LPGA blows it with Morgan Pressel slow play penalty

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by brocks

First, this isn't a Rule of Golf we're talking about; it's an LPGA policy. And second, the timing policy has discretion written right into it. It practically reeks with discretion:

"6. Commencing of Timing: Timing of a player officially commences when, by the discretion of the LPGA Official, it is clearly the player’s turn to play and nothing interferes with her ability to play the stroke. Time taken for determining yardage, club selection, wind conditions, etc. will count against the player’s overall time. On the putting green, timing commences after a player, by the discretion of an LPGA Rules Official, has had a reasonable amount of time to repair ball marks and remove loose impediments on her line of putt. Timing may commence before a player has replaced her ball on the putting green. A few additional seconds will be allotted to the first player in the group to play a: 1) tee shot on a par 3, 2) second shot, 3) chip shot, or 3) putt. Every effort will be made by an LPGA Rules Official to notify a group when timing has commenced, however, timings accrued prior to such notification shall count towards a player’s overall average for a given hole." (emphasis mine)

Clear as mud to me.

He should have swallowed his whistle.

[Mr. Desmond]

Y'all can beat this situation to death, but it is the past. Why not look at what can be done to resolve the issue and speed up play.

I think there is an assumption in that applying a rule in this situation, it fixes the problem. We penalize the player so they avoid the penalty in the future.

In general, I do not believe players don't  purposely play slow on purpose (although some may slow down if they know it irks another player).

I think it is a mental issue.

Look at Kevin Na - he yells at himself to pull the trigger.

Ben Crane - he wants to play faster and has improved, but he can only improve so much.

I'm certain Morgan and her playing partner want to play faster.

It's a mental thing.

My thoughts are that the LPGA and PGA Tour welcome players to their tour if they pass certain playing requirements. Perhaps they should add the ability to play within a certain allotted time to their membership requirements. Or perhaps they should require players to attend sessions on how to become more efficient on the course, require their caddies to attend the same courses to make certain these players are using more efficient techniques on the course, or require them to go to a psychologist who will work with them to improve their pace of play.

But fining the player does not attack the problem. It attacks the symptoms.

Yes, indirectly the player should get the message to seek help.

It is either player preparation or mental. But does the Tour help them, do they have seminars on preparation, do they have professionals to help these players?

My solution would be for the Tours to directly attack the issue. Fines will not help the game. Doing something positive with the player will help the game and its audience.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

No, Grasshopper, it was a general statement.

Since you are interested in evidence, why don't you supply the forum with evidence that shows that this rule is being enforced on every occasion, and that all groups are clocked according to the rules.

Frankly, I'm not interested. I think professionals should be treated as such, and instead of making examples of your professionals and affecting the outcome of matches, they should try to encourage faster play with other methods. And maybe they've tried other methods. I do not know.

I get it, you're not interested in facts.

But, the fact is, you have no support for the claim that anyone is making an example of anyone. The facts I know (that have been amply supported in this thread and the articles linked) support Pressel having broken a rule. She was substantially over on time, not just a few seconds, and had been amply warned.

Anyway, I can see you're not actually interested in anything but spouting your pompus "Grand Master" crap.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Same thing here.  I do not disagree with you, it is your teams responsibility.  However, because the QB does not have the luxury of seeing when he's about to run out of time so he can make sure to get the play off on time, I would surely hope that the back judges use their discretion,  and apply the "spirit" of the rule.  If the clock expires while you are still in the huddle, that is an obvious penalty, but if you are at the line and your receiver has already gone in motion, you are clearly about to snap it, so unless everybody freezes (or its a fourth and short attempt to draw the other team offsides, or the end of the game and you are ahead) then I'd hope he lets it slide.

If you don't have the luxury of a play clock, then you just don't get to do the NFL clock gaming thing where you run down to the last second. Same here. If you're not able to time it yourself, you can just be sure you get it off in time.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Timing each person's shot and putting them on the clock for every hole is probably too cumbersome and definitely inefficient.

Fairly sure that's the reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Of all the posters that don't like the rule, I haven't seen anybody bring up it's potentially biggest flaw.  It is a per-shot average rule.  Therefore, if Pressel were to miss her par putt, let's say, and quickly walk up and tap in her gimme-distance fourth shot, she wouldn't have broken any rule.  So it essentially penalizes the slow player that successfully executes, and not the slow player that unsuccessfully executes.

