LPGA blows it with Morgan Pressel slow play penalty

[rustyredcab]

Is there an LPGA and Golf Channel conspiracy to keep the video of the two of them playing the hole out of the public?

I keep searching and can only find the edited clip of just Pressel and just while she is being timed. Show the darn video of the play, in context, and let the fans see how this was so a clearly wonderful call.

[brocks]

Arbitrary implies that they just decided randomly to apply the rule for no apparent reason.

That's one possible interpretation, but I don't see how anyone can say that after I've made a dozen posts explaining my objections to the policy. Although I do think it was extremely ill-advised to suddenly crack down during the semifinals of match play (unless they made it VERY clear to the players that that would happen, rather than just giving the same spiel they give before every event), I have never said or implied that they applied the rule for no apparent reason. I am talking about the policy itself, not its application. Unless they can show studies that prove that women are much more decisive than men, then giving women 101 seconds to hit three shots, under circumstances where the PGA would give men 180 seconds for the same three shots, is arbitrary. And they exacerbate that by not defining what "a few additional seconds" is, when all they have to do is see what the PGA did -- you get 20 additional seconds per shot if you're first to hit. So I guess whether or not you get a penalty depends on which official is timing you. If Pressel had been timed by someone who thought that the PGA wasn't full of idiots, he would have given her 20 seconds extra per shot, and she would have been well under even the LPGA's "30 seconds plus a few additional seconds" policy. But evidently, whoever timed her thought that even ten extra seconds per shot was too much, so she lost two holes --- another arbitrary part of the policy that makes no sense, when the Rules of Golf call for just subtracting one hole, regardless of the score, for a similar meta-penalty that involves the entire hole, rather actions taken during a single stroke.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by brocks

That's one possible interpretation, but I don't see how anyone can say that after I've made a dozen posts explaining my objections to the policy. Although I do think it was extremely ill-advised to suddenly crack down during the semifinals of match play (unless they made it VERY clear to the players that that would happen, rather than just giving the same spiel they give before every event), I have never said or implied that they applied the rule for no apparent reason.

So maybe its just a matter of slilghtly different definitions of the word "arbitrary" between you and Brandon.  Annnnyways ...

I haven't followed much LPGA (and if I'm being 100% honest the rare times I do watch is to see the cute girls playing golf) but I have learned from this thread that they didn't suddenly crack down, they have actually enforced this rule several times (9) in the past 4-5 years, and I think 3 already this year.  Had this been the first time they've issued a penalty since 1995 (picked that year because that is the last time the PGA has enforced theirs) then I would TOTALLY agree that the semifinals of a match play event is an absurd time to decide to make an example.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by brocks

That's one possible interpretation, but I don't see how anyone can say that after I've made a dozen posts explaining my objections to the policy.

Because your "explanations" haven't proven anything.  You are on an extreme end here.  Your agenda is baffling and your logic is flawed.  Calling the rule arbitrary because they get less time than the men is nothing but flawed logic.  Somebody could easily say the men get too much time, and be no more right or wrong than you are. For the record, both numbers are equally arbitrary (which doesn't make the rule arbitrary).  There is likely plenty of thought that has gone into them, but to you or I, they are simply numbers.

If you want to call the rule stupid and senseless, explain how it should be better.  What is your rule to prevent slow play?  How is it implemented?  How is it worded?  How do you possibly define an exact point in time when to start the clock, with some universal reference point that encompasses all possible scenarios so that "discretion" is never, ever needed?

Brandon

[brocks]

Because your "explanations" haven't proven anything.  You are on an extreme end here.  Your agenda is baffling and your logic is flawed.  Calling the rule arbitrary because they get less time than the men is nothing but flawed logic.  Somebody could easily say the men get too much time, and be no more right or wrong than you are. For the record, both numbers are equally arbitrary (which doesn't make the rule arbitrary).  There is likely plenty of thought that has gone into them, but to you or I, they are simply numbers. If you want to call the rule stupid and senseless, explain how it should be better.  What is your rule to prevent slow play?  How is it implemented?  How is it worded?  How do you possibly define an exact point in time when to start the clock, with some universal reference point that encompasses all possible scenarios so that "discretion" is never, ever needed?

