Patrick Reed vs. the Rules of Golf

[iacas]

1 hour ago, No Mulligans said:

It wasn't sopping wet. 

Did you watch any of Saturdays coverage? 

Poor word choice by me. It was definitely still soft and I watched all of the coverage.

Soft enough that they were playing lift clean and place again.

1 hour ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Here's my theory, and I'm stickin' to it.  (Like anybody asked me for my theory)  A player, it doesn't matter who it was, walked up to their ball sitting on top of the ground.  After hopping out of the hole it had made upon first landing it had come to rest in a garbage lie in the rough.  And, as is often the case when a ball plugs and then jumps out of its plug, it had mud on it.  Three quick thoughts came to the player's mind:

1.  If I can claim my ball was embedded, back there in that empty hole, I can get a better lie in the rough, via a knee high drop.

2.  I can get the mud off my ball.

3.  I can get a better angle to approach the pin, by a driver's length and then some.

He asked the question and marked the ball long before he could even see the ball let alone whether it had mud on it.

[Double Mocha Man]

5 minutes ago, iacas said:

He asked the question and marked the ball long before he could even see the ball let alone whether it had mud on it.

Can you re-phrase that?  He couldn't mark the ball before he could even see the ball.  And ultimately, didn't he mark the pitch hole as being where he said he found his ball?

Edited January 31, 2021 by Double Mocha Man

[woodzie264]

Patrick Reed says he 'perfectly' handled controversial plugged-ball decision in Farmers Insurance Open | Golf News and Tour Information | GolfDigest.com

---

 

“After the round, lead PGA Tour Senior Tournament Official John Mutch reviewed the videotape with Reed and playing parners Will Gordon and Robby Shelton, and he determined that Reed handled the situation properly, including asking a volunteer if the ball had bounced and notifiying his playing partners that he believed he had an embedded ball. Mutch said in an interview with reporters that Reed was entitled to determine if his ball was embedded without the help of a rules official.

"It was reasonable for him to conclude that that was his ball, it did not bounce and he was then entitled to see if it was embedded," Mutch said.”

[DaveP043]

2 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

Patrick Reed says he 'perfectly' handled controversial plugged-ball decision in Farmers Insurance Open | Golf News and Tour Information | GolfDigest.com

---

 

 

To be fair, Reed said that he had been told by the head rules official that he had handled the situation perfectly.  He wasn't claiming that on his own, which is what the headline seems to say.  

[woodzie264]

36 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

To be fair, Reed said that he had been told by the head rules official that he had handled the situation perfectly.  He wasn't claiming that on his own, which is what the headline seems to say.  

Agreed - just posting article 

[Deleo77]

Next time Reed shouldn’t make it so complicated and should just take a mulligan 

[GolfLug]

Welp, if my man says it was plugged, then it was plugged. End of story. 

Some one can sit there and toss a thousand balls from six feet or whatever at the exact spot, not have a single ball plug yet prove nothing of consequence. Rest of the procedural 'perfection' is just window dressing. 

I guess I am just a hater..😄

[Shorty]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

To be fair, Reed said that he had been told by the head rules official that he had handled the situation perfectly.  He wasn't claiming that on his own, which is what the headline seems to say.  

 

To be fair, Reed did claim this on his own. He "interpreted" what he was told.

"It's an unfortunate situation, obviously," Reed said, "but at the end of the day when you finish a round, and the head rules official comes up to you and has the video and shows everything that went down to the whole group and says that you've done this perfectly, you did this the exact right way, the protocols you did were spot on—at that point, I feel great about it." 

What a load of complete BS. No-one said that to him in those words. It also seems that he has changed the word "properly" to "perfectly".

"Perfect" handling of the situation would have been  at least waiting for the official before handling the ball and at best asking if maybe there is video because the volunteer and his playing partners didn't see it bounce.  

The big question remains: Why did he aske if it bounced before he even knew what sort of lie he had?

And the other question, if you believe that anything goes because you don't "know" what he was thinking is: Did Reed handle the situation "perfectly"?

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Shorty

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Can you re-phrase that?  He couldn't mark the ball before he could even see the ball.  And ultimately, didn't he mark the pitch hole as being where he said he found his ball?

Yeah, sorry, bad phrasing on my part.

He couldn't see that the ball had mud on it when he asked the question. He couldn't even see the ball when he asked the question.

1 hour ago, woodzie264 said:

"It was reasonable for him to conclude that that was his ball, it did not bounce and he was then entitled to see if it was embedded," Mutch said.”

Yep.

