Lexi Thompson's 4 Stroke Penalty at the ANA

[Shorty]

8 minutes ago, Bballref said:

 Lexi was not punished by her fellow competitors. I think rules officials need to be redefined. 

Lexi was punished by her inability to observe the rules of golf. Had she not cheated she would have had another tournament win under her belt and she would not have been humiliated. She brought it upon herself. 

[iacas]

7 hours ago, rehmwa said:

stop being in tune with my feelings

To be clear I'm not trying to imply that I know what you're feeling.

It just seems like you "feel" a certain way about a ruling, and are trying to devise ways that would have let you feel better about it. I think in doing so you likely focus only on THIS one set of circumstances, and I could create circumstances where you'd like disagree with your proposed solution. Or, if not, we're simply VERY far apart and will likely never convince the other of anything.

7 hours ago, rehmwa said:

So, I guess I 'feel' that - If the goal is the most accuracy, why throttle the rest of the public from bringing forth observations (of course the answer is the logistical nightmare)

I think that if you posted an actual "rules tip hotline" two bad things would happen:

• You'd turn what is a pretty rare thing (seriously, it's not like these rules infractions happen all the time, even if some go unnoticed) into a PR negative. "Call 1-800-RULE-BREACH if you spot a rules infraction!" is just bad PR that implies they all cheat like crazy.
• It'd be unmanageable. Crazy people would call in with all sorts of shit, 99% of which wouldn't be against the Rules.

Right now let's say 99.2% of the rules situations are caught and handled properly. If an occasional call-in bumps that number to 99.3% or 99.4%, cool. I'm good with that.

7 hours ago, rehmwa said:

So I put forward this " If not, then they should be able to define 'who' can call in and make it very public.  (Since they are being public about it.) "  fine - then make that policy - rules officials can call in, not the rest of the public.  no problem

No thank you. The Rules say nothing about disregarding testimony from someone just because they're in group X.

7 hours ago, MRR said:

"Someone sitting at home who just feels like calling in"?  No.

Why?

Did the player breach the rules? Who cares who saw it first. The truth is they did. (If they didn't, it's a moot point, because they won't be penalized.)

7 hours ago, MRR said:

I think that both sets a bad precedence and would lead to people calling in all the time.

People have been calling in since at least 1987. We're not seeing a dramatic up-tick in call-ins.

7 hours ago, MRR said:

I wasn't much of a golf watcher until about five years ago.  Have you noticed a difference in rules violations and/or calls in due to golf being broadcast 24/7* in HD instead of six hours on the weekend in standard definition?

No.

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

In other sports, the referees, umpires, etc... are charged with watching the action, and using their judgement to identify and charge infractions.  It's their responsibility to do so, not the players.  In golf, the rules officials are NOT charged with identifying every breach that occurs.  That responsibility lies with the individual competitor.  The rules officials are only there to assist and provide guidance when asked to do so, or if something is otherwise brought to their attention.

QFT.

Also, in basketball, there's a shared ball. What you do with it affects every other player. That's not true in golf.

8 minutes ago, Bballref said:

If that's the case then who lowered the boom on Lexi?

The rules officials at the tournament did, because she breached the rules, and they saw evidence of it.

The emailer didn't lower the boom.

8 minutes ago, Bballref said:

In golf, someone(body) has the ultimate power to make a rules decision and invoke penalties, Lexi was not punished by her fellow competitors. I think rules officials need to be redefined. 

That doesn't make any sense to me.

She breached the rules. The Rules Committee penalized her two strokes twice.

[jetsknicks1]

On 4/16/2017 at 3:56 PM, Shorty said:

Nope. Like Lexi, he acted all innocent and tried to brush it off.

Doesn't look like he swung the putter. Looks like he put the putter head on the ground and then made the stroke.

[Shorty]

2 hours ago, jetsknicks1 said:

Doesn't look like he swung the putter. Looks like he put the putter head on the ground and then made the stroke.

The putter got jammed on the green just before the ball as he made his stroke. He then pretended he had done as you suggest

[rehmwa]

18 hours ago, iacas said:

I think that if you posted an actual "rules tip hotline" two bad things would happen:

• You'd turn what is a pretty rare thing (seriously, it's not like these rules infractions happen all the time, even if some go unnoticed) into a PR negative. "Call 1-800-RULE-BREACH if you spot a rules infraction!" is just bad PR that implies they all cheat like crazy.
• It'd be unmanageable. Crazy people would call in with all sorts of shit, 99% of which wouldn't be against the Rules.

.

.

.

.

No thank you. The Rules say nothing about disregarding testimony from someone just because they're in group X.