I believe there's an exception for tap-ins that take less than 10 seconds not being counted. I don't recall off-hand whether that is in the player's benefit or detriment in a case like this, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Y'all can beat this situation to death, but it is the past. Why not look at what can be done to resolve the issue and speed up play.

I think there is an assumption in that applying a rule in this situation, it fixes the problem. We penalize the player so they avoid the penalty in the future.

The stats have been collected. These rules substantially shortened the average round (from just shy of 5 hours to just shy of 4.5 hours, IIRC, or thereabouts.

[brocks]

My solution would be for the Tours to directly attack the issue. Fines will not help the game. Doing something positive with the player will help the game and its audience.

I agree. I didn't hear it, but it was reported that Tiger mentioned a much better idea today than he had last week (when he said not to give any warnings): go back to the days when players didn't mark their ball after every putt. Once you start putting, as long as you don't have to stand on another player's line, go ahead and putt out.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by zeg

I get it, you're not interested in facts.

But, the fact is, you have no support for the claim that anyone is making an example of anyone. The facts I know (that have been amply supported in this thread and the articles linked) support Pressel having broken a rule. She was substantially over on time, not just a few seconds, and had been amply warned.

Anyway, I can see you're not actually interested in anything but spouting your pompus "Grand Master" crap.

If you don't have the luxury of a play clock, then you just don't get to do the NFL clock gaming thing where you run down to the last second. Same here. If you're not able to time it yourself, you can just be sure you get it off in time.

The stats have been collected. These rules substantially shortened the average round (from just shy of 5 hours to just shy of 4.5 hours, IIRC, or thereabouts.

I did say these rules can improve play, but only so much.

If these people are professionals, there is no reason to fine them. I do not think the solution is fining or penalizing. It is doing something about the issue in a positive way.

Fining is lazy.

Fining does not help the player in the long run. Oh, yes, maybe in the short term, but it's not an effective long term solution by itself.

Why is a prepared professional who has mapped out the course and greens on a relatively uncrowded course taking 4.5 hours to play a round of golf?

It takes amateurs 4 hours or less to walk with a bag, and they don't even have the course or greens mapped out beforehand, although they may have GPS or lasers.

The Tours still have a problem with slow play because they do not attack the problem in a way that helps the player.

Oh, they talk about it, they grouse about it, they even threaten, and once in a while, they use their discretion to fine. But they still have a problem.

And what are we talking about today?

It's not about the winner. It's about a slow play penalty that turned a match.

[brocks]

It takes amateurs 4 hours or less to walk with a bag, and they don't even have the course or greens mapped out beforehand, although they may have GPS or lasers.

So why not let the pros use lasers? It would save a lot of time, and it wouldn't give them an unfair advantage. Actually, it would even the playing field, because now the guys who can afford the best caddies have the advantage.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by brocks

So why not let the pros use lasers? It would save a lot of time, and it wouldn't give them an unfair advantage. Actually, it would even the playing field, because now the guys who can afford the best caddies have the advantage.

A good idea.

[NM Golf]

Originally Posted by brocks

So can we please not call people cheaters, just because they have an honest difference of opinion?

First, I did not call anyone a cheater I said if they pick and choose when to use the rules they are a cheater. Second, don't tell me what I should or shouldn't do.

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Y'all can beat this situation to death, but it is the past. Why not look at what can be done to resolve the issue and speed up play.

I think there is an assumption in that applying a rule in this situation, it fixes the problem. We penalize the player so they avoid the penalty in the future.

In general, I do not believe players don't  purposely play slow on purpose (although some may slow down if they know it irks another player).

I think it is a mental issue.

Look at Kevin Na - he yells at himself to pull the trigger.

Ben Crane - he wants to play faster and has improved, but he can only improve so much.

I'm certain Morgan and her playing partner want to play faster.

It's a mental thing.

My thoughts are that the LPGA and PGA Tour welcome players to their tour if they pass certain playing requirements. Perhaps they should add the ability to play within a certain allotted time to their membership requirements. Or perhaps they should require players to attend sessions on how to become more efficient on the course, require their caddies to attend the same courses to make certain these players are using more efficient techniques on the course, or require them to go to a psychologist who will work with them to improve their pace of play.

But fining the player does not attack the problem. It attacks the symptoms.

Yes, indirectly the player should get the message to seek help.

