Is Phil Mickelson Going Nuts?: Hitting a moving ball at US Open

[Chris223]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

Stop with the sanctimonious “come on dude” stuff like it’s obvious.

He deflected the ball by swinging the putter at it.

Read it again.

I did, he got a 2 stroke penalty... same as he would have gotten with the other rule violation, unless a “serious breach” was determined... which it wasn’t by the USGA, PERIOD.

And no per the rules of golf you seem interested in twisting to favor your opinion of the matter which you are entitled to do it was not a deflection it was a stroke.... there IS a difference

Edited June 17, 2018 by Chris223

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, FlappyGilmore said:

are the 2 situations really that different in terms of intent and application of penalty strokes?

Yes.

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

I did, he got a 2 stroke penalty... same as he would have gotten with the other rule violation, unless a “serious breach” was determined... which it wasn’t by the USGA, PERIOD.

No, not "period." The USGA got this one wrong, IMO.

And the opinions of many, many, many others.

I'm not saying that to as some sort of appeal to majority or anything like that… just that this isn't as clear as you want to believe it to be. A lot of people who know a lot about the Rules are questioning the USGA here.

He deflected the ball. Had he stopped it or deflected it away from the hole, Mike Davis said, he would have been DQed. So why does the direction the ball traveled when he deflected it matter? Why wasn't John Daly DQed, as that wasn't deflected with the intent of holing the "shot"? Why was Kirk Triplett not listed as a DQ; it should be irrelevant that he MCed, he should be listed as a DQ?

[Chris223]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Yes.

No, not "period." The USGA got this one wrong, IMO.

And the opinions of many, many, many others.

And all they are is opinions, same as the USGA.  You are entitled to yours as I am entitled to mine.  Move on, lets not bury a hall of fame career over a bad choice played during a tournament that come close to clown golf.

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Chris223 said:

And all they are is opinions, same as the USGA.  You are entitled to yours as I am entitled to mine.  Move on, lets not bury a hall of fame career over a bad choice played during a tournament that come close to clown golf.

No thank you. I'll move on when I wish to move on. Phil's reputation was forever soiled by his actions IMO.

---

Also… how is it different?

Again… a player has a right to declare his ball unplayable at any point (not OB, not in a water hazard… etc.). He doesn't have the right to do what Phil did.

One is using the rules. It's no different than dropping because your ball is on a cart path.

This wasn't that.

[Chris223]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

No thank you. I'll move on when I wish to move on. Phil's reputation was forever soiled by his actions IMO.

---

Also… how is it different?

Again… a player has a right to declare his ball unplayable at any point (not OB, not in a water hazard… etc.). He doesn't have the right to do what Phil did.

One is using the rules. It's no different than dropping because your ball is on a cart path.

This wasn't that.

By this logic half the field should have called unplayables left a right since getting up and down from those run off areas has been next to impossible and hey, its in the fairway but “it’s unplayable, I think I’ll reputt”.  Free relief, how in gods name are you going to bring that to this argument?

Edited June 17, 2018 by Chris223

[iacas]

Just now, Chris223 said:

By this logic half the field should have called unplayables left a right since getting up and down from those run off areas has been next to impossible and hey, its in the fairway but “it’s unplayable, I think I’ll reputt”

That doesn't make any sense.

If you have a 20-foot putt, hit it 50 feet past the hole, and think - even with a stroke penalty - that you can score better by re-hitting the 20-footer… by all means, go ahead.

I doubt that situation happened to "half the field" - that they thought that even with a stroke penalty and putting from the same place as before, they could score better.

[Chris223]

Just now, iacas said:

That doesn't make any sense.

How does it not?  We’ve seen plenty of balls run off greens and getting up and down has shown to be extremely low percentage.  You’re suggesting take an unplayable because, at best, your shot from off the green will end up where you just played from, your “1 stroke” penalty

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Chris223 said:

How does it not?

Did you not read all of what I wrote? They're welcome to avail themselves of that option.

1 minute ago, Chris223 said:

We’ve seen plenty of balls run off greens and getting up and down has shown to be extremely low percentage.

The players may have felt that getting up and down was a higher percentage play than holing that same putt the second time (since they're "up" of the "up and down" would have already been used by the penalty stroke).

Plus, I don't think as many people putted off the greens as you're implying.

1 minute ago, Chris223 said:

You’re suggesting take an unplayable because, at best, your shot from off the green will end up where you just played from, your “1 stroke” penalty

That's not accurate at all.

I'm suggesting that what Phil did is not at all in the same class as exercising a right all players have when their ball is not OB or in a water hazard, etc.

Phil's actions were deplorable. They forever soil his reputation, and he should have been DQed. I think rule 1-2 applies here - he intentionally deflected his ball so it couldn't go to the same area from which he'd previously played.

