Jump to content
IGNORED

Patrick Reed vs. the Rules of Golf


NM Golf

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

 I'd be willing to bet that every player on tour, Reed included, would get that assistance if they were savvy enough to realize it was legal. 

Are you seriously suggesting that PGATour players think they aren't entitled to help from the gallery when searching for their ball? You would be wrong there, sorry.

On what basis would you suggest this?

You are saying that if a member of the gallery was telling them where their ball was the players (including Reed) would tell them they can't do this. BS.

Sometimes you see dozens of gallery members searching for lost balls, especially on Open courses.

1573310823849.jpeg

visitors-search-for-joel-sjoholms-fourth-from-right-from-sweden-lost-ERC53K.jpg

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
6 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Are you seriously suggesting

No, I think he's talking about a situation like the Tiger boulder thing. Clearly.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Shorty said:

Are you seriously suggesting that PGATour players think they aren't entitled to help from the gallery when searching for their ball? You would be wrong there, sorry.

On what basis would you suggest this?

You are saying that if a member of the gallery was telling them where their ball was the players (including Reed) would tell them they can't do this. BS.

Sometimes you see dozens of gallery members searching for lost balls, especially on Open courses.

1573310823849.jpeg

visitors-search-for-joel-sjoholms-fourth-from-right-from-sweden-lost-ERC53K.jpg

I’m totally lost here?  Did you quote the correct post or perhaps just didn’t read it right?  Cuz whatever you think I was saying isn’t remotely what I was saying.

I was simply countering the other post suggesting that Tiger is the only one that people would move a boulder for.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Reed handled it wrong in my opinion.  For me, golf is a game of honor and virtue.  We should not waste other's time and attention when taking relief for which we are allowed under the rules.   The rare cheaters are eventually found out, why make the game slower requiring one's marker or competitor to come over to verify all is Kosher.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
7 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

Reed handled it wrong in my opinion.

Good thing your opinion doesn't matter on this topic, as he did nothing "wrong" here.

7 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

For me, golf is a game of honor and virtue.

He did nothing dishonorable (that we know; again, if he pushed the ball down to make it embedded, we don't know that) or lacking in virtue.

7 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

We should not waste other's time and attention when taking relief for which we are allowed under the rules.

And right there is where you contradict your whole argument.


Again, what stinks here is that this will "tag" Reed again. A story:

When I was a really little kid, I stole some of my sister's Halloween candy after I'd finished mine (this was probably late December, and hers would last so long we'd throw half of it out anyway as she kept "saving" it so long it would spoil). I left the wrappers in my room. My mom found out, and I got in trouble, rightfully so.

My sister, being a sibling, would then for a time eat her own candy but leave the wrappers semi-hidden in my room. I'd get in trouble, even though I didn't do anything. My sister, then being lazy, would just start leaving the wrappers in her room when she ate some of her candy, and again my mom would yell at me, because I had "done it so many times before, and now I'm not even bothering to try to hide the wrappers."

So because of one bad act, I was assumed to be committing future bad acts.

I feel like the same thing could be happening to Patrick Reed right now. If he has an iffy rules situation in the future, a rules situation for which nobody would bat an eye if it's almost anyone else, people will bring up the Torrey Pines thing as if it's fact and ding him yet again.

I don't know how he breaks out of it. I couldn't. Reasoning didn't work - I was a smart kid. If I wanted to steal candy and get away with it, I'd throw the wrappers away, or put them somewhere where people wouldn't find them. Patrick called an RO over perhaps because he was thinking "oh, this will give me cover, if he says it's embedded too." And then people twisted that around, too!

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Up 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
10 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

Reed handled it wrong in my opinion.  For me, golf is a game of honor and virtue.  We should not waste other's time and attention when taking relief for which we are allowed under the rules.   The rare cheaters are eventually found out, why make the game slower requiring one's marker or competitor to come over to verify all is Kosher.   

I'm wondering what you believe Reed did wrong.  He took relief as specifically allowed by the rules.  He went beyond the actual requirements of the rules by asking an official to confirm his evaluation that the ball was indeed embedded.  As far as I could tell, each step he took was in accordance with the rules.  So how did he handle it wrong?

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, DaveP043 said:

I'm wondering what you believe Reed did wrong.  He took relief as specifically allowed by the rules.  He went beyond the actual requirements of the rules by asking an official to confirm his evaluation that the ball was indeed embedded.  As far as I could tell, each step he took was in accordance with the rules.  So how did he handle it wrong?

No need to call the Official over.  Waste of time and made a circus of it.  Just my perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Just now, Rippy_72 said:

No need to call the Official over.  Waste of time and made a circus of it.  Just my perspective.

Oh brother. Tour players call officials over all the time. He was seeking verification.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
15 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

No need to call the Official over.  Waste of time and made a circus of it.  Just my perspective.

