Lexi Thompson's 4 Stroke Penalty at the ANA

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Braivo said:

To compare this to Lexi you'd have to say this is the equivalent to having the ticket due the day of the infraction when you didn't find out about it until a week later.

I get what you're saying, but there's no equivalent to "signing your scorecard" in driving or other traffic laws, so… that analogy is now stretched beyond the point of breaking.

4 minutes ago, Braivo said:

If we can agree it was unintentional, then this means she did not knowingly sign an incorrect scorecard. Why should one bit of carelessness carry with it two penalties?

She didn't knowingly sign an incorrect scorecard… but it was still an incorrect scorecard. You're not recognizing this. She incurred the penalty when she committed the act. It's her responsibility to know.

[Golfingdad]

18 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

I don't really get your comment here. So are you saying that the players have no integrity and would take advantage and will knowingly sign incorrect scorecards? If you really believe that then you must think that cheating is prevalent in the game.

Yup, I had the exact same reaction.

I also agree with those who suggest that the incorrect scorecard thing is silly.  (Not that the rule was misapplied, but that the rule needs reevaluating)  She screwed up and she deserves a 2-stroke penalty for the mistake.  Or, if you think she did it intentionally, then she deserves a DQ and then some for cheating.  Either of those makes more sense than the 4-stroke double up 

Heck, we have precedence for waiving the incorrect scorecard rule in Tiger's situation at the Masters.  He's even on record as admitting that he knowingly dropped somewhere that he shouldn't have.  This was back when the rule was a DQ, but still, for whatever reason they chose to not apply the rule.  They could have done that here too.

[Braivo]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

I get what you're saying, but there's no equivalent to "signing your scorecard" in driving or other traffic laws, so… that analogy is now stretched beyond the point of breaking.

She didn't knowingly sign an incorrect scorecard… but it was still an incorrect scorecard. You're not recognizing this. She incurred the penalty when she committed the act. It's her responsibility to know.

I agree. I believe we agree on everything except I believe the rule for incorrect scorecard should be changed to somehow take intent into account. 

[dbuck]

I agree that Lexi had two violations and therefore, two penalties. Under the circumstances, there was no other way to proceed. I don't have the rules in front of me, but I don't think the part about signing an incorrect scorecard says "knowingly".

I don't believe she intended/attempted to cheat.

I do wish that viewers were not allowed to call in, especially after the round has ended, next day, etc.

[Houselr69]

I have seen several of you say that this did not hurt the viewership or desire for people to play golf. I think you need to ask people who just watch golf or have not played or just started playing and you will find it does. Having played only socially for 20 years and seriously only a year I can tell you it really bothered me. The people I was watching it with all talked about how negative it was. In fact where I was, we were there to watch the PGA and LPGA, changed the channel on all the tv's. Ridiculous actions are not appreciated or tolerated. 

[Braivo]

6 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I agree. I believe we agree on everything except I believe the rule for incorrect scorecard should be changed to somehow take intent into account. 

Even more so, if a penalty can be called after the fact, then this "re-opens" the round so to speak. This means the player should be able to amend and re-sign the card. You can't have this be a one sided issue. 

[Bucki1968]

I would like to know who taped the third round, watched it in real time, then could zoom in and see if the ball if properly marked? Really? Whoever it was, you really need to get out more. Maybe it was Donald Trump with the help of the Russians?

[sacm3bill]

5 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Yup, I had the exact same reaction.

I also agree with those who suggest that the incorrect scorecard thing is silly.  (Not that the rule was misapplied, but that the rule needs reevaluating)  She screwed up and she deserves a 2-stroke penalty for the mistake.  Or, if you think she did it intentionally, then she deserves a DQ and then some for cheating.  Either of those makes more sense than the 4-stroke double up.

I agree with this too.  The scorecard was only incorrect because of an error she had already been penalized for. Penalizing her again is double indemnity.  Like others have said, since the rules allow penalties to be applied after a scorecard has been signed, the scorecard should be allowed to be amended after it's been signed.  Put another way, if the score for the round is not final, the scorecard isn't either.

And IMO the tax analogy isn't valid because if you make a mistake in a prior year that the IRS deems to be unintentional, you pay only the difference owed plus interest. It's only if they deem it intentional fraud that you pay additional penalties. (Of course, we shouldn't be using taxes as analogies anyway, since golf is not taxes... indeed, as has been said, golf is not even other sports.)

[Braivo]

5 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Even more so, if a penalty can be called after the fact, then this "re-opens" the round so to speak. This means the player should be able to amend and re-sign the card. You can't have this be a one sided issue. 