 

so:

1 - you think anyone should be able to call in

2 - but you don't have a problem that only a priviledged small group has the wherewithal to actually get through

I think that's inconsistent.  Or rationalizing at best.  The rules, today, may allow one thing, but in practice it just isn't true

But, I also agree that the logistics issues to actually be pure about your open call-in philosophy are a nightmare - which practically results in a restricted pool of people able to call in - which is today's reality.  So why not change the rules and codify it instead of pretending/posturing that 'anyone' can make a claim? 

I like the idea of only rules officials being able/authorized to get through.  They know the rules, they are the front line.  The PGA can defuse the (albeit short lived) periodic uproars in PR but publicly changing the rules to "rules officials certainly can call in".  (Of course, then rules officials shouldn't be able to bet on tournaments - if they have an ounce of morality....)

Frankly, if Joe Cheetoh wants to make a claim, let him call his buddy the rules official and make the case - then the official can call in on the Batphone if it passes muster.  That could result is a HUGE delay, but certainly balances out the sheer volume of crackpots.

[iacas]

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

so:

1 - you think anyone should be able to call in

Yep. Why not? It helps the tournament to be the most accurate, truthful, authentic competition.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

2 - but you don't have a problem that only a priviledged small group has the wherewithal to actually get through

Nope. Why would I? Your alternative - publishing the number or email address or whatever - has obvious faults.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I think that's inconsistent.

Not at all.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Or rationalizing at best.

I'm not rationalizing anything.

Words have definitions. My position is neither inconsistent or rationalizing anything. Just saying those words doesn't make it accurate.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

The rules, today, may allow one thing, but in practice it just isn't true

Huh?

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

But, I also agree that the logistics issues to actually be pure about your open call-in philosophy are a nightmare

Which is why I don't really support publicizing the email address or phone number. That's not a "rationalization" nor inconsistent.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

So why not change the rules and codify it instead of pretending/posturing that 'anyone' can make a claim?

Because anyone can make a claim. Just because it's difficult doesn't mean it's impossible.

Post a video on Twitter or Facebook and tag the PGA Tour and some journalists covering the tournament. If there's something actionable there and you do a little to spread the word… it'll be seen.

That's an entirely different thing though than publicizing a number, which is both bad PR and a "nightmare" as you said.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I like the idea of only rules officials being able/authorized to get through.

I don't. I think it's ridiculous. Plus, who is to say who is a "rules official" or not? I've been a rules official for national USGA events, local events, college and high school events, stat amateur events… but not an LPGA event. Do I make the cut?

Why limit it? You're drawing pointless lines in the sand.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

They know the rules, they are the front line.

No… the players are the front line. When they fail to uphold their responsibilities, the rules committee can step in. I don't care who brings something to the attention of the rules committee. Only rules breaches result in penalties. A fan doesn't have to know the rules. If they have a video and they post on Twitter, and it's not a rules infraction, they'll likely be told to sit down and shut up. If it is, and they reach people, it'll spread.

51 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Frankly, if Joe Cheetoh wants to make a claim, let him call his buddy the rules official and make the case - then the official can call in on the Batphone if it passes muster.

I disagree. Pointless, stupid, arbitrary limitation that knowingly leaves bits of truth to the side simply because the "wrong" class of person saw it.

---

Remember, too, two things:

• This almost never happens. It's human nature to over-emphasize something that just happened, but this almost never happens. It's really, really rare.
• Lexi breached the Rules of Golf. Any limitation of the mechanism that caught her and punished her (properly) is simply you willingly choosing to allow a player to go unpenalized for breaches.

[rehmwa]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

has obvious faults.

I think it's ridiculous.

You're drawing pointless lines in the sand.

Pointless, stupid, arbitrary

Seriously, Erik.  I know your style, but not all the newbies do.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

Seriously, Erik. I know your style, but not all the newbies do.

Let's stick to discussing the topic, please.

Spoiler

My style is to use words as they're defined. Nothing more.

I said nothing offensive there.

If I think something has obvious faults, what would you have me say? Because it seems to me that saying "that has obvious faults" (particularly when I'd previously shared them) is the most straight-forward way to do it.

Arbitrary? What's so negative about that? It means what it means. It's not positive or negative.

The other words accurately express my opinion. I think the idea of limiting call-ins only to "rules officials" is stupid. And ridiculous. Then I explain why I feel that way. Someone else - including you - is free to think the same of my opinions.

We don't all have to be weenies tip-toeing around each other and not saying what we think. I didn't get offended when you called my points "inconsistent" or "rationalizations". Why would I? It's just golf. None of this shit really matters all that much.