I agree that there was no requirement under the rules.  This may have been enough of a "borderline" judgement that Reed wanted to have his own evaluation confirmed.  "I think this is enough of a lip, I believe what I feel shows the ball is embedded, but I'm not 100% sure.  Please let me know what you think."  And in this specific circumstance, imagine the even greater uproar when the video shows that the ball actually DID bounce.

  • Like 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, iacas said:

Oh brother. Tour players call officials over all the time. He was seeking verification.

 

Yes, my thoughts exactly, they often need help on where to drop the ball. Why is that.  I find it incredibly boring as a fan to watch the official point with the antenna of his walky talky.   Just my view.  What is next, Refs looking at slow motion replays from the Blimp.  If Reed had just taken the drop, we would not have seen that his ball had bounced before settling down.  This bounce was out of his view.  In his judgement and caddie's, the ball was imbedded.  I think he should have just taken the drop, assuming the ball's pitch mark was below the level of the ground.   It was so wet out there that it is possible to embed even on a second bounce as did Reed's ball.  It broke the surface.  He was entitled to relief for sure.

I never suggested what Reed did was dishonorable.  The game is one of honor.  We should trust his decision.  That he took the time to call an Official over is a waste of time in my opinion.  The drop was completely justified and yes, he is entitled to a verification.  I just don't think it was necessary.  Normal golfers emulate professionals.  I don't want to be called over to help someone figure out who to drop from a lateral water hazard nor do I want to be called over to confirm a plugged ball.  Just take the relief.  Like I said, just my view.

2 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I agree that there was no requirement under the rules.  This may have been enough of a "borderline" judgement that Reed wanted to have his own evaluation confirmed.  "I think this is enough of a lip, I believe what I feel shows the ball is embedded, but I'm not 100% sure.  Please let me know what you think."  And in this specific circumstance, imagine the even greater uproar when the video shows that the ball actually DID bounce.

I think the ball was embedded per the rules.  He was entitled to both the relief and confirmation by an official.  Bringing the official in made it a time consuming mess in my opinion as I explained.    Rub of the Green.  He got lucky with a plugged ball, he should have smiled to the golf gods and taken his drop.  That simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
3 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

If Reed had just taken the drop, we would not have seen that his ball had bounced before settling down. 

As the leader, we definitely would have seen that video.  And having seen that, Reed would have been "guilty" because everyone knows the ball cannot embed on the second bounce.  And again, if he was even a little doubtful, the responsible, the honorable thing to do is to have his judgement verified.  Knowing what we do now, it seems pretty likely that the ball wasn't deeply embedded, logical that it wasn't totally clear that it was embedded.

  • Like 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

Yes, my thoughts exactly, they often need help on where to drop the ball. Why is that. 

They want the most favorable location with out breaking the rules. 

I've had situations were I dropped on a cart path because I know I get another free drop.

3 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

If Reed had just taken the drop, we would not have seen that his ball had bounced before settling down. 

Incorrect. He is in the lead. Every shot is under scrutiny. They would have inquired as to why he took a drop and why he didn't call a RO over. 

4 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

Normal golfers emulate professionals. 

Not really. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been ask by another golfer my opinion on a rule. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, DaveP043 said:

As the leader, we definitely would have seen that video.  And having seen that, Reed would have been "guilty" because everyone knows the ball cannot embed on the second bounce.  And again, if he was even a little doubtful, the responsible, the honorable thing to do is to have his judgement verified.  Knowing what we do now, it seems pretty likely that the ball wasn't deeply embedded, logical that it wasn't totally clear that it was embedded.

The bolded part is where we disagree in principle.  I realize my perspective might be different and I think I explained how I see it.  Thinking about what you wrote and Patrick Reed's past controversies, you are probably right.  He needed to have confirmation.  I suppose I am living in the past, when the older statesmen would have sat him down and splained it to him real clear.   Nowadays, there is so much money and each player is like a Corporation.  We fans have slow motion aerial views.  So, I guess you are right with the new context.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Thinking back to my youth, a fellow competitor earned the nickname, "hot pencil" that was shortened to 'Pencil".   He never cheated again but the nickname stuck.  Reed will always suffer, probably unfairly.  So, I was wrong.  His besmirched reputation and being on the top of the board made is essential.   It was still a circus.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
1 hour ago, Rippy_72 said:

So, I was wrong.

You may be a unicorn, unique in online forum conversations.  Its a real treat to have a civil discussion about a topic we disagree on.  I hope I can always follow your example, to examine my own views when different viewpoints are offered.

:beer:

  • Thumbs Up 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
2 hours ago, Rippy_72 said:

If Reed had just taken the drop, we would not have seen that his ball had bounced before settling down.

FWIW I think it was shown live, so we saw the shot and the ball bounce before he even stepped out of the bunker.

The bounce is also largely irrelevant. Balls can embed after a bounce and you still get relief.

2 hours ago, Rippy_72 said:

I don't want to be called over to help someone figure out who to drop from a lateral water hazard nor do I want to be called over to confirm a plugged ball.  Just take the relief.  Like I said, just my view.