What if the player were to self-assess a penalty, and then later upon review, realize a penalty wasn't warranted? Would they then be guilty of signing an incorrect scorecard? Could they go back and remove the penalty, only to be penalized for an incorrect card?

I could see this in the case of say, grounding your club in a hazard. Someone could say "I might have brushed the grass, calling a penalty" only to see on TV later that they didn't?

Edited April 3, 2017 by Braivo

[Gary Kay]

If the LPGA and/or PGA are going to allow arm chair rules officials watching TV, then they must be prepared to show the actions of "every" golfer in a tourney not just tournament leaders. That means every ball address, every ball placement, etc. of every golfer so all can be fairly scrutinized. A four shot penalty on someone in 30th place affects a lot more golfers than someone in first place as it means thousands of dollars being at stake for lots of people. Knowing that it would be impossible to put every player under the same scrutiny. Allowing selective enforcement to the few being seen more often is simply unfair to them and seemingly beneficial to those not under the watchful eyes of the self proclaimed TV rules officials. 

Edited April 3, 2017 by Gary Kay

[Jack Watson]

Simple solution make the signing of the card an official score signed by player and tour official.

After that it's in the books period.

Problem solved.

 

[Golfingdad]

1 minute ago, Jack Watson said:

Simple solution make the signing of the card an official score signed by player and tour official.

After that it's in the books period.

Problem solved.

 

Or just save the official signing part until the end of the whole tournament.  It's not a collection of 4 18-hole mini tournaments, it's one 72-hole tournament.

[Braivo]

1 minute ago, Golfingdad said:

Or just save the official signing part until the end of the whole tournament.  It's not a collection of 4 18-hole mini tournaments, it's one 72-hole tournament.

Correct. If you can change it before the trophy is awarded, but not after, then it is clear where the cutoff line is. 

[boogielicious]

17 minutes ago, Bucki1968 said:

I would like to know who taped the third round, watched it in real time, then could zoom in and see if the ball if properly marked? Really? Whoever it was, you really need to get out more. Maybe it was Donald Trump with the help of the Russians?

Please DO NOT go there. The rest of your post is fine.

[Hategolf]

The rules are the rules as crappy as sometimes they might be. But Golf needs to IMO address the lack of overseeing during a professional round.

To me, if the LPGA/PGA accepts spectators and TV viewers to call in for an infraction, then they are not really doing their jobs. That is why the LPGA/PGA HAS to enforce even after the round has ended, they have no choice, they can not ignore an infraction they should have caught but it wasn't because they put the responsibility in the player.  

IMO If they can sanction they should also be responsible for monitoring.

A player is responsible for following the rules, the officials should be responsible for watching the players. 

How is it that a viewer is watching and an official is not? Why not have an official watch the broadcasting and see what the viewers see. Let the fans be fans. 

It sucks what happened to Lexi but it sucks even more how much involvement the public has over a tournament. 

Edited April 3, 2017 by Hategolf

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Golfingdad said:

Yup, I had the exact same reaction.

I also agree with those who suggest that the incorrect scorecard thing is silly.  (Not that the rule was misapplied, but that the rule needs reevaluating)  She screwed up and she deserves a 2-stroke penalty for the mistake.  Or, if you think she did it intentionally, then she deserves a DQ and then some for cheating.  Either of those makes more sense than the 4-stroke double up.

I don't think cheating is prevalent, but the additional penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard is to help curb it, particularly unintentional violations of the rules.

If there were no additional penalty, players may be more inclined to not inquire about possible breaches (at all levels of the game). After all, there'd be no downside: they could only ever be penalized the same amount they'd be penalized if they inquire, and they may just get away with it.

I think a lot of the people who object to this particular instance are, as is typical, only really considering this particular instance. The Rules of Golf apply at all level and in every situation.

Lexi:

• incurred a penalty.
• signed an incorrect scorecard.

It's only because she was unaware of the first that she wasn't DQed for the second. The rule is already significantly softer than it was in previous versions.

Players have a responsibility to follow the rules, and to know the rules. What Lexi did was probably a brain fart. She'd probably have been thankful to a fan had they pointed it out (depending on the timing, she could have saved two to four strokes).

The lighter two-stroke penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard is already softer than straight out DQing, and I see no reason to soften it by eliminating it.

1 minute ago, Golfingdad said:

Heck, we have precedence for waiving the incorrect scorecard rule in Tiger's situation at the Masters.  He's even on record as admitting that he knowingly dropped somewhere that he shouldn't have.  This was back when the rule was a DQ, but still, for whatever reason they chose to not apply the rule.  They could have done that here too.

They couldn't have done that here, because they didn't receive a phone call and make a ruling as they supposedly did in the Tiger situation. It's a different situation.

