Rahm: Incorrectly Replacing Ball?

[boogielicious]

9 hours ago, RandallT said:

Yep. I think he got it EXACTLY right.

Here's the before zoomed in, with a stupid grid I've superimposed.

Here's the after zoomed in:

The grid is the exact same for both, the width/height of the hole. 

If you assume that camera is fixed and not some dude holding the camera in a tower, the zoom level shouldn't matter. 

To my eye, there is absolutely no difference in the two locations. By my math, with each grid being 4.25", that's a 21" putt both times. From the exact same point.

 

 

CSI Virginia Starring Randall T! 

[DeadMan]

9 hours ago, RandallT said:

Yep. I think he got it EXACTLY right.

Here's the before zoomed in, with a stupid grid I've superimposed.

Here's the after zoomed in:

The grid is the exact same for both, the width/height of the hole. 

If you assume that camera is fixed and not some dude holding the camera in a tower, the zoom level shouldn't matter. 

To my eye, there is absolutely no difference in the two locations. By my math, with each grid being 4.25", that's a 21" putt both times. From the exact same point.

 

 

Hard to believe that he got it right just by watching the broadcast, but this is as good of evidence as possible that he placed it correctly.

Hopefully Rahm is a little more careful in the future to avoid these questions however.

[Golfingdad]

31 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

Hopefully Rahm is a little more careful in the future to avoid these questions however.

Or we just need to collectively lighten up on this and not take it so seriously or look at it through such a microscope.  When somebody does like Lexi or Chella Choi, where they are marking for almost no reason and then replacing, and where the ball isn't even traveling more than a foot or so away from its spot and yet it somehow gets put back in a different place, then by all means, lets look closely and curb that kind of carelessness and/or cheating.

But when a guy needs to move his mark to get off of somebody else's line so the guy can putt, maybe we give him the benefit of the doubt when he comes back and tries to replace in the same spot?  Or maybe we start supplying them with protractors and tape measures and task them with doing a little surveying on the course to keep from being DQd.

[DeadMan]

1 minute ago, Golfingdad said:

Or we just need to collectively lighten up on this and not take it so seriously or look at it through such a microscope.  When somebody does like Lexi or Chella Choi, where they are marking for almost no reason and then replacing, and where the ball isn't even traveling more than a foot or so away from its spot and yet it somehow gets put back in a different place, then by all means, lets look closely and curb that kind of carelessness and/or cheating.

But when a guy needs to move his mark to get off of somebody else's line so the guy can putt, maybe we give him the benefit of the doubt when he comes back and tries to replace in the same spot?  Or maybe we start supplying them with protractors and tape measures and task them with doing a little surveying on the course to keep from being DQd.

I probably didn't make my point clear enough. I think golfers should be careful with the rules so that they don't even invite these questions. If Rahm had replaced his ball to the side of his marker, there wouldn't have been any questions about his actions at all. I think he just got sloppy, and it could have easily cost him 2 strokes. He should be more careful so that these questions aren't even asked.

For example, I do not ever make practice strokes in a hazard, because I don't want to worry about other people questioning whether I grounded my club by making the practice strokes. If I am asked to mark my ball off the green, I will mark and then put the ball on the ground so other people don't question whether I cleaned it.

You don't want to be the sloppy golfer that invites a lot of questions about breaking the rules. That's the point I was trying to make.

[Golfingdad]

5 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

I probably didn't make my point clear enough. I think golfers should be careful with the rules so that they don't even invite these questions. If Rahm had replaced his ball to the side of his marker, there wouldn't have been any questions about his actions at all. I think he just got sloppy, and it could have easily cost him 2 strokes. He should be more careful so that these questions aren't even asked.

For example, I do not ever make practice strokes in a hazard, because I don't want to worry about other people questioning whether I grounded my club by making the practice strokes. If I am asked to mark my ball off the green, I will mark and then put the ball on the ground so other people don't question whether I cleaned it.

You don't want to be the sloppy golfer that invites a lot of questions about breaking the rules. That's the point I was trying to make.

That's fair, I totally see your point.  But the way I'd look at it is that we watch these professionals collectively play thousands and thousands of golf shots per year and these kind of situations where "he should've been more careful" come up almost, what, never?  I mean, even if you count both DJ incidents in the last several years, Lexi, Chella, and Anna, and throw in Tiger's year of rules issues in 13 or whatever it was, then we're still at a fraction of a fraction of a percent.  These guys/gals DO do a pretty danged good job of not being careless under a crapload of HD scrutiny and I think they deserve some credit for it. :)

[iacas]

I agree with both of these points. It's a judgment call whether the golfer put the ball back in the spot close enough to the spot to warrant no penalty. The factors like whether the marker had to be moved (Rahm's case) or the ball was only ever moved a few inches in a second or two (Lexi's case) are considered, as is the amount of error: apparently none or very little in Rahm's case, over 3/4 of an inch in Lexi's case.

