Lexi Thompson's 4 Stroke Penalty at the ANA

[boogielicious]

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

As this discussion goes on, while I've never felt that call ins hurt the game, I'm becoming more and more adamant that they actually do benefit it, in exactly the manner you mention.

It almost went unnoticed, and didn't even get much, if any comment here (unless I missed it), but there was a call in situation regarding Sergio on, I believe 13, on Sunday.  Sergio took his unplayable out of the bushes and dropped in the pine straw.  As he was tidying up, with cameras watching everything in high-def close-up, his ball settled, almost imperceptibly.  He never noticed, and played his shot, saving a great bogey.  Within 10 minutes, we were informed that calls had come in, the situation had been reviewed, and a ruling had been made that no breach had occurred because the movement, though there, could not have been noticed without the HDTV shot.  

Had call-ins not been allowed.  Had the committee not been made aware of the situation by those outside, knowledgeable observers, the tournament could easily been completed before anyone could be made aware of it.  Can you imagine the s**t storm that would have erupted when, not if, that video later came to light?  As it was, the call-ins identified an issue that rightfully needed to be reviewed by the committee.  It was.  The right decision was made.  Viewers were informed, and we moved on, with nary a blink.  As a result, this Masters will be remembered as one of the better of all time, instead of potentially embroiled in a controversy that could follow it forever.  

Thank goodness for those who called in.

Agree. Although I do agree with some other comments that stated instead of saying a viewer called, they should say that video was being reviewed. It may help how reviews are seen by the public.

On another note, I saw a whole bunch of crappy marking of balls during the round similar to Lexi's. They approached from the side and marked it in a similar manner. It didn't look to me like the put the mark directly behind the ball with respect to the cup. Bubba even did an overhand mark, very nonchalant. What I didn't see was them replacing the ball.

[Aflighter]

1 hour ago, MRR said:

Absolutely.

Even if I felt the ruling were incorrect, I am at least 100% confident that the issue was reviewed and administered by the appropriate individual(s).

If moving your ball that lil bit would create a sh...tstorm then id say growup and quit crying and play better instead of complaining over a lil ball mark which gave her no advantage whatsoever. Unfortunately in todays world people like complaining over small stupid stuff. 

[rehmwa]

2 hours ago, David in FL said:

......Sergio took his unplayable out of the bushes and dropped in the pine straw. 

........cameras watching everything in high-def close-up, his ball settled, almost imperceptibly

.........Within 10 minutes, we were informed that calls had come in,

Thank goodness for those who called in.

I have the opposite (and more visceral) reaction than "thank goodness"

But regardless of either position - why on earth do they even need to tell us about the calls?  if they want to commentate that balls will shift in piles of pine straw no matter what one does and the judges watched this and already ruled, fine.  it helps no one to know that calls came in (they did state very clearly after the placement, "now he has to walk very carefully" or something of the sort - that must be code word for "hit your speed dial")

I cringe now at each and every prolonged closeup of anything in a tournament because somehow, someway, the focus will leave the tourney and go towards some idiotic nitpickery - but.....that's what golf is

 

what we need is a tournament where there is a clear 800 number on screen and the cameras spend extended times on lots of shots on random players - with rewards offered to the 'best' call ins on rules violations.  they could offer prizes, cash and trips to viewers - I think this would motivate a lot of people to learn the rules.  It would be like a giant gameshow.

Edited April 12, 2017 by rehmwa

[MRR]

1 minute ago, rehmwa said:

why on earth do they even need to tell us about the calls? 

So that we know it was reviewed and evaluated.  Otherwise, we might think that someone "got away with something" because nobody noticed it.

IMO, a ruling with which I disagree is still better than no ruling.

3 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

... somehow, someway, the focus will leave the tourney and go towards some idiotic nitpickery - but.....that's what golf is

When Dustin Johnson withdrew, I really thought the cameras would leave the coarse for 30 minutes so that four idiots in chairs could talk about what they thought Tiger Woods would have said about it.

[rehmwa]

1 minute ago, MRR said:

So that we know it was reviewed and evaluated.  Otherwise, we might think that someone "got away with something" because nobody noticed it.

 

You didn't understand that comment.  They can say it was reviewed and evaluated and still not have to tell us it was due to call ins.  that would be easier on the 'annoyed' television public.  So maybe 5 or 10 people that called in don't get a bit of weak press ...