Um, I'm not expecting my posts to prove anything, although I think they are more fact-based than average, if the commentators on Golf Central are any indication of what's average. I'm just hoping that my explanations make my position clear. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I would hope they are arguing against something I actually said. For example, I never said or implied that they imposed the penalty on Pressel for no reason. As for my "agenda," I don't have one; I'm just giving my opinion. I don't watch the LPGA, and can only name half a dozen players, and would likely misspell most of those. Of the players I do recognize, Pressel is probably my least favorite, because it seems like every time I see her, she's crying about something (which I realize is unfair to her, because I only see her when Golf Central does a story about her crying). But when I read the LPGA policy, it seemed dumb to me, and nobody either here or on TV has said anything to change my mind. Now that my baffling motives are cleared up (heh), I never said discretion is never needed; in fact, I said the opposite. When I posted about all the places the LPGA policy mentions discretion, I wasn't complaining about it; I was responding to posts that said (or implied) that people who want to use discretion are cheaters. Obviously discretion must be used in starting the clock, but IMO discretion should also be used in recognizing that conditions may have changed since the time pars were set before the round, in recognizing that gusting winds may make it unfair to expect a player to hit a shot within 30 seconds, and even in recognizing that match play is different from stroke play. To say the PGA gives too much time is facile, but the PGA is the standard for American golf, so IMO the burden of proof is on the LPGA to show why their time limits are more reasonable. I honestly don't see how anyone who has ever played golf in gusting winds can say 30 seconds is plenty of time, with no exceptions allowed, and so IMO the 30-second rule is arbitrary. Arbitrary doesn't always mean horrible, and in some cases it's necessary (you have to have some time limit), but IMO if they deviate from the PGA policy for no good reason, then it's *needlessly* arbitrary. And if they leave it to individual officials to decide what "a few additional seconds" means, it's also unfairly arbitrary. And I have already said in several posts how the LPGA's policy can be improved. Give a flat 20 seconds extra to the player first up, instead of a meaningless "a few additional seconds" that depends on what the official had for breakfast. Rewrite the part about tap-ins so that it is intelligible, or get rid of it altogether. Make the penalty in match play the loss of one hole, regardless of the score, rather than the loss of two holes if you won the hole where you had the bad time, and apparently no penalty if you lost the hole. Hope that helps.

[brocks]

I haven't followed much LPGA (and if I'm being 100% honest the rare times I do watch is to see the cute girls playing golf) but I have learned from this thread that they didn't suddenly crack down, they have actually enforced this rule several times (9) in the past 4-5 years, and I think 3 already this year.

I mentioned that myself several pages ago, but I haven't been able to find if they ever did it in the late stages of match play before. Does anybody know?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

When the rule uses (as quoted earlier in this thread) the phrase 'at the official's discretion', it makes it subjective.

By all accounts the rules official applied the rule as loosely as possible, waiting until the last possible moment to 'start the clock.'

Originally Posted by zipazoid

We can post until we're blue in the face that 60 seconds is 60 seconds, but clearly, that's not enforced uniformly (and no, iacas, I cannot prove that - it's just common sense. Not every player taking more than 60 seconds is penalized - Kevin Na would have 10 shots added to his score if so).

Bzzzzt. Wrong.

Kevin Na's group wasn't out of position. He also doesn't play on the LPGA Tour and is thus not subjected to their policies and rules.

It's not "common sense." That's the type of thing someone losing an argument says.

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Compare & contrast to Dustin Johnson in the 2010 PGA, when he grounded his club. That was clear-cut with video proof - he grounded his club in a hazard. I would imagine there wasn't too much debate about that.

Uhm.... you'd be wrong about that. Really, really wrong about "wasn't too much debate about that."

Originally Posted by zipazoid

And I will contend that on the back nine of a semifinal match-play match, where only one of the players gets gigged & it costs her 2 holes & as a result she goes on the lose the match was a horrible time to decide to enforce it. At least in stroke play the rest of the field benefits from Pressel's gaffe - in match play it benefitted only her opponent.