I thought Tiger should have been DQed because he knowingly played from a wrong place and then signed that card. I still think that's what should have happened.

5 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I agree. I believe we agree on everything except I believe the rule for incorrect scorecard should be changed to somehow take intent into account. 

There's no way to take intent into ignorance.

Facts are she incurred the penalty when she breached the rules, and thus, signed for the incorrect score.

It's her responsibility to know the rules, follow them, and pay attention when she's marking and replacing her ball.

3 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Even more so, if a penalty can be called after the fact, then this "re-opens" the round so to speak. This means the player should be able to amend and re-sign the card. You can't have this be a one sided issue. 

The round isn't "re-opened." It's not a court case, or a police investigation or something.

She incurred the penalty. She signed for the wrong score. It's that simple.

1 minute ago, Bucki1968 said:

I would like to know who taped the third round, watched it in real time, then could zoom in and see if the ball if properly marked? Really?

I called Tiger for what should have been a DQ because I wanted to protect the integrity of the game, the competition, the sport, the rules, etc. Do I need to get out more?

Lexi is not the victim here. She's the perpetrator. She breached the rules, and was caught.

1 minute ago, sacm3bill said:

I agree with this too.  The scorecard was only incorrect because of an error she had already been penalized for. Penalizing her again is double indemnity.

That's not right. She did not penalize herself, thus, her scorecard was incorrect.

1 minute ago, sacm3bill said:

Like others have said, since the rules allow penalties to be applied after a scorecard has been signed, the scorecard should be allowed to be amended after it's been signed.

No, it shouldn't. The signing of the scorecard is the final point at which you say "I upheld the rules and played within them, producing this score, to which I attest."

If you only incur the original penalty, there's no disincentive to try to remain diligent or to report penalties if you think nobody else saw a breach. "Awww, I brushed the sand on my backswing there… oh well, worst case I get the same penalty, and maybe nobody saw it and I can get away with it, because c'mon, I know it didn't really affect my shot…".

Oy.

Lexi violated two rules and was punished under each.

2 minutes ago, Braivo said:

What if the player were to self-assess a penalty, and then later upon review, realize a penalty was warranted?

I'll assume you meant "was not warranted."

2 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Would they then be guilty of signing an incorrect scorecard?

Yes, but they'd have written down a higher score, so that score stands. No additional penalty.

Guys… it's right there, you can read this stuff yourself. It's pretty simple. 6-6d IIRC.

2 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Could they go back and remove the penalty, only to be penalized for an incorrect card?

No. Read the rules.

2 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I could see this in the case of say, grounding your club in a hazard. Someone could say "I might have brushed the grass, calling a penalty" only to see on TV later that they didn't?

They're welcome to review their case prior to signing their scorecard.

Again, @Braivo, just go read the rules.

8 minutes ago, Gary Kay said:

If the LPGA and/or PGA are going to allow arm chair rules officials watching TV, then they must be prepared to show the actions of "every" golfer in a tourney not just tournament leaders.

Not true. Golf's not fair, and the televising of events is not going to be fair, or you're going to have to mandate other things, too, like:

• Every player gets the same number, shape, and size of spectators with the same rooting interests, eyesight, hearing, and accessories like binoculars, cameras, etc.
• Every player plays each hole at the same exact time of day (so as to mitigate against the bad luck of an afternoon increase in wind speed or other weather-related things).
• etc.

8 minutes ago, Gary Kay said:

Allowing selective enforcement to the few being seen more often is simply unfair to them and seemingly beneficial to those not under the watchful eyes of the self proclaimed TV rules officials. 

So you'd rather everyone know Lexi committed a penalty, but just not enforce it because the lady who finished DFL wasn't shown on camera and she may have done something that warrants further attention?

I don't think even Lexi would ever want that to be the case. Talk about a tainted win. She wouldn't want that.

Be reasonable.

Just now, Jack Watson said:

Problem solved.

Hardly.

2 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Or just save the official signing part until the end of the whole tournament.  It's not a collection of 4 18-hole mini tournaments, it's one 72-hole tournament.

So you're going to require those who would have to sign the scorecard but MCed or WDed or DQed to stick around?

Please.

It's not even remotely practical. How would they do pairings for the third and fourth round if no scores were turned in? Solution in search of a problem: just know and follow the rules. Simple.

The number of holes in a stipulated round is 18 unless a smaller number is authorized by the Committee. So if your stipulated round is 72 holes… now players can't practice between rounds, they can't change clubs between rounds, and all sorts of other things pop up.

Oy.

This is very simple: Lexi should have not breached the rules. She did, she suffered the consequences, and that's that. Everyone's working really freaking hard to try to find a way for her not to have been penalized based on this one specific situation, and yet… again… she's not the victim here.

