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

[David in FL]

17 hours ago, iacas said:

The Rules of Golf look bad here.

I understand that they're trying to apply 14-5, but what I don't get is that he deflected the ball… but it just happened to be toward the hole.

Mike Davis said that he made a stroke, he didn't "deflect the ball in some other direction." But what about John Daly? Was that also a stroke even though it in no way was going to go in?

What's a "deflection" instead of a "stroke" if you swipe at it? Can anyone just avoid DQing under 1-2 if they can claim to have simply made a stroke?

I don't think you go to 14-5 right away. I think you look at RULE 1 - THE GAME first.

Definition of a stroke...

He clearly made a stroke.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

Definition of a stroke...

He clearly made a stroke.

He also "[took] an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play."

Straight from 1-2.

The note at the bottom of 14-5 also says: "(Ball purposely deflected or stopped by player, partner or caddie - see Rule 1-2)".

He "purposefully deflected or stopped" the ball.

1 hour ago, Chris223 said:

People will forever debate if Phil is genuine or just putting on a show.  I believe its genuine with the way he spoke about it during his Feherty interview and how Palmer taught it to him.  Point is he IS the most engaged pro on tour when it comes to the fans and they received him just like normal today.  He wont miss those in this thread who now hate him, he still has PLENTY of fans, myself included.

It's genuine to lie to fans and tell the people who are disappointed by his actions to "toughen up"? You're a fan of a guy who lies to you, and you think that's genuine? Phil's always been thought of as a phony. He'd done such a good job many people came around on him over the last few years, as he started winning majors, but I think yesterday revealed his true character.

And he may have lost more fans than you think. People were calling for his sponsors to ask him to withdraw.

[Chris223]

11 minutes ago, iacas said:

He also "[took] an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play."

Straight from 1-2.

The note at the bottom of 14-5 also says: "(Ball purposely deflected or stopped by player, partner or caddie - see Rule 1-2)".

He "purposefully deflected or stopped" the ball.

It's genuine to lie to fans and tell the people who are disappointed by his actions to "toughen up"? You're a fan of a guy who lies to you, and you think that's genuine? Phil's always been thought of as a phony. He'd done such a good job many people came around on him over the last few years, as he started winning majors, but I think yesterday revealed his true character.

And he may have lost more fans than you think. People were calling for his sponsors to ask him to withdraw.

Pro athletes aren’t saints.  People need to stop this notion that they should be.  Yes, I am still a Phil fan as are a lot of people, you seem to be hell bent on making sure nobody else likes Phil.  I still do.  He made a mistake.  Plenty of pro athletes lie and do a lot of awful things.  Let me ask you this are you a DJ fan?  I hope not he’s been know to be a super douche.  If I didn’t like a pro athlete because of something that was at some point in time said about them I wouldn’t have a lot of athletes to like.  It’s my choice to still be a Phil fan just as its your choice to hate the man.  Have fun with your hatred

Edited June 17, 2018 by Chris223

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Pro athletes aren’t saints.

I was never under the impression that they were. I simply expect honesty in their play and actions re: the game. Phil failed at that.

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Yes, I am still a Phil fan as are a lot of people, you seem to be hell bent on making sure nobody else likes Phil.

Nope. Just sharing my thoughts, as you are. Yet I'm not on here saying "you seem to be hell bent on making sure everybody still likes Phil."

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Let me ask you this are you a DJ fan?

Not particularly.

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

If I didn’t like a pro athlete because of something that was at some point in time said about them I wouldn’t have a lot of athletes to like.

OMG… @Chris223, this wasn't "because of something that was at some point in time said about them." This is something he actually did in the game.

I've also been around Phil several times. I've had the opportunity to talk with him, interact with him, and observe him. He didn't build up enough goodwill during those times for me to overlook this incident, which again, is something he actually did, not something someone else said about him.

[Shorty]

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

Phil's always been thought of as a phony. He'd done such a good job many people came around on him over the last few years, as he started winning majors, but I think yesterday revealed his true character.

 

He lost me last year when he pulled out of the U.S. Open because of his daughter's high school graduation ceremony. I know I am possibly (or probably) unfairly critical here, but it fits a pattern.

I read it as a completely constructed act designed to curry favour with his fans. I know my view isn't popular, but it was a high school graduation. An intelligent girl finishes HIGH SCHOOL! Wow. It's not that he did it it's the fact that he overplays these things by pretending to underplay them. 