Read the responses in the "embedded ball" topic - that guy wants notified of all kinds of things. And thinks Patrick should have had his playing partners come over, or something.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't at this point. Just like me with the candy.

2 hours ago, Rippy_72 said:

Bringing the official in made it a time consuming mess in my opinion as I explained.

The whole thing took three minutes. This isn't really much of a "delay" in PGA Tour terms.

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

And having seen that, Reed would have been "guilty" because everyone knows the ball cannot embed on the second bounce.

Except that it can, and you get relief, as you know. At least, I think you know that. Maybe you're highlighting how little "everyone" tends to know the Rules of Golf.

1 hour ago, Rippy_72 said:

I suppose I am living in the past, when the older statesmen would have sat him down and splained it to him real clear.

Explained what to him? I'm still not sure.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
6 minutes ago, iacas said:

Except that it can, and you get relief, as you know. At least, I think you know that. Maybe you're highlighting how little "everyone" tends to know the Rules of Golf.

I know, but in the court of public opinion he'd have been seen as obviously guilty.  Facts don't always matter.

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Hogan: "Hey Arnie, it's playing slow today."  Arnie: "That's cool. Right now I'm in flavor country." 
    • But most of the the time those smaller businesses aren't in lawsuits against another "business" who has a blank check funding their side. To the tune of BILLIONS of dollars at their disposal. I think you're underestimating how much money these lawsuits were costing the PGA Tour. The costs were expected to reach well into the tens of millions of dollars for each side.  The PIF probably could have bled the PGA Tour dry of cash if they really wanted to by dragging those multiple lawsuits out over multiple more years, especially considering that the PGA Tour was going to have to come up with money from somewhere to pay for the substantial increases in purses for the designated events. I highly doubt every designated event sponsor was going to be willing to double their investment for essentially the same product. Especially since the PGA Tour is a 501(c) (6) non-profit organization there's limits as to exactly where their funding can come from.  So I don't necessarily think it was a mutual desire to stop the bleeding of cash from the lawsuits, but rather the PGA Tour's desire to stop the bleeding of cash. I think the Saudi's/PIF were fine to continue to bleed cash until they ultimately got what they wanted.
    • I think once the lawsuits are dropped, they’re dropped. They could re-file but they can’t just say hey never mind.
    • It was Larry Laoretti I was thinking about. I remember cigars being a thing back then. Along with pleated Dockers and shirt sleeves down to your elbows. 
    • What doesn't make any sense to me is the claim that this merger is driven by the mutual desire to stop the bleeding and fallout from the lawsuits.   On costs, for example.  Lawsuits are expensive, yes.  But businesses smaller than the PGA Tour are in big lawsuits all the time.  You're telling me the PGA Tour can't afford 2 or 3 lawsuits that have been going on for a year or two?  Not only that, you're telling me they got into these lawsuits and what, were surprised that they'd have to pay their lawyers?  Monahan didn't first ask the lawyers, hey, so what do you think this is going to cost us?  Come on.   And even if you assume this is, in large part, about the costs of the lawsuits, it means that the CEO decided to file a lawsuit, then a year later came back and said to his organization that the lawsuit he started was bleeding them dry and the only solution was to let the group he sued buy a huge chunk of the organization?   Oh, and in this deal he negotiated, he's in charge of the new company?  That's either some extraordinary incompetence or a breach of his fiduciary duties to the organization or both.     And then there's the idea that something harmful would come out of discovery.  So again, we'd have to believe that these executives started lawsuits, not realizing there would be discovery, then realized they'd be embarrassed, and went back to their organizations and said, hey, my mistake, time for the organization to bend over otherwise I'll be embarrassed.  Or maybe its that discovery was going to cause them to lose the case.  Sure, that could make sense.  Until you tell me the solution to losing an antitrust case is to merge with your competitor.  Huh? I know that the PGA Tour only filed one of the lawsuits and the others were filed against the Tour and they didn't really have a say in that.  But much of this still holds.  The Tour still went ahead and filed a lawsuit it says it couldn't afford when already entangled in one.  And we have two orgs suing each other and then saying they have no choice but to merge (or whatever you want to call it) because....they sued each other?   New information could certainly change any of this.  We don't know a lot.  But based on what we do know, it doesn't pass the sniff test for me.  I think its more likely that Monahan and YAR decided this was an explanation the players and the public would accept without questioning.  Everyone will say, oh yeah, lawyers are expensive, risks, discovery, yada yada, IANAL, makes sense okay.   And you see a lot of the players saying that.   I realize its not some great revelation to suggest that this deal was driven by business reasons.  Maybe this was really just the Michael Scott Paper company deal--PIF wasn't going to stop, so the tour could either fight them forever or let them in.  But a lot of the players are saying its mainly about the litigation costs and I think that's a pretext to cover up the real reasons.        

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...