[MRR]

1 minute ago, rehmwa said:

They can say it was reviewed and evaluated and still not have to tell us it was due to call ins.  that would be easier on the 'annoyed' television public.  

Ah.  Yes, I agree with that statement.

[iacas]

5 hours ago, BallStriker said:

I took zero's comment here to mean that it negatively impacts the general popularity/following of the PGA/LPGA......from there, you can argue that......less interest in game at highest level=less interest in the game at the individual level=less money in the industry overall=bad for the game

I don't think it really does that at all.

There really weren't any casual fans watching the ANA Inspiration.

5 hours ago, Aflighter said:

If moving your ball that lil bit would create a sh...tstorm then id say growup and quit crying and play better instead of complaining over a lil ball mark which gave her no advantage whatsoever. Unfortunately in todays world people like complaining over small stupid stuff. 

She moved it plenty far enough to gain an advantage - she could have avoided a spike mark or other imperfection that could have caused her to miss the putt.

You don't know.

[BallStriker]

4 hours ago, iacas said:

I don't think it really does that at all.

There really weren't any casual fans watching the ANA Inspiration.

 

The context of his statement is broader than the ANA incident....not saying he is right or wrong, but I belive the point of his statement has been misinterpreted in this thread

[MRR]

18 hours ago, rehmwa said:

You didn't understand that comment.  They can say it was reviewed and evaluated and still not have to tell us it was due to call ins.

I know I agreed with that statement, but I'm reversing on what I said a bit.  

For the most part, I agree that the public does not need to know that this was from a phone-in.  Not even sure why they allow phone-ins, but I'm not on that board.

Think of the bigger mess it would have been if they simply ruled that it was two two-stroke penalties based on actions the day before, but said nothing else (even if questioned).  Then the internet would be awash with people thinking that the LPGA was out to get a particular golfer for reasons unknoen.  The fact that someone called in at least explains the unusual scrutiny of Lexi's actions.

 

I have ideas on a better process, but all of them involve other things that allow for cheating (or playing fairly but being accused of cheating) in other fashions.  That's an inherent problem in any activity.

[MuniGrit]

I bet Lexi marks her ball correctly now after she was caught trying to gain an advantage.

[zero]

22 hours ago, BallStriker said:

I took zero's comment here to mean that it negatively impacts the general popularity/following of the PGA/LPGA......from there, you can argue that......less interest in game at highest level=less interest in the game at the individual level=less money in the industry overall=bad for the game

I don't think anyone can argue that call-ins are bad for the integrity of the game......my 2 cents

This was my intended point, thanks. I said nothing about viewers calling in, or questioning the fairness of the ruling as it applies to the ball being moved. But as it applies to the day-after "you signed an incorrect scorecard even though presumably you didn't know you broke a rule and that it was incorrect"... that is very off-putting to the average viewer. Someone is leading a major, playing the best golf, and wham, you lose, good day. And with that I will agree to disagree with those who know much more than I about the RoG :)  @DaveP043 @boogielicious  @iacas

[rehmwa]

2 hours ago, MRR said:

Think of the bigger mess it would have been if they simply ruled that it was two two-stroke penalties based on actions the day before, but said nothing else (even if questioned).  Then the internet would be awash with people thinking that the LPGA was out to get a particular golfer for reasons unknoen.  The fact that someone called in at least explains the unusual scrutiny of Lexi's actions.

Meh - They can explain the violations without quoting the source.  In no way did I imply they just penalize the player without saying what the violations were for...  Just "They" get to be the source as far as the viewing public is concerned.

Either way they look dumb -

1 - they admit they took a call in.  they look dumb because someone outside the tourney caught a rule issue they missed.  Everyone cries and whines.  And a lot of people complain about call ins.

2 - they don't admit they took a call in and just own it.  They look dumb because they didn't find it right away.  Everyone cries and whines.  But they don't get the pointless dialogue about call ins.

 

In both cases the player looks bad because they didn't catch their own violations.....

Edited April 13, 2017 by rehmwa

[MRR]

3 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Meh - They can explain the violations without quoting the source.  In no way did I imply they just penalize the player without saying what the violations were for...  J

I must not be clear on my point.