It is either player preparation or mental. But does the Tour help them, do they have seminars on preparation, do they have professionals to help these players?

My solution would be for the Tours to directly attack the issue. Fines will not help the game. Doing something positive with the player will help the game and its audience.

Are you serious? Do you really think the players want the Tour starting seminars on how to prepare to hit a golf ball?! Really?! You actually believe the Tour should make these guys seek professional help if they play slow!? These are professionals, highly paid professionals, if they can't pull the trigger then they should find another line of work.

If they want to play faster then they will play faster, the excuses are ridiculous. Azahara Munoz found a way to play all her shots within the allotted time. Morgan Pressel didn't think she would get dinged, she was wrong. Good job rules official.

[rustyredcab]

has anyone seen the hole being played? Is there any video?

[x129]

I wasn't be sarcastic. It seems to me that all 18 holes should be under the same rules. The rules shouldn't switch 2/3's of the way through the match. If Munoz took 5 mins on a par 3 on the front nine and wasn't penalized (no idea if that happened),  it seems unfair to penalize the other player for taking 2:10 or so because the first player took 5 mins and put them behind schedule.  Would it be a pain to do? Sure. But it would be fair. The slow play rules don't come up much because when the whole field is playing slow, it is a lot harder to get on the clock.

Fun numbers would be to time a tournament (or just a hole) under these rules and see what percentage goes over under both the LPGA and PGA rules. The numbers I have seen suggest that about half the PGA field would fail the LPGA rules. Now I am sure some of that slow play is a result of not wanting to hurry up and wait. But my rough impression was that in 17 at the players, everyone took more than 30s for the the tee shot and first chip/putt so you better have left yourself a tap in.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

I understand you're being a bit sarcastic, but if people have a problem with the rule process (that being, only after a group falls behind par time or the group ahead of them is out of sight are they actually put on a clock), then they may want to suggest a better way to do it.  I find the current one pretty reasonable, save the fact that they don't attempt to determine who caused the group to fall behind in the first place (which can be subjective).  Timing each person's shot and putting them on the clock for every hole is probably too cumbersome and definitely inefficient.

Brandon

[RGoosen]

Originally Posted by The Recreational Golfer

It's not like Pressel was three seconds over the time limit, folks. It was 29 seconds over, 39 seconds over the rule if you throw in the "grace period" to account for things like having to change your club because the wind shifts.

What galls me is pros agonizing over the shot and then still hitting a clinker. I have yet to see anyone in a golf tournament on TV play better because they play slowly, or play worse because they have to speed up. Correct me if you have. Whatever happened to "miss 'em quick"?

Golf Channel used to run a special series with Dave Pelz and he had one show about pre-shot routines.  He would show videos of golfers at a national handicap golf tournament.  The videos he showed were hilarious.  He would point out how terrible the players golf shots got after two to three practice swings.  He would count one...two...three...four...five...chilli-dip

I think we should ask Rory Sabbatini his thoughts on the topic of slow play and Morgan's infraction.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKQhrGiXB88 - snoozefest

[bplewis24]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Clear as mud to me.

He should have swallowed his whistle.

You are being pretty disingenuous if you think anything in that text means the ref should have "swallowed his whistle."  Every reference to discretion is in when to start the clock, not when to apply the rule.  As alluded to earlier, in most scenarios, this would most likely result in a few seconds +/- for each shot.  Well, she was already given 10 extra seconds, and was still 29 seconds over.  There is no "swallow the whistle" discretion for that scenario.

Quote:

Originally Posted by x129

I wasn't be sarcastic.

So you were 100% serious about wanting to see the following:

Quote:

Each green could have a shot clock and when the player gets to the green they could see how much time they had to putt.  Think of the excitement when Tiger gets to the green with an eagle putt, looks at the clock and sees he has 5s to get the shot off.

I find it hard to take that serious.

Brandon

[brocks]

It's not like Pressel was three seconds over the time limit, folks. It was 29 seconds over, 39 seconds over the rule if you throw in the "grace period" to account for things like having to change your club because the wind shifts.  What galls me is pros agonizing over the shot and then still hitting a clinker. I have yet to see anyone in a golf tournament on TV play better because they play slowly, or play worse because they have to speed up. Correct me if you have. Whatever happened to "miss 'em quick"?