[Chris223]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

Did you not read all of what I wrote? They're welcome to avail themselves of that option.

The players may have felt that getting up and down was a higher percentage play than holing that same putt the second time (since they're "up" of the "up and down" would have already been used by the penalty stroke).

Plus, I don't think as many people putted off the greens as you're implying.

That's not accurate at all.

I'm suggesting that what Phil did is not at all in the same class as exercising a right all players have when their ball is not OB or in a water hazard, etc.

Phil's actions were deplorable. They forever soil his reputation, and he should have been DQed. I think rule 1-2 applies here - he intentionally deflected his ball so it couldn't go to the same area from which he'd previously played.

I never said it was a smart choice and I’m not entirely defending what he did.  Simply trying to state this is being blownup way out of proportion.  Plenty of players, respected ones at that, took a steaming dump on the USGA today for the shit show many recent US Opens have become and Phil made a bad choice letting his emotions get the better of him.  

Edited June 17, 2018 by Chris223

[Crim]

1 hour ago, Chris223 said:

Meh.  I still think he just let frustration get the better of him and I’m willing move on from it.  I am a big Phil fan.  One on course blemish like this isn’t enough for me to put him on a shit list.  For those that do... he probably wont shed a tear or lose any sleep, he already has plenty of haters.

I like Phil, but you know what rubbed me the wrong way is the fact that he made all of this seem calculated, yet check this out...

Here's a quote from Beef, his playing partner. 

"He said, 'I don't know what that is. I don't know what score that is or what happens now.' And he started speaking to the rules official. It was one strange moment."

Clearly not premeditated, which like you said, he probably just let frustration get the better of him. And if that's the case (which based off what Beef heard, it clearly is) then why'd he have to lie to all of us about it? Of course probably because Phil ALWAYS has to be right. He sort of lost me as a fan, I still like watching him play, kind of like Bubba. Not a fan of the personality, more of the play. 

I don't dig liars and cheats.  

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Simply trying to state this is being blownup way out of proportion.

I don't agree.

8 minutes ago, Crim said:

I like Phil, but you know what rubbed me the wrong way is the fact that he made all of this seem calculated, yet check this out...

Here's a quote from Beef, his playing partner.

I heard and thought the same thing when they interviewed Beef. Phil's bullshit about how it was something he's always considered doing was just that - bullshit.

8 minutes ago, Crim said:

Of course probably because Phil ALWAYS has to be right. He sort of lost me as a fan, I still like watching him play, kind of like Bubba. Not a fan of the personality, more of the play.

I don't dig liars and cheats.  

Bingo.

They said on Golf Channel afterward that Phil has to be "the smartest guy in the room." In this case, he wasn't, and in trying to say that he was… he lied to us, then told us to "toughen up."

[Roosto]

That's not the way you play golf, Phil.  This isn't ice hockey.

[graham57]

I have a hard time getting my head round the idea that calling an unplayable and re-placing the ball on the green would somehow be more within the spirit of the game than what Phil actually did. While I agree that it is in accordance with the letter if the rules, It would mean moving the ball not „back“ to where the last shot was played from, but forwards in terms of the hole layout, at the same time placing the ball closer to the hole, which is expressly banned in situations where a ball has to be dropped or replaced (including within Rule 28 itself (28-c), if the player chooses to drop the ball within two clublengths of where it came to rest).

This quote from an article on the USGA website demonstrates for me that the original intention of the unplayable rule was to prevent players gaining an unfair advantage:

In the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews Rules code of 1851, the player required “the consent of his adversary” to declare a ball unplayable and drop it for a one-stroke penalty. So if your opponent thought your ball was playable, he was given the opportunity to make two strokes with your ball in an attempt to move it to a playable position. If he succeeded, the two strokes your opponent made count in your score, and you must then continue play of the hole. The idea for this practice actually came from an earlier 1828 code from Burntisland Golf House Club.

Again, I don‘t dispute that the move would be legal - I just would ‚t feel any more comfortable with it than with what Phil did.

 

[ScouseJohnny]

So how does he redeem the situation now? If he checks out of his hotel and throws his clubs in his car trunk rather than showing up to play today, would that make it a bit better?

[Zeph]

It was a stupid move, but in the heat of a difficult tournament, he could've done worse. I don't care too much.

[billchao]

11 hours ago, iacas said:

Mickelson said that disrespecting the game wasn’t his intent, that he didn’t think the move would damage his reputation, and that any fans or players who were offended by his actions needed to “toughen up.”

I fail to see how blatant disregard of the rules is anything other than disrespecting the game. His explanation was basically, "Whatever, just give me 2 strokes."

Saying anybody who doesn't like it should toughen up just makes him out to be a tool. I didn't like it and I certainly wasn't offended by it, but his response to the whole situation makes me believe that his whole "good guy" persona is just an act which I've read from various sources over the years.