If the LPGA enforces a ruling 24 hours after the infraction and does not cite a reason for taking so damn long, then the rabid supporters of that golfer will cry foul.  Even those who are not rabid supports would question why it took so long, especially when taking so long forces the additional two-stroke penalty*

You are correct, though; either way, they look dumb.

 

My proposed solution;

1) 12 hour statute of limitations.

2) Challenge that is not made by an official must come from a Player on the tournament.

3) Player must be ahead of, or no more than four stroke behind, the "violator".  This is so that certain ramifications (see later) cannot be taken by low-ranked "rules hounds" trying to help (and possibly being paid by) a leader.

4) Upon notice of this challenge, the violator has 60 minutes to accept that a penalty was made and retroactively change the score card without the additional two-stroke penalty

5) If the violator refuses to accept the change, the Rules Committee then looks at the evidence and makes a ruling.

6) If the Rules Committee decides there was a violation, the violator incurs the penalty and the additional two-stroke penalty for signing an incorrect card.

7) If the Rules Committee decides that there was NO violation, the accuser gets a two-stroke penalty.  This will prevent people from crying foul all the time and help ensure that only real violations are brought up.

I'm sure this also creates other issues, though.

 

*I give a damn about that extra two-stroke penalty only because other golfers have been told of their original infraction in time to amend the score card.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, MRR said:

My proposed solution;

1) 12 hour statute of limitations.

Stupid. To what end? The competition is still going on, and 12 hours to one player may be after they finish their second round, while another player may not have teed off. You're just adding an arbitrary line in the sand, to no real benefit, and possibly to the counter-benefit: again, it would be worse if a player got away with someone but because some stupid barrier line was passed just got away scot free.

3 hours ago, MRR said:

2) Challenge that is not made by an official must come from a Player on the tournament.

Really stupid. Facts are facts. The player breached the rule or they didn't.

3 hours ago, MRR said:

3) Player must be ahead of, or no more than four stroke behind, the "violator".  This is so that certain ramifications (see later) cannot be taken by low-ranked "rules hounds" trying to help (and possibly being paid by) a leader.

Oh brother. I'm going to stop commenting on this "solution" now. Are you joking?

4? Stupid. 5? Stupid. 6? Stupid. 7? Stupid.

3 hours ago, MRR said:

I'm sure this also creates other issues, though.

YA THINK?!?!

I almost have to think you're joking, but you gave no indication of such…

[MRR]

42 minutes ago, iacas said:

Stupid. To what end? The competition is still going on, and 12 hours to one player may be after they finish their second round.

At what point is a tournament over, then?  Can an official determine a ball was placed incorrectly, assess the penalty and assess the two-stroke penalty for signing an incorrect card the following Wednesday?  How about Monday morning?  I continue to agree that "Facts are facts. The player breached the rule or they didn't."  I agree that in this specific case, Lexi violated both rules and deserved the penalties.  But what if this video didn't come to light until Sunday evening at 9:00 pm?  Even if the LPGA chose to enforce the penalties, it would have resulted in a tie at first place, but no golfers around for a playoff.

If you feel that anyone at any time should be able to notify the LPGA or PGA about an infraction and have it enforced, then you do not see a problem that needs to be addressed.  That's totally fine.  I, however, feel that there should be a time where it ends.

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, MRR said:

At what point is a tournament over, then?

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-34,34-1

10 minutes ago, MRR said:

Can an official determine a ball was placed incorrectly, assess the penalty and assess the two-stroke penalty for signing an incorrect card the following Wednesday?  How about Monday morning?

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-34,34-1

10 minutes ago, MRR said:

Even if the LPGA chose to enforce the penalties, it would have resulted in a tie at first place, but no golfers around for a playoff.

The tournament was over by then.

10 minutes ago, MRR said:

If you feel that anyone at any time should be able to notify the LPGA or PGA about an infraction and have it enforced, then you do not see a problem that needs to be addressed.  That's totally fine.  I, however, feel that there should be a time where it ends.

I've never said at any time. The "close of competition" cutoff makes sense to me.

There is a time when it ends. http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-34,34-1

[MRR]

Thank you for citing the rule.  While that still gives over 70 hours to find an infraction from day one and very little time for day three, at least there is a black line somewhere.

[marcharing]

On 12 April 2017 at 6:22 PM, Aflighter said:

Unfortunately in todays world people like complaining over small stupid stuff. 

Do you know my Ex?