trophy from a relative unknown is an easy call for the PGA, but they have a good history of treating everyone with the same. Then again, would anyone else have been allowed to get the gallery to move a boulder in their line?

PS. Speaking of spinless - the decision to wait until a player is done the hole to inform him of penalty strokes is as chicken sh** as it gets. The player should have a right to know where he stands before he makes his next shot - just like opponents in match play. To allow Dustin to think he was putting to win the championship all while knowing he was putting to finish one back is the real embarassment to the PGA - imvho.

[ctyankee]

PS. Speaking of spinless - the decision to wait until a player is done the hole to inform him of penalty strokes is as chicken sh** as it gets. The player should have a right to know where he stands before he makes his next shot - just like opponents in match play. To allow Dustin to think he was putting to win the championship all while knowing he was putting to finish one back is the real embarassment to the PGA - imvho.

As others have already pointed out in this thread, it would have been nice if Johnson had been informed about his violation before he chipped to the green as he could have tried to hole it. By the time he was putting, it just didn't matter. Others have also chimed in that the official could have asked Johnson if he understood his situation before entering the bunker. That's a lot of woulda, shoulda as how is the rules official suppose to know Johnson is clueless? Rules officials are there to answer questions and make interpretations as necessary - they are not there for giving advice - which is completely against the rules. However, a smart rules official can (and do) put things in the form of a question so it's technically not giving advice. It can be phrased like 'do you know where you are and what your options are?'

[sean_miller]

As others have already pointed out in this thread, it would have been nice if Johnson had been informed about his violation before he chipped to the green as he could have tried to hole it. By the time he was putting, it just didn't matter. Others have also chimed in that the official could have asked Johnson if he understood his situation before entering the bunker. That's a lot of woulda, shoulda as how is the rules official suppose to know Johnson is clueless? Rules officials are there to answer questions and make interpretations as necessary - they are not there for giving advice - which is completely against the rules. However, a smart rules official can (and do) put things in the form of a question so it's technically not giving advice. It can be phrased like 'do you know where you are and what your options are?'

I didn't read other's opinions so I have no idea what they chimed in with. My opinion is that if the PGA was aware that DJ could not win, they should not have allowed him to believe he was still putting for victory. If he'd sunk that put it would have been insulting and humiliating for the player.

Has that been said too? Yeah, I don't care. If this post is also a rehash of someone else's opinion either start a survey, or ignore it. Your choice.

[chriskzoo]

PS. Speaking of spinless - the decision to wait until a player is done the hole to inform him of penalty strokes is as chicken sh** as it gets. The player should have a right to know where he stands before he makes his next shot - just like opponents in match play. To allow Dustin to think he was putting to win the championship all while knowing he was putting to finish one back is the real embarassment to the PGA - imvho.

This 1000X.

The Rules official with the group has now said that he purposely didn't say anything to DJ because he didn't want to affect the way he played the rest of the hole - ignoring the fact that the piece of information he had was THE most important thing regarding how the rest of the hole SHOULD have been played. In essence, the rules official said "If he grounded the club, I'm not going to give him a chance to get in the playoffs." The correct thing to do would have been to tell DJ "Hey, we're not 100% sure, but we think you were in a bunker back there, so play the rest of the hole as you see fit." That might have jogged DJs brain to think "Oh shit, that WAS a bunker" and given him a chance to try and hole that chip shot. Even if he tries to hole it and it ended up not being a penalty, he probably would have had a putt to win and worst case scenario been in the playoff. Instead the rules official decided that if it was a penalty, DJ didn't deserve a chance to hole that shot.

[TheGeekGolfer]

PS. Speaking of spinless - the decision to wait until a player is done the hole to inform him of penalty strokes is as chicken sh** as it gets. The player should have a right to know where he stands before he makes his next shot - just like opponents in match play. To allow Dustin to think he was putting to win the championship all while knowing he was putting to finish one back is the real embarassment to the PGA - imvho.

Exactly. While the chances were 'slim' that he could've holed out from long / left of the green on his '3rd' (actually 5th) stroke, it was still a chance. That's where great shots come from in sports, the slimmest of chances and then it happens. Odds NEVER apply to an individual shot.

Eh, I disagree. It's not a cop-out. I wouldn't want someone interrupting my play to tell me that I may have violated the rules. Additionally, the official walking with him wasn't the one who made the call, so maybe he didn't even know in time to prevent the loss.