1 hour ago, Golfingdad said:

Or we just need to collectively lighten up on this and not take it so seriously or look at it through such a microscope.  When somebody does like Lexi or Chella Choi, where they are marking for almost no reason and then replacing, and where the ball isn't even traveling more than a foot or so away from its spot and yet it somehow gets put back in a different place, then by all means, lets look closely and curb that kind of carelessness and/or cheating.

But when a guy needs to move his mark to get off of somebody else's line so the guy can putt, maybe we give him the benefit of the doubt when he comes back and tries to replace in the same spot?  Or maybe we start supplying them with protractors and tape measures and task them with doing a little surveying on the course to keep from being DQd.

58 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

I probably didn't make my point clear enough. I think golfers should be careful with the rules so that they don't even invite these questions. If Rahm had replaced his ball to the side of his marker, there wouldn't have been any questions about his actions at all. I think he just got sloppy, and it could have easily cost him 2 strokes. He should be more careful so that these questions aren't even asked.

For example, I do not ever make practice strokes in a hazard, because I don't want to worry about other people questioning whether I grounded my club by making the practice strokes. If I am asked to mark my ball off the green, I will mark and then put the ball on the ground so other people don't question whether I cleaned it.

You don't want to be the sloppy golfer that invites a lot of questions about breaking the rules. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

[TropicalSandTrap]

When is the last time you watched a football game that wasn't really that close and the entire post game show was devoted to a holding call that either was or wasn't called in the 3rd quarter?

thats my problem. Golf channel devoted their entire Sunday to a call where the official did address it at the appropriate time, made a ruling, and his ruling turned out to be correct. Yet because it was a perceived breach of the strict technicality of the rules of golf (even though it wasn't even a violation at all), it turned into a scandal that overshadowed everything else.

the guy didn't cheat. He tried to place the ball where it belonged. He ultimately did place it where it belonged. And he made a 2 foot putt. The official addressed any issues at the appropriate time and made he right call. Why did it become the scandal of the year?

I mean, of the dude is playing hozel hockey in the rough, or caught dropping a ball down the pant leg through a hole in his pocket, or lying about his score on a hole, that's cheating. 

MArking the ball where it was supposed to be isn't cheating. It's not even a violation. 

[todgot]

He was not trying to gain an advantage which would be cheating.  This would be the player who replaces his ball differently to avoid a spike mark.  The fact he marked his ball to the side initially and then replaced it in the orthodox way tells me he just forgot.  How may times have you forgotten to replace your mark after moving it?  It's so common I have to put my mark upside down to remind myself to move the marker back.  It's an unconscious task which he's done thousands of time.  Just my 2 cents. 

[iacas]

41 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

When is the last time you watched a football game that wasn't really that close and the entire post game show was devoted to a holding call that either was or wasn't called in the 3rd quarter?

I don't know. Who cares? He's doing his job. Hell, you're still talking about it.

41 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

thats my problem. Golf channel devoted their entire Sunday

No, they didn't. You're being dramatic. They had coverage of other golf tournaments, showed other golf tournaments, talked about other things, etc. They didn't "devote" more than a segment or two to this.

[TropicalSandTrap]

I care. And I don't think that's what his job is. No other sport would they devote the entire post game to some inconsequential (and ultimately correct) call that took place halfway through the match. This wasn't like some game changing offsides in soccer. This was like a controversial called strike in the third inning of what ended up being a 5 run win in baseball  

Problem is, Chamblee thinks his job is the Hall monitor of the rules of golf. It's not. He should show some respect to the players who are putting themselves out there and competing rather than the role he has decided to take. 

 

Feel free to disagree if you want. That's just my opinion. Guy like Chamblee is a black eye for the sport. 

[David in FL]

9 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

I care. And I don't think that's what his job is. No other sport would they devote the entire post game to some inconsequential (and ultimately correct) call that took place halfway through the match. This wasn't like some game changing offsides in soccer. This was like a controversial called strike in the third inning of what ended up being a 5 run win in baseball  

Problem is, Chamblee thinks his job is the Hall monitor of the rules of golf. It's not. He should show some respect to the players who are putting themselves out there and competing rather than the role he has decided to take. 

 

Feel free to disagree if you want. That's just my opinion. Guy like Chamblee is a black eye for the sport. 

Did Brandel Chamblee stop by one night and pee on your prize rose bush? 

 

[iacas]

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

And I don't think that's what his job is.

It is. He's a commentator that's supposed to be controversial.

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

No other sport would they devote the entire post game to some inconsequential (and ultimately correct) call that took place halfway through the match.

Maybe.

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

This wasn't like some game changing offsides in soccer. This was like a controversial called strike in the third inning of what ended up being a 5 run win in baseball.