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

To be fair, Reed said that he had been told by the head rules official that he had handled the situation perfectly.  He wasn't claiming that on his own, which is what the headline seems to say.  

Right.

10 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Welp, if my man says it was plugged, then it was plugged. End of story.😄

Who is "your man"?

7 minutes ago, Shorty said:

"Perfect" handling of the situation would have been  at least waiting for the official before handling the ball and at best asking if maybe there is video because the volunteer and his playing partners didn't see it bounce.  

Absolutely no need for him to wait.

7 minutes ago, Shorty said:

The big question remains: Why did he aske if it bounced before he even knew what sort of lie he had?

Perfectly logical to me.

When I'm playing a soft course, and I don't see the ball bounce, I have a strong suspicion it may be embedded.

7 minutes ago, Shorty said:

And the other question, if you believe that anything goes because you don't "know" what he was thinking is: Did Reed handle the situation "perfectly"?

He handled it completely within the Rules.

[Double Mocha Man]

27 minutes ago, Deleo77 said:

Next time Reed shouldn’t make it so complicated and should just take a mulligan 

😃Right.  And if it's on the first tee just take a breakfast ball...

[GolfLug]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

Who is "your man"?

Reed. Nobody's else can question his claim that it was plugged since there is not any other factual (eye witness/video) evidence other than his claim, right? We can all theorize one way or the other all we want. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by GolfLug

[Shorty]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

When I'm playing a soft course, and I don't see the ball bounce, I have a strong suspicion it may be embedded.

Me too. Every time.

But I'm wondering about that AFTER I see the lie. Or, I'm wondering if it's plugged because it appears lost in a  place I'd expect it to be found.

Reed is lying about what he was told. It was far from "perfect" and he was not told that it was. That is a freaking lie. That point is moot with regard to the ruling, but it speaks volumes about his character. And, again, you don't get penalised because all your colleagues think you're a lying, cheating jerk, but you have to be prepared for the backlash when you overstep the line.

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Reed. Nobody's else can question his claim that it was plugged since there is not any other factual (eye witness/video) evidence other than his claim, right? We can all theorize one way or the other all we want. 

The RO said it was embedded (well, that he felt the "lip") too.

Just now, Shorty said:

But I'm wondering about that AFTER I see the lie. Or, I'm wondering if it's plugged because it appears lost in a  place I'd expect it to be found.

Relevance? Reed's ball wasn't lost.

Just now, Shorty said:

It was far from "perfect"

How do you figure? Please answer knowing that you're quite likely wrong about this, from a Rules perspective.

Just now, Shorty said:

That point is moot with regard to the ruling, but it speaks volumes about his character.

If you say so.

Just now, Shorty said:

And, again, you don't get penalised because all your colleagues think you're a lying, cheating jerk, but you have to be prepared for the backlash when you overstep the line.

Keep on hatin'.

[No Mulligans]

22 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Some one can sit there and toss a thousand balls from six feet or whatever at the exact spot, not have a single ball plug yet prove nothing of consequence.

 

I agree.  But no one would do that, that makes about as much sense as throwing a thousand up in the air to see if gravity was still functioning as expected.  Some experiments aren't worth doing as the outcome is pretty much certain.

The odds are so small of that ball embedding that one logically looks for other explanations.

[Double Mocha Man]

A slightly different perspective... barely.  Footage at the opening of today's telecast, that I didn't see yesterday, showed Mr. Reed  picking up his ball with a couple of fingers.  But it didn't come up immediately and he had to grasp it again.  This could indicate it was in some sort of pitch mark or hole.  However, I'll go to my grave absolutely sure that it wasn't in its original pitch mark.

[Shorty]

8 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

A slightly different perspective... barely.  Footage at the opening of today's telecast, that I didn't see yesterday, showed Mr. Reed  picking up his ball with a couple of fingers.  But it didn't come up immediately and he had to grasp it again.  This could indicate it was in some sort of pitch mark or hole.  However, I'll go to my grave absolutely sure that it wasn't in its original pitch mark.

His claim is that he was trying to make sure that any debris on the ball was not displaced in case he had to recreate the lie.

 

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Shorty said:

His claim is that he was trying to make sure that any debris on the ball was not displaced in case he had to recreate the lie.

Players have learned to do the two-finger thing lest they accidentally "clean" the ball.

[DaveP043]

11 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Reed is lying about what he was told. It was far from "perfect" and he was not told that it was. That is a freaking lie

Please tell us, what WAS he told?  While you're at it, post some video to back your claim.

I don't know what "perfect" really entails, but he followed the requirements of the rules.