11 hours ago, ChrisP said:

I would have understood it more if he admitted “Listen I snapped. I wanted to win this tournament so so badly and I let my frustration get the best of me. I apologize.” I would have been very okay with that. Instead he joked it off and made it out to be like it wasn’t that big a deal and nobody should care. I definitely lost respect for him.

Exactly. If he owned up to it and said he got caught up in the heat of the moment, I can understand that. But it's rather presumptuous to basically say, "I don't care so you shouldn't either."

11 hours ago, iacas said:

Someone said it at the course today… (I got home at 7:30 tonight)… "Imagine if Tiger had done that."

But because it's Phil, people don't care as much.

Literally the first thing I thought when I read about his reaction, but you know how I feel about certain people getting more negative attention than others.

10 hours ago, ScouseJohnny said:

And the response was always going to be the Phil Flintstone Show, not humility, shame, or embarrassment.

Well he's FIGJAM, right? Everyone should be on board with that /sarcasm 

1 hour ago, ScouseJohnny said:

So how does he redeem the situation now? If he checks out of his hotel and throws his clubs in his car trunk rather than showing up to play today, would that make it a bit better?

In my eyes, it does. If he came out to the press tent today and said something along the lines of, "I was frustrated yesterday and wasn't thinking clearly, I slept on it and realized I made a mistake and I apologize" and WD, that does make it somewhat better.

Showing remorse speaks to a person's character. It's why people forgave Andy Pettitte but not Roger Clemens.

[boogielicious]

After reading Mickelson’s interview comments, I have to say he’s lost me as a fan. If he just said, “I lost my cool” or something to that effect, it would have been OK. But what he did instead was give the USGA and golf fans the finger, telling us to “toughen up.” He even said he was laughing about it in the scoring tent. Sad ending to his career. I will not cheer for him now. 

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

Showing remorse speaks to a person's character. It's why people forgave Andy Pettitte but not Roger Clemens.

I didn’t forgive Pettite! 😜

He’s a Yankee!

[iacas]

5 hours ago, graham57 said:

I have a hard time getting my head round the idea that calling an unplayable and re-placing the ball on the green would somehow be more within the spirit of the game than what Phil actually did.

The Rules of Golf allow you to "do over" a shot at (almost) any time with a one-stroke penalty.

That's within the rules, and an explicit right of the player.

5 hours ago, graham57 said:

While I agree that it is in accordance with the letter if the rules, It would mean moving the ball not „back“ to where the last shot was played from, but forwards in terms of the hole layout, at the same time placing the ball closer to the hole, which is expressly banned in situations where a ball has to be dropped or replaced (including within Rule 28 itself (28-c), if the player chooses to drop the ball within two clublengths of where it came to rest).

That's not an accurate take (particularly the bit about "expressly banned"). His skill or "talent" already advanced the ball to that point.

It's literally no different than a player hitting his second shot on a par 4 into a spot between two rocks where he literally can't get the clubhead on the ball, and deciding to take an unplayable and go back and re-play his approach shot. A player may declare his ball unplayable at any time, and even Phil said he had "no shot" from down where he was.

It's like a person's right to take the fifth amendment… it's a player's right to declare his ball unplayable (most of the time). Period.

5 hours ago, graham57 said:

This quote from an article on the USGA website demonstrates for me that the original intention of the unplayable rule was to prevent players gaining an unfair advantage:

He would not be gaining an unfair advantage. He already advanced the ball to that point through legal strokes. He would be paying a stroke penalty to simply re-hit, just as the player who hit his ball into the rocks would be above.

1 hour ago, ScouseJohnny said:

So how does he redeem the situation now? If he checks out of his hotel and throws his clubs in his car trunk rather than showing up to play today, would that make it a bit better?

He's playing. I saw him warming up just now.

Lost me as a fan. And others, too. Important in the grand scheme of things? Not at all. But what Bill said is relevant…

2 minutes ago, billchao said:

I fail to see how blatant disregard of the rules is anything other than disrespecting the game. His explanation was basically, "Whatever, just give me 2 strokes."

Saying anybody who doesn't like it should toughen up just makes him out to be a tool. I didn't like it and I certainly wasn't offended by it, but his response to the whole situation makes me believe that his whole "good guy" persona is just an act which I've read from various sources over the years.

Exactly. If he owned up to it and said he got caught up in the heat of the moment, I can understand that. But it's rather presumptuous to basically say, "I don't care so you shouldn't either."

In my eyes, it does. If he came out to the press tent today and said something along the lines of, "I was frustrated yesterday and wasn't thinking clearly, I slept on it and realized I made a mistake and I apologize" and WD, that does make it somewhat better.

Showing remorse speaks to a person's character. It's why people forgave Andy Pettitte but not Roger Clemens.

All of that.