I agree. Of course, if the called third strike was a ball and your best hitter was on deck and it was a 3-2 count with the bases loaded… your analogy could have been better.

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

Problem is, Chamblee thinks his job is the Hall monitor of the rules of golf.

No. It's his job to be kinda controversial. To stir the pot.

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

He should show some respect to the players who are putting themselves out there and competing rather than the role he has decided to take.

So if people are "putting themselves out there and competing" they get to break the rules? Of course not. And I don't think you're saying any differently.

Remember, in his mind, Rahm broke the rule. He should stay silent just because the player is "putting himself out there and competing"?

18 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

Feel free to disagree if you want. That's just my opinion. Guy like Chamblee is a black eye for the sport. 

He's stirring the pot. That's it. You're still talking about it. He did his job.

[TropicalSandTrap]

Ok, so I guess we disagree what his job is. I don't view a golf channel post match show as a place to be stirring the pot. Create some pardon the interruption type show that airs during the week to stir the pot. After the round show some respect to the competitors and recap the round. Don't try to create stories that don't exist. Don't accuse some 22 year old champion of breaking rules when he didn't .  That's low class

And like you said, in his mind the guy broke the rules. But ultimately he was wrong.  No rules were broken. So if he thinks rahm should be penalized for making a mistake I would say he should be suspended for trying to create a controversy that didn't exist because he was wrong. It's only fair right?  Let's hold him to the same standard he is trying to hold others to  

Also, the officials did address the issue. Show them some respect. After all, the official was correct and Chamblee was wrong. 

And I don't mind them showing what happened but it was such a minor issue in the grand scheme of the tournament.  Yet they made it the main story, which is my real beef with what was essentially tabloid journalism  and I don't think people tune into a euro tour post game show to watch tabloid journalism, most are golfers just looking for a recap of the highlights, not Chamblee incorrectly ranting about something  

 

 

[dennyjones]

Quote

When is the last time you watched a football game that wasn't really that close and the entire post game show was devoted to a holding call that either was or wasn't called in the 3rd quarter?

 

Obviously you missed the UM vs OSU football game.  It wasn't a holding call but ball placement.

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

I don't view a golf channel post match show as a place to be stirring the pot. Create some pardon the interruption type show that airs during the week to stir the pot.

Waiting until "during the week" is too long.

14 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

After the round show some respect to the competitors and recap the round.

They did that too.

You're being extreme. It wasn't "an entire Sunday" and it wasn't even the entire post-game show. It was a few minutes.

14 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

Don't try to create stories that don't exist. Don't accuse some 22 year old champion of breaking rules when he didn't .  That's low class

He thought he had.

14 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

And like you said, in his mind the guy broke the rules. But ultimately he was wrong.

He didn't know that Sunday, did he?

14 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

And like you said, in his mind the guy broke the rules. But ultimately he was wrong.  No rules were broken. So if he thinks rahm should be penalized for making a mistake I would say he should be suspended for trying to create a controversy that didn't exist because he was wrong. It's only fair right?  Let's hold him to the same standard he is trying to hold others to

That's not the same standard. Never mind that there are no written rules in being a commentator as there are in golf.

Why do you keep talking about it? Just let it die. It's over.

[TropicalSandTrap]

Why are you defending him?

if Chamblee that all mistakes should be punished, then shouldn't he be punished if he went nuts over a perceived break in the rules when he was ultimately wrong?

rahm didn't try to cheat, yet Chamblee has been on a crusade calling him a rules breaker. 

So even though Chamblee didn't intend to be wrong, should not he incur some sort of punishment for being a low class jerk?

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

Why are you defending him?

I'm not.

Seriously, not even a little.

He thinks Rahm violated the rules of golf. If I'm doing anything I'm explaining why he would do that, and what his job entails.

3 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

if Chamblee that all mistakes should be punished, then shouldn't he be punished if he went nuts over a perceived break in the rules when he was ultimately wrong?

Mistakes?

You're not understanding the fact that Chamblee thought Rahm violated the Rules of Golf.

The two situations are not the same. Chamblee didn't violate a "rule" of anything.

3 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

rahm didn't try to cheat, yet Chamblee has been on a crusade calling him a rules breaker. 

False. "Has been" implies current tense. He was. He has not been since Sunday, AFAIK.

3 minutes ago, TropicalSandTrap said:

So even though Chamblee didn't intend to be wrong, should not he incur some sort of punishment for being a low class jerk?

Whatever dude. Keep talking about it if you want. I'm out.

[TropicalSandTrap]

It just seems funny that Chamblee believes in such high standards of accountability, but when he's wrong everyone says let it go. Chamblee devotes his day to calling rahm a rules breaker, but when it turns out rahm did not violate any rules the Chamblee defenders all say let it go, no big deal, Chamblee didn't realize he was wrong.