When I first read this, I thought you were joking, but I guess not. 29 seconds over time for the hole is less than ten seconds per shot. And since she had the honor, she's supposed to get "a few extra seconds," as their extremely ambiguous policy states. So it doesn't sound that cut and dried to me. PGA rules would have allowed her at least 140 seconds for the three shots, so IMO a case can be made that the LPGA rules are unreasonable. Ten seconds to change your club because the wind shifts is joke even for one shot, let alone an entire hole. As for your claim that players don't hit better or worse shots based on the time they take, obviously it can't be disproved, because we don't know what would have happened if they took more or less time. But I see Phil hit great shots after having a long conversation with Bones almost every round. And we all saw Harrington hit his chip into the water when he was put on the clock and forced to speed up, in that famous final round against Tiger.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by brocks

29 seconds over time for the hole is less than ten seconds per shot. And since she had the honor, she's supposed to get "a few extra seconds," as their extremely ambiguous policy states. So it doesn't sound that cut and dried to me. PGA rules would have allowed her at least 140 seconds for the three shots, so IMO a case can be made that the LPGA rules are unreasonable.

Ten seconds to change your club because the wind shifts is joke even for one shot, let alone an entire hole.

This is an argument for the rules to be altered.  That's different from suggesting the rule was improperly applied in this case.

[brocks]

This is an argument for the rules to be altered.  That's different from suggesting the rule was improperly applied in this case.

I'm arguing both points. 1. The LPGA policy is IMO a) poorly written, b) ambiguous, c) unreasonable, and d) unfair. a) and b) can be seen just by reading the policy. c) IMO it's unreasonable because the women are given only half the time per shot the PGA gives men (if you're the first to hit), and d) it's unfair because of what someone else brought up --- if you won the hole, the penalty is really loss of two holes (going as Pressel did from 3up to 1up), but if you lost the hole, your score is unaffected. A fair rule would have you lose one hole regardless of the score, just like the USGA does for having 15 clubs in the bag. Under USGA rules, if you win the first two holes, but then discover that you have 15 clubs in your bag, the match is all square after two. If you lose the first two holes, and then discover that you played them with 15 clubs in your bag, you're 4 down after two holes. Why can't the LPGA just do what the rest of golf does? 2. The policy doesn't just allow discretion from the officials, it mandates it, so they should use some discretion rather than suddenly going zero-tolerance in the semifinals of match play.

[Rudyprimo]

Tour official Doug Brecht looks like a complete moron in this case. And there's an even bigger problem when rules are not cut and dried and are up to the discretion of an official like the slow play rule is. Brecht should have used his discretion in applying the penalty knowing he had practically handed the match to Munoz, when Munoz was the slower player of the two. And I'm not just talking about discretion as to when the clock should start, I'm talking about the rare instances they call it. Munoz was the main reason the group was warned and then Brecht penalizes Pressel. That's not using discretion the right way. There were only 5 slow play penalties last year on the LPGA. I'm sure there cold have been dozens more called. And they're not because most officials don't want to affect the outcome of a tournament by calling a rules violation that is not evenly enforced. Same thing on the PGA tour, and that's why Na wasn't penalized even when his group had a two hole gap in front of them in the second round. Either set up a clock that starts as soon as the player away from you hits his shot. And then apply the rule even if it's 1 second over the allotted time. Otherwise you shouldn't have officials calling a slow play penalty only when they feel like it. A sport like golf is different from other sports in that there's a lull in between shots. Players have different internal clocks as to how fast or slow they set up and finally hit the ball. The thing I can compare it to is a pitcher in baseball. There are a few pitchers like Mark Buehrle who pitch fast, 2 hour games. Most other pitchers take 3-3 1/2 hours to finish a game. At least the umpires know better than to call such an arbitrary rule, the 12 second rule, that could change the outcome of a game. Brecht's penalty on Pressel would be like an umpire not calling the 12 second rule the entire game, but issuing a warning to speed up, and then calling the rule with the bases loaded in he ninth inning and giving the team a run. And yes, it is fair to compare other sports to golf because in all sports there are rules that are arbitrarily applied that can affect the outcome of a game. Putting a shot clock in with strict adherence would ruin golf. I could care less how long some guys take as far as there being a 10-15 second difference between some players. There's been some really great shots that would never have happened if they had a shot clock. Because of it being an arbitrary, seldom applied rule, the penalty should be monetary, not handing the tournament to someone who caused the warning in the first place.