The rule was enforced when it was broken . Seems to me that's the best time to enforce the rule. The penalty was loss of hole. Not two. It cost her one hole. She was never 3 up. She was 2up, lost the hole, and was 1up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by brocks

Having the honor is not a matter of bad luck, and that is exactly why the penalty was arbitrary.

The penalty isn't arbitrary.

An arbitrary penalty would be "loss of hole this time, last time it was that you had to do 500 pushups, and the time before that the penalty was you had to buy me a beer."

A definition: " Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system."

It's not based on a whim, and it's not a random choice, and it has a reason and a system.

Not arbitrary.

Originally Posted by brocks

And Fotz is quoted as saying she didn't seem to be in a hurry, as if that proves she deserved the penalty. Really? Is that what all the True Golf Purists want to see --- players hitting their shots in a hurry?

For the record, I'll take players hitting their shots inside of 40 seconds on average when they are on the clock because they're out of position over continuing to take their time, you bet!

Originally Posted by brocks

Although I do think it was extremely ill-advised to suddenly crack down during the semifinals of match play (unless they made it VERY clear to the players that that would happen, rather than just giving the same spiel they give before every event), I have never said or implied that they applied the rule for no apparent reason.

Uhm, it's a policy/rule on the LPGA. How "very clear" do they have to make it for you to be satisfied?

Originally Posted by brocks

Unless they can show studies that prove that women are much more decisive than men, then giving women 101 seconds to hit three shots, under circumstances where the PGA would give men 180 seconds for the same three shots, is arbitrary.

Dude, buy a dictionary. It's not arbitrary.

And who cares? Perhaps 20 seconds should be the rule and the PGA Tour is just way the heck out of it. They haven't assessed a penalty in 17 years. Clearly 180 seconds is WAY too long. If I was wagering, I'd put my money on the LPGA being closer to being "correct" on the timing required.

PLUS, again, the group has to be ON THE CLOCK. If you maintain your position, you can take 300 seconds to play three shots if you walk quickly between them or something. Same on the PGA Tour. You've gotta be out of position AND on the clock before the timing even becomes relevant.

Jerry Foltz knows a lot more about the situation than you do, can you concede that?

Originally Posted by brocks

And they exacerbate that by not defining what "a few additional seconds" is, when all they have to do is see what the PGA did -- you get 20 additional seconds per shot if you're first to hit. So I guess whether or not you get a penalty depends on which official is timing you. If Pressel had been timed by someone who thought that the PGA wasn't full of idiots, he would have given her 20 seconds extra per shot, and she would have been well under even the LPGA's "30 seconds plus a few additional seconds" policy.

She was at 39 seconds over, was she not, or 29 if you give her the added 10 seconds. So she'd have still been over, and Foltz said the guy didn't start counting until he absolutely had to.

[jamo]

Compare & contrast to Dustin Johnson in the 2010 PGA, when he grounded his club. That was clear-cut with video proof - he grounded his club in a hazard. I would imagine there wasn't too much debate about that.

FWIW, you might want to go back and read some of the discussions from that. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/b/pga/2010_pga_championship_final_round_chat]Here[/URL] (around 7:00), [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/38911/2010-pga-championship/342]here[/URL], [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/39109/pga-fiasco]here[/URL], and [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/39138/can-pga-rules-officials-be-proactive]here[/URL]. Maybe not a lot of debate by the rules officials, but there was here.

[bingo]

I play a lot of golf and don't like slow play.

However, I have never played for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

My understanding of how the rule is stated is that a player is allowed so many seconds per shot,

Based on that criteria, If Pressel had missed the par putt and tapped in then there would have been no penalty (she was within the limit for four shots)  and she would have been 2up. The fact that she made the putt put her in violation of the "rule", Does that make sense?

If she had 3 putted and lost the hole there would have been no penalty.

If on her tee shot she took over a minute to hit it and she got a hole in one she would have been penalized. I think not!!!

Does anyone see the stupidity of the formulation of the rule?

The referee told Jerry Foltz that couldn't ignore the "rule of golf" and that he had to enforce the "rule of golf".

