Patrick Reed vs. the Rules of Golf

[RemyM]

21 hours ago, iacas said:

The lie is more than the ball.

Your point is taken because it’s the spot on which the ball lies by definition but colloquially “spot” is the area immediately around the ball. Nobody whose ball is sitting down in Bermuda grass says “my lie is great but my area of swing is bad.”

He breached the rule. That much is clear.

I started to write about the definition of lie but deleted it.  He was trying to compare what Reed did to someone sticking a tee in the rough and putting his ball on it.

Under the definition of lie I don't see where sand behind the ball fits in.  While we know sand is not a loose impediment does it fall under "attached natural object?"  Sand isn't attached, a gust of wind could blow it away.  Clearly though 8.1a(4) says you can't "remove or press down sand or loose soil.".

[iacas]

You seemingly missed the "your point is taken" bit, so, anyway…

[Herkimer]

How does a player at the highest level of the sport not see that he's pushed sand back or felt that he's pushed sand back with his club?  Is it possible, when you're as good as he is, not to realize what you've done....twice?  

 

[boogielicious]

3 hours ago, Herkimer said:

How does a player at the highest level of the sport not see that he's pushed sand back or felt that he's pushed sand back with his club?  Is it possible, when you're as good as he is, not to realize what you've done....twice?  

 

IMO no. He just didn’t think anyone was watching. 

[GolfLug]

He prolly thought it wasn't fair the ball was in a sandy depression so he must have thought he needed to level the playing field.. I mean literally. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by GolfLug

[MarvChamp]

I have not seen a full video. Was he taking practice swings? While looking at the ball? While looking at the hole? Thanks, -Marv

[Missouri Swede]

9 minutes ago, MarvChamp said:

I have not seen a full video. Was he taking practice swings? While looking at the ball? While looking at the hole? Thanks, -Marv

Post 67:

On 12/7/2019 at 12:43 PM, DeadMan said:

Hmmm...

 

 

[saevel25]

To me this is were intent needs to be taken out of golf. 

I can understand if you lay the clubface open, you maybe lose reference to the bottom of the club. I think I would have some pattern recognition and realize that the sand behind the ball has changed. I mean, it would go from a crater looking lie to having a grove made behind the ball. Maybe he didn't notice, but still, it really improved his lie.

In the end, he should have been more careful. He's played for years knowing you can't touch sand. I would think that habit would make him just not come close to the sand. 

[iacas]

1 minute ago, saevel25 said:

To me this is were intent needs to be taken out of golf.

There is no "intent" here, in this Rule. So there's nothing to "take out."

[saevel25]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

There is no "intent" here, in this Rule. So there's nothing to "take out."

Oh, because when I was watching a commentary talk about this he went on about how intent. 

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Oh, because when I was watching a commentary talk about this he went on about how intent. 

I know people talk about it, but read the rule. There's no "intent" here.

You know people don't know the Rules very well. This is simply a matter of fact, whether you did it accidentally or not.

[rehmwa]

14 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

To me this is were intent needs to be taken out of golf. 

I can understand if you lay the clubface open, you maybe lose reference to the bottom of the club. I think I would have some pattern recognition and realize that the sand behind the ball has changed. I mean, it would go from a crater looking lie to having a grove made behind the ball. Maybe he didn't notice, but still, it really improved his lie.

In the end, he should have been more careful. He's played for years knowing you can't touch sand. I would think that habit would make him just not come close to the sand. 

I think this is the fairest statement.

Whether on purpose or accidental, the action itself improved the lie.  So 2 strokes for doing on purpose, or 2 strokes for being unaware and careless in a situation where a pro should be VERY aware.  Doesn't really matter on the intent.  I don't really see any reason in that tournament at that time for him to even chance penalty strokes, he was playing very well and on track to be in a position to win.

[David in FL]

I’ve tried really hard to like him, but damn, he’s making it tough.

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I think this is the fairest statement.

Did you read my response?

GUYS, C'mon!!! There's no intent in this rule. By continuing to talk as if there is, you're just contributing to the ignorance.

[Double Mocha Man]

30 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

In the end, he should have been more careful. He's played for years knowing you can't touch sand. I would think that habit would make him just not come close to the sand. 

Maybe similar to what LeBron James did the other night?  He was slowly dribbling down court, picked up the ball and continued walking and then began to dribble again. Sort of a brain fart.

[GolfLug]

28 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Doesn't really matter on the intent. 

Just like the 'no harm, no foul', the intent debate has raged on for a long time. Even from people who should know better when it comes to rules.

The way I see it is if you ain't preventing, you are trying. 

I see this kind of stuff at club level but think egregious it at top pro level. 

Also, if he thought nobody was watching he is not very bright either. 

I know am piling on but he is full shit. Hope he manages to find redemption at some point. 

 

Edited December 10, 2019 by GolfLug

[Yukari]

It seems very odd that he would place the club right behind the ball and then take a practice swing away from the ball.

If that is his regular routine, then it's understandable.  But if his regular practice swing does not involve placing the club right behind the ball, then one can only assume he did it to brush away the sand.  Regardless, since the rule does not require any intent....

[mcanadiens]

Reed could have done a lot better for himself than he did. 

It could have been played off as a mistake, but for a guy with his reputation, he sounded too dismissive of it. That's exactly the wrong tact to take with a fellow golfers, both the ones that play against him and those who watch the sport.

Patrick is going to have to do it better and cleaner than everyone else going forward or he's going to known as a cheater for the rest of his days.