Well...there are some valid points on both sides. I just know as a player, if they have already decided there is a violation (which I believe they did in this case), I would want to know. Here is my last attempt to sway you, if not...then we can 'agree to disagree'.

iacas - hypothetically, suppose you're in this scenario... tied for the lead on a PAR 5, 18th hole, your drive puts you in a bunker, not much of a lip and only 205 to the green. There's no water in front, so it's really not a decision to 'go for it or not'. If you nail it you'll be on the green and can 2-putt for the win. If you don't catch it good, you'll still be able to wedge it on and possibly make birdie to win or 2-putt for the tie. You (unknowingly), brush a piece of sand on your backswing, but you nail it and knock it to 10 ft. You have a good look at eagle, but....knowing that (in your mind) all you need is to 2-putt to win, you 'just make sure to get it close' and tap in for what you 'think' is your first win. Oh wait... the official (who knew all along) comes over and tells you that you have a 2-shot penalty because it WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR on tape that you brushed some sand in the bunker and incurred a 2-shot penalty. But, he didn't want to 'interrupt you', because "that's just the way it is". Do NOT tell me that you would not be upset / p#ssed / angry... if you had known, you could have MADE the 10 ft putt for a PAR and got into a playoff. Oh well...better luck next time

They didn't "decide" so much as "notice." From "up in the booth" (or wherever these mythical rules guys who see it on TV are), all they know is that they saw him violate the rule. Maybe he knows it and already accounted for it.

OK...your just being silly. To say that he already knew and was taking it into account is silly (imho). If he had any idea, he would've called a rules official over and there would've been a 1/2 hour delay before he hit his '3rd' (5th) shot. Which I guess is OK and somehow not 'unfair' to Nick Watney, because the 'player' called the rules official over and caused the delay? That makes no sense.

[chriskzoo]

The ridiculous thing is, if the RO says something to DJ, they can take care of it then and there before he even hits his 3rd/5th shot. If the rules official said that a penalty might be assessed, they could have easily walked back to the spot of the penalty and DJ would have seen that, despite not being able to tell when 50 people were standing in it, that yes, it was a bunker. I think at that point they could have hashed out if he grounded his club (clearly yes), was his ball actually IN the bunker or in some sand that was pushed out, or maybe where he grounded his club was outside the bunker but the ball was inside (you can't tell definitively that he soled his club behind the ball).

At least then DJ knows what the LIKELY outcome is. Worst case he tries to hole that chip and if it wasn't a penalty he two putts to be in the playoff.

[iacas]

We already have another thread on whether the RO should say something. I still say no, per their policy. That policy won't change. DJ could have called him over, and DJ broke the rules. Simple. And use the other thread, please. Quotes and things there.

[eedsmx691]

There is an article on ESPN.com with the official that was walking with Dustin and Nick during the final round. He states that DJ had asked on two different holes that day about bunkers, but not on the 18th.

[iacas]

BTW, people in bunkers?



The differences here?
a) the bunker style is more obvious and non-"linksy" (i.e. rough edges, etc.)
b) the player is Tiger Woods and the Caddie is Steve Williams... who knows to give his man space.
c) this bunker was just off the fairway (albeit on a different hole)

And yet there they are, people standing in the bunker when, in this case, they have no real reason to do so.

Not exactly the same, I grant y'all, but proof that people have stood in bunkers even recently.

[heyscuba]

Not totally true. They did not outline that patrons would be standing in and obstructing a hazard at the time a shot was being played.

They did mention that foot prints and tire tracks may be in the sand traps so I feel as if they did warn them about people being in them, standing or walking through, what's the diference,...?

i'm glad two things happened.

I don't get it,...? why do you think an asterisk would be in order if Bubba would have been declared the winner in regulation after the ruling,...? If you don't believe in the ruling (and you do believe in asterisk's) then either winner should have one under your belief. Personally, the asterisk thing make no sense to me. It was a clear rules violation that was outlined on line # 1 in the rules.

That's not the way the rule works. You don't get penalized twice for grounding the club twice before you take the shot. If he had left his shot in the bunker and then grounded it again before the next shot, it would have been another penalty.

Is this true,..? if so, once you ground your club you can do it again and again,...? I have a hard time believing that but I've yet to try and look it up. It's seems to me that the rule is there so you don't alter the amount of sand behind you ball, so if you have a fried egg lie it might be worth it to ground your club 4 or 5 times giving you a better shot at good ball contact,...?

Not arguing that point. It was a bunker. Just hard to tell because of the trash and mob of people standing in it.

after seeing this (I watched this in Kuwait and wasn't privy to many replays) and stopping the clip at :06 seconds there you can see the very clear outline of a bunker, one prerson standing in it and several standing on top of a huge lip and you see a ball cleary in a flat portion of sand the is attached to a huge portion of sand and having played around all these millions of bunkers and reading that #1 rule about the bunkers, no question it was a bunker and how he didn't even question it is beyond me,...

so in my mind DJ messed up there, but the course messed up by allowing people to stand in the bunkers,...

[zeg]

Is this true,..? if so, once you ground your club you can do it again and again,...? I have a hard time believing that but I've yet to try and look it up. It's seems to me that the rule is there so you don't alter the amount of sand behind you ball, so if you have a fried egg lie it might be worth it to ground your club 4 or 5 times giving you a better shot at good ball contact,...?

Yes, it's true. If you're doing it intentionally to gain an advantage, the committee would have grounds to DQ you. If, as happened here, you do it a few times without realizing what you're doing, you only take one penalty. Generally a repeated violation of a single rule only results in a single penalty for each real stroke you take. If you are made aware of its being a violation and you then do it again afterwards, that would be taken into consideration and you'd probably be given a second penalty.