It is not a "rule of golf". It's a rule specified by the LPGA that should be enforced with a modicum of common sense specifically not on the 12th hole of the semi-final match when they are the last group on the course.

[brocks]

Uhm, it's a policy/rule on the LPGA. How "very clear" do they have to make it for you to be satisfied?

They have to make it very clear that they are going to be zero-tolerance during the semifinals of match play. Just having the policy in print doesn't mean anything, and just enforcing it for stroke play events doesn't mean much more, for this situation. As someone else noted, they have a 55-MPH speed limit posted on most highways, but I'll bet a lot of people would be surprised if they suddenly started writing tickets for everyone who exceeded it, even if they did it five times last year when it was foggy and there was a litter crew on the side of the road. [quote] Dude, buy a dictionary. It's not arbitrary[/quote] Actually all penalties are more or less arbitrary, but that's unavoidable (and I agree to disagree with you about my ability to read a dictionary). As I posted an hour or so before you wrote this, I acknowledge that they have to pick *some* number for the time limits and the number of strokes or holes or dollars imposed, but it's needlessly deviating from the PGA that I consider unnecessarily and/or unfairly arbitrary. [quote]The penalty was loss of hole. Not two. It cost her one hole. She was never 3 up. She was 2up, lost the hole, and was 1up.[/quote] That's a perfect example of it being unfairly arbitrary. By that logic, if Munoz had birdied the hole, or Pressel had double bogeyed, the score would have been unchanged. So you get a severe penalty if you play well, and no penalty if you play poorly. [quote] And who cares? Perhaps 20 seconds should be the rule and the PGA Tour is just way the heck out of it. They haven't assessed a penalty in 17 years. Clearly 180 seconds is WAY too long. [/quote] Evidently a lot of people care, at least for a few days, although I'm rapidly losing interest. And you should take your own advice about reading a dictionary if you think "CLEARLY" is a synonym for "in my opinion." [quote]PLUS, again, the group has to be ON THE CLOCK. If you maintain your position, you can take 300 seconds to play three shots if you walk quickly between them or something. [/quote] You don't have to be a hole behind another group to be put on the clock. You just have to be behind the schedule they set before the round begins. If conditions change, or if the guy who makes the schedule sets unreasonable times, tough. [quote]Jerry Foltz knows a lot more about the situation than you do, can you concede that?[/quote] First, I didn't dispute anything Foltz said; I just asked whether it's a worthy goal to make players hurry their shots. Second, if he is typical of the GC commentators, then I'll concede that he knows more about the specific actions of the specific official on that specific day, but not about the LPGA policy. [quote][quote] Originally Posted by brocks: And they exacerbate that by not defining what "a few additional seconds" is, when all they have to do is see what the PGA did -- you get 20 additional seconds per shot if you're first to hit. So I guess whether or not you get a penalty depends on which official is timing you. If Pressel had been timed by someone who thought that the PGA wasn't full of idiots, he would have given her 20 seconds extra per shot, and she would have been well under even the LPGA's "30 seconds plus a few additional seconds" policy.[/quote] She was at 39 seconds over, was she not, or 29 if you give her the added 10 seconds. So she'd have still been over, and Foltz said the guy didn't start counting until he absolutely had to. [/quote] OK, so you haven't read the policy. It doesn't say she gets additional seconds per hole, it says she gets additional seconds per shot, whenever she is first to hit (they even go through it -- tee shot, second shot, chip, putt). Like everyone else, I haven't seen an unedited clip of the play, but if other posters are correct that Pressel was the first to drive, first to chip, and first to putt, she would have received an extra 60 seconds for the hole (if she got 20 additional seconds per shot, as the PGA allows), and would have been 21 seconds under the LPGA's "30 seconds plus additional seconds" per shot, even without the ten-second cushion (which apparently *is* for the entire hole).

[brocks]

Does anyone see the stupidity of the formulation of the rule?

Now that you mention it, yes.

[brocks]

[quote]Originally Posted by zipazoid Compare & contrast to Dustin Johnson in the 2010 PGA, when he grounded his club. That was clear-cut with video proof - he grounded his club in a hazard. I would imagine there wasn't too much debate about that.