[phillyk]

It sounds like the arguments are coming from a viewpoint of whether golf is an individual game or whether it is a game against someone.  Ultimately, the rules were made so that the player will call themselves on infractions.  This is the only sport that relies on the individual calling fouls.  Because of it being a game where it's more of you versus you, instead of you vs them, there is no value in cheating.  That is why the rules must be followed strictly.  If you fail to follow those rules in competition, and someone catches you, you should and will be penalized.  There is no trying to get away with cheating, because it ruins the nature of the game being you vs you.  If you want to form a tour that plays a match style where they can try and get away with penalties with officials watching your every move, go form something else.

So many people are hung up on the job of an official.  In US Open qualifying or Pro-ams and such, you may not find an official for a few holes, if at all, so that's why they always say to play two balls and bring it their attention when you see them.  It is not the job of an official to make sure you play the game right shot to shot, it is the golfers job to make sure they play it right.  That's why the USGA prints the rules book.  Read it and find out for yourselves how to play the game correctly.

In this case, there is no opinion on whether she broke a rule, it happened.  It doesn't matter who brought it up.  If other people are getting away with breaking rules, it'll catch up with them eventually.  They all should be following the same principles of the game.

[jetsknicks1]

22 hours ago, Shorty said:

The putter got jammed on the green just before the ball as he made his stroke. He then pretended he had done as you suggest

Well, it worked lol.

[Lihu]

7 hours ago, jetsknicks1 said:

Well, it worked lol.

It looked like he stopped mid stroke because the club got stuck on the green. Then he lifted the putter and made another stroke. He could have just lost his balance, but it does look like 2 strokes were made.

[BallStriker]

Story not going away....lot of players continue to  be vocal about call-ins.....attitude seems to be "this is our tour and we can police ourselves thank you very much!"

rumors floating that tour sponsors are very irritated with how this went down

If it could be clearly demonstrated that these call-ins are bad for the popularity of the game and/or has a negative impact on sponsorship dollars, it would be a no brainer to eliminate 

[iacas]

13 minutes ago, BallStriker said:

Story not going away....lot of players continue to  be vocal about call-ins.....attitude seems to be "this is our tour and we can police ourselves thank you very much!"

rumors floating that tour sponsors are very irritated with how this went down

If it could be clearly demonstrated that these call-ins are bad for the popularity of the game and/or has a negative impact on sponsorship dollars, it would be a no brainer to eliminate 

I disagree.

How about the players actually police themselves?

 

[BallStriker]

My specific point was this...

If you were in a position to make a decision and faced the issue of declining popularity of the game and declining sponsor directly related to "call-ins," would you eliminate the call-ins?  I guess it boils down to the integrity of professional tournament golf versus the growth of the game

I would eliminate call-ins if I was making the decision....

Edited April 24, 2017 by BallStriker

[Wally Fairway]

1 hour ago, BallStriker said:

My specific point was this...

If you were in a position to make a decision and faced the issue of declining popularity of the game and declining sponsor directly related to "call-ins," would you eliminate the call-ins?  I guess it boils down to the integrity of professional tournament golf versus the growth of the game

I would eliminate call-ins if I was making the decision....

I think your point sounded like the integrity of the game vs the popularity of the sport/business.
If the sport/business doesn't like the outcome of call-in rules violations or post round DQ or penalties then they should lobby for local rules or the R&A and USGA.

Because above all the game is about all playing under the same rules, and 99% of the time calling their own penalties. Part of the issue both on this and the DJ issue is the timing of when the rules officials notify the player.
I can tell you that the game of golf will survive this episode and this issue, the LPGA and how it affects them is still up in the air.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, BallStriker said:

My specific point was this...

If you were in a position to make a decision and faced the issue of declining popularity of the game and declining sponsor directly related to "call-ins," would you eliminate the call-ins?

Don't you think that's kind of a ridiculous question?

The "declining popularity of the game" (which isn't even a fact I'll grant you as accurate) is not at all affected by this Lexi Thompson rules breach.

3 hours ago, BallStriker said:

I guess it boils down to the integrity of professional tournament golf versus the growth of the game

I don't think that it boils down to that at all.

[David in FL]

21 minutes ago, iacas said:

The "declining popularity of the game" (which isn't even a fact I'll grant you as accurate) is not at all affected by this Lexi Thompson rules breach.

QFT

[RH31]

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/ra-usga-make-rules-announcement-tuesday/

 

quoted from the article; "Leaders from the USGA, R&A, PGA of America, PGA Tour, LPGA and European Tour met in a closed-door meeting at the Masters to discuss the incident and how to prevent future issues."

They probably all just got together and said players should just follow the rules better...