[zeg]

(I want to apologize for the formatting. The editor really seems to hate me.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by brocks

I'm arguing both points.
1. The LPGA policy is IMO a) poorly written, b) ambiguous, c) unreasonable, and d) unfair.
a) and b) can be seen just by reading the policy.

I don't agree. It doesn't strike me as worse than many sections of the RoG.

c) IMO it's unreasonable because the women are given only half the time per shot the PGA gives men (if you're the first to hit), and

That's not an argument for its being unreasonable. I can just as easily say that the PGA is unreasonably lenient because it gives twice the time per shot as the LPGA.

Quote:

d) it's unfair because of what someone else brought up --- if you won the hole, the penalty is really loss of two holes (going as Pressel did from 3up to 1up), but if you lost the hole, your score is unaffected.
A fair rule would have you lose one hole regardless of the score, just like the USGA does for having 15 clubs in the bag. Under USGA rules, if you win the first two holes, but then discover that you have 15 clubs in your bag, the match is all square after two. If you lose the first two holes, and then discover that you played them with 15 clubs in your bag, you're 4 down after two holes. Why can't the LPGA just do what the rest of golf does?

That rule is an anomaly among the penalties. Almost every other two-stroke penalty in the rules just means loss of hole, which is what you have here. So why should this be treated like the anomalous rule? That's not at all self-evident.

Quote:

2. The policy doesn't just allow discretion from the officials, it mandates it, so they should use some discretion rather than suddenly going zero-tolerance in the semifinals of match play.

There was some discretion granted by the rule in terms of when to start the clock, but not about when to enforce the penalty based on that discretion once the group was on the clock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudyprimo

Munoz was the main reason the group was warned and then Brecht penalizes Pressel. That's not using discretion the right way.
There were only 5 slow play penalties last year on the LPGA. I'm sure there cold have been dozens more called.

[...]

Either set up a clock that starts as soon as the player away from you hits his shot. And then apply the rule even if it's 1 second over the allotted time. Otherwise you shouldn't have officials calling a slow play penalty only when they feel like it.
[...]

Putting a shot clock in with strict adherence would ruin golf. I could care less how long some guys take as far as there being a 10-15 second difference between some players. There's been some really great shots that would never have happened if they had a shot clock.
Because of it being an arbitrary, seldom applied rule, the penalty should be monetary, not handing the tournament to someone who caused the warning in the first place.

First off, the rules don't permit the discretion you're asking for. Once the group is on the clock, they are subject to the penalty.

Second, how often do groups fall a hole behind? How often are they on the clock? Do you have anything more than a vague feeling? I'd really like to know this answer, but I don't think anyone knows.

Yes, I'd be fine with it being 1s. There is already discretion as to when to start the clock---something that is absolutely unavoidable in any rule of this sort. That's, IMO, the best you can do. It enables the official to be as impartial as possible. He can focus on determining when the conditions allow the player to consider it her turn. If you allow discretion after the clock is stopped, he already knows whether he's choosing to give a penalty. So absolutely, the discretion is in the right place. You don't need another layer of ambiguity.

As to your second-to-last point, we would ALL prefer not to have a time rule. If everyone played within 10-15 seconds of each other, we wouldn't be having this discussion. They don't. You have to draw a line somewhere, somehow.

And, as to your last point, it's not an arbitrary rule.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Rudyprimo

Tour official Doug Brecht looks like a complete moron in this case. And there's an even bigger problem when rules are not cut and dried and are up to the discretion of an official like the slow play rule is. Brecht should have used his discretion in applying the penalty knowing he had practically handed the match to Munoz, when Munoz was the slower player of the two. And I'm not just talking about discretion as to when the clock should start, I'm talking about the rare instances they call it.

Munoz was the main reason the group was warned and then Brecht penalizes Pressel. That's not using discretion the right way.

I'm sorry, but there is nothing within the rule giving the official the discretion you are referring to.  It is absolutely NOT up to the "discretion of the official" when to apply the penalty.  Some of you are reading what you want to within the rule, even contrary to what it actually says.

And he didn't practically hand the match to Munoz.  That's a bit revisionist.  It clearly altered the end result, but Pressel was 1up with something like 7 or 8 holes remaining.  Nothing was set in stone at that point.  And I'm wondering how many of you that continually suggest that Munoz was the slower player actually watched the match to know this for a fact?  Do you know for a fact it's seldom applied?  How do you know it's arbitrary?

Brandon