FWIW, you might want to go back and read some of the discussions from that. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/b/pga/2010_pga_championship_final_round_chat]Here[/URL] (around 7:00), [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/38911/2010-pga-championship/342]here[/URL], [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/39109/pga-fiasco]here[/URL], and [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/39138/can-pga-rules-officials-be-proactive]here[/URL]. Maybe not a lot of debate by the rules officials, but there was here.[/quote] Actually, I don't remember much debate about whether he grounded his club, or even whether it was a hazard. But there was quite a bit of debate about whether he should have known that it was a hazard, or whether the rules official should have told him it was.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by brocks

They have to make it very clear that they are going to be zero-tolerance during the semifinals of match play.

No they don't. It's zero tolerance ALL the time. That's why they have a policy/rule in the first place.

Originally Posted by brocks

As someone else noted, they have a 55-MPH speed limit posted on most highways, but I'll bet a lot of people would be surprised if they suddenly started writing tickets for everyone who exceeded it, even if they did it five times last year when it was foggy and there was a litter crew on the side of the road.

And that has what to do with this?

By that logic, should we just let PGA Tour players move their balls in the fairway because it really doesn't affect anything? Maybe penalize one out of every thousand "rollers" like we do the occasional speeding motorist?

Terrible analogy.

Originally Posted by brocks

Actually all penalties are more or less arbitrary

Seriously, look up the definition. Penalties aren't random or on a whim.

Originally Posted by brocks

That's a perfect example of it being unfairly arbitrary. By that logic, if Munoz had birdied the hole, or Pressel had double bogeyed, the score would have been unchanged. So you get a severe penalty if you play well, and no penalty if you play poorly.

Actually, you get the same exact penalty: loss of hole.

[carrx]

Originally Posted by brocks

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.

We actually tried this in my Men's Club tournaments last year.  It doesn't speed up play.  In fact, what you typically get is a mishmash of missed 2 and 3 foot cleanup putts as guys are totally knocked out of their routines and putting like they're playing "Twister" as they try to avoid each other's intended lines.

[luu5]

Originally Posted by iacas

Actually, you get the same exact penalty: loss of hole.

Like when you are on death row and happen to die before the execution...

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by jamo

FWIW, you might want to go back and read some of the discussions from that. Here (around 7:00), here, here, and here. Maybe not a lot of debate by the rules officials, but there was here.

Trust me jamo, I won't. I've been here long enough to know how you guys roll. This place can debate whether air is good.

Now, before my words are latched onto like a pit bull & the debate becomes nuancing what I said v what I was implying, I do hope my point came through - grounding a club in a hazard is clear. A slow play rule that features the phrase that it's at the official's discretion is not. My opinion.

[zipazoid]

Bzzzzt. Wrong.

Kevin Na's group wasn't out of position. He also doesn't play on the LPGA Tour and is thus not subjected to their policies and rules.

It's not "common sense." That's the type of thing someone losing an argument says.

And that's the type of thing someone says when their argument is being eroded away.

So now it's about being out of position? I thought it was about taking too long to hit a shot.

Tell me why it isn't common sense to say that not everyone taking more than 60 seconds has been penalized? I can't prove it, as I do not have a vault of video or pour through (nor the time), but to turn the argument around, prove to me that everyone has. You can't prove it either. Therefore we have to go to 'common sense'. Doesn't mean I'm losing the argument. In other words, I'm not losing the arugment because you think I am.

[ev780]

Well hell,  after 143 posts in this thread, and thousands of other posts about slow play,  I think I have the solution and it will make me rich.  Create a timer similar to what they use in chess.  Push the button after you hit and it starts the other guys clock.  After that guy hits then he pushes the button to stop his and start the opponents.  If you exceed your time you loose!!

Done!!!  Golf is now a timed sport and there will be no further talk of slow play.  I can now choose my course based on how long they give me to play rather than how long it is or how it is rated.  Speed golfers will be happy and guys like me who enjoy the outdoors will sell their clubs and find something else to do.