5 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Correct. If you can change it before the trophy is awarded, but not after, then it is clear where the cutoff line is. 

We have a clear line now: it's when you sign your card and "leave the scoring area."

2 minutes ago, Hategolf said:

The rules are the rules as crappy as sometimes they might be. But Golf needs to IMO address the lack of overseeing during a professional round.

To me, if the LPGA/PGA accepts spectators and TV viewers to call in for an infraction, then they are not really doing their jobs.

The person who failed in his or her responsibility here was Lexi Thompson.

2 minutes ago, Hategolf said:

IMO If they can sanction they should also be responsible for monitoring.

They are not. They cannot see everything, while the player is in the position of being able to see pretty much everything.

Golf is not a game where referees are out there while players try to get away with everything they can without being caught, like almost every other sport out there.

2 minutes ago, Hategolf said:

How is it that a viewer is watching and an official is not?

Why's that so hard to believe? After all… not even Lexi noticed she breached the rules. But she did.

[Valleygolfer]

1 hour ago, brettfan said:

My only issue is that she never signed an incorrect scorecard.  Her scorecard, when signed, was correct. I have no problem with the initial 2 shot penalty but she never signed an incorrect scorecard.  If the score can be amended 12 hours later then the scorecard can too.

 

Edited for typo.

 

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

Did anyone notice that the ball was in some kind of a "indentation" in the original position? Or is this an optical illusion?

 

Actually, I noticed that her hand is in the way of her view the entire time. Probably not the reason she moved the ball even if there is one. . .IDK many people who would miss a 15" putt.

She was lining up the ball so she was looking at it the whole time. Why deviate from position

1 hour ago, Braivo said:

Our mind works in crazy ways. She likely approaches and marks her ball from behind 99% of the time. This time she approached and marked from the side. She marks a ball dozens of times per week. It's autopilot. 

Have you ever driven home from work and basically forgotten the drive? What if you went 7mph over the speed limit one day and got a ticket from a camera radar thingy mailed to you, would you remember? Have you ever exited a freeway on a familiar place even though you intended to drive somewhere further down the road? What if they took away your drivers license for such an infraction? Or fined you $10,000? 

I see no evidence this is anything more than her making a mistake by breaking her routine a bit, approaching the ball from the side then her brain did what it always does, and places the ball in front of the marker. With such a short putt she was probably already thinking about the next hole the same way we think about what we're having for dinner on the way home. 

This ain't driving. What if you lapse mentally and killed someone instead?

1 hour ago, Jack Watson said:

Simple solution to this abortion is to draw the line at the signing of the card.  Either find the penalty before that or that's it.

just as the player signs a tour official should sign and then it's over and this nonsense couldn't happen.

 

Right now the signing of the card means nothing apparently might as well not do it

Not signing the card until the end gives you time to come to your senses. Once you sign it there is no going back and confirming your score and if it is found not to be true then you can't say own that is not what I meant.

33 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I agree. I believe we agree on everything except I believe the rule for incorrect scorecard should be changed to somehow take intent into account. 

Then DQ her. The scorecard signing keeps you in the tournament. A way of unintentional mistakes to stay in the game but not the severity to kick them out and keeps you honest. If you cheat and it saves you 2 strokes and the worse you can do is have 2 strokes applied later, why not take the chance.

[Hat]

I don't play golf to any high standard, but when I put a marker down on the green and replace the ball, I know whether I'm putting it down in the wrong spot, certainly to the degree shown in the video - I'm right there looking down at my marker, after all, so I don't need 4K TV. I would imagine a golfer who does this thousands upon thousands of times would be able to replace a ball more accurately than I am. That there seems to be little gain in wilfuly misplacing the ball in a competition so closely examined, I can't comment - could be a momentary lapse of concentration, pressure, or even intent -  only she can know. However, it seems obvious to me that it's reasonable that she should know she placed the ball down in the correct spot, or in this case, not. So given that she should have known and didn't assess a penalty on herself, the extra two shots for an incorrect scorecard seems fine as a penalty for her having not scrutinised her own actions closely enough. Removing that second penalty from the rules seems to only encourage people to try and get away with not scrutinising themselves enough.

After that, the argument seems to boil down to whether we want the sport to be so highly regulated at competition level that every golfer has an official with them at all times in order to improve 'watchability'. Even then we'd probably argue about the individual officials, just as we do in other sports, and instances would arise, just as in other sports, where the official was incorrect in their assessment. Where do we draw the line in the sand then?

As the official in question is quoted, she couldn't ignore an infraction of the rules once it had been brought to their attention. If we were currently talking about how Lexi had won in spite of a penalty that viewers could not notify the tournament of, would we be happy?