The other phony act was the "I'll walk off the course if she goes into labour" comment which again, is calculated to appeal to the "It's all about family, nothing else matters, what an awesome guy" crowd.

I never like the grandstanding conversations with Bones when the microphones were close, as if Bones was being paid by the word. (But I like Bones)

Yesterday's explanation was cynical and dishonest. And if he was being honest it's even worse.

I had warmed to Phil a couple of years back. Now I find myself rooting for Reed to win. Hell has frozen over.

12 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Pro athletes aren’t saints.  People need to stop this notion that they should be.  

Come on! That's like the "Have you never made a mistake?" defense when someone is convicted of or is accused of a crime. It's about what Phil DID, not what you expect.

You don't have to be  a saint to not do things that are, in effect, though not by law, cheating - and then lie about them.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Shorty

[Chris223]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

I was never under the impression that they were. I simply expect honesty in their play and actions re: the game. Phil failed at that.

Nope. Just sharing my thoughts, as you are. Yet I'm not on here saying "you seem to be hell bent on making sure everybody still likes Phil."

Not particularly.

OMG… @Chris223, this wasn't "because of something that was at some point in time said about them." This is something he actually did in the game.

I've also been around Phil several times. I've had the opportunity to talk with him, interact with him, and observe him. He didn't build up enough goodwill during those times for me to overlook this incident, which again, is something he actually did, not something someone else said about him.

And omg I was making a general point not saying that in specific reference to Phil and what he did yesterday but to the point that he’s being called fake again.  When I said I believe he’s “genuine” I meant in the way he’s engaged with the fans when he plays.  It shows, I did NOT mean specifically yesterday.  I’m done with this debate, he made a mistake and I readily admit that and it was a bad one and yet I am still not ready to trash his entire career over it.  Thats it.  I can’t speak to the times you’ve personally engaged with him and come away with a bad impression I wasn’t there.

7 minutes ago, Shorty said:

He lost me last year when he pulled out of the U.S. Open because of his daughter's high school graduation ceremony. I know I am possibly (or probably) unfairly critical here, but it fits a pattern.

I read it as a completely constructed act designed to curry favour with his fans. I know my view isn't popular, but it was a high school graduation. An intelligent girl finishes HIGH SCHOOL! Wow. It's not that he did it it's the fact that he overplays these things by pretending to underplay them. 

The other phony act was the "I'll walk off the course if she goes into labour" comment which again, is calculated to appeal to the "It's all about family, nothing else matters, what an awesome guy" crowd.

I never like the grandstanding conversations with Bones when the microphones were close, as if Bones was being paid by the word. (But I like Bones)

Yesterday's explanation was cynical and dishonest. And if he was being honest it's even worse.

I had warmed to Phil a couple of years back. Now I find myself rooting for Reed to win. Hell has frozen over.

Welcome to society today.  Its all about participation trophys.  The fact though that you hate Phil over that, to me, is absurd.  But to each their own

[turtleback]

3 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

And omg I was making a general point not saying that in specific reference to Phil and what he did yesterday but to the point that he’s being called fake again.  When I said I believe he’s “genuine” I meant in the way he’s engaged with the fans when he plays.  It shows, I did NOT mean specifically yesterday.  I’m done with this debate, he made a mistake and I readily admit that and it was a bad one and yet I am still not ready to trash his entire career over it.  Thats it.  I can’t speak to the times you’ve personally engaged with him and come away with a bad impression I wasn’t there.

It's not the act that is so damning, it is the lying cover-up.

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

And omg I was making a general point not saying that in specific reference to Phil and what he did yesterday but to the point that he’s being called fake again.

This topic - and my newly again (re?)-found dislike for Phil - are what we're discussing. Then you pop off with some "what other people say about him?" That has nothing to do with it. What's that got to do with anything here?

7 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

When I said I believe he’s “genuine” I meant in the way he’s engaged with the fans when he plays.

You can be a genuine liar, but you cannot be both genuine and a liar. Phil is a genuine liar, and a liar, but he's not genuine IMO.

4 minutes ago, turtleback said:

It's not the act that is so damning, it is the lying cover-up.

Yep.

Had he said "Look, I goofed back there. I wasn't playing well, I got frustrated. I had no clue what the penalty would be, just that I might remember John Daly doing it once… I don't know, just a brain fart there, borne out of frustration. I let myself down, my fans down, and that type of behavior is not what I want to be to the game, my fellow competitor Beef… I'm sorry. I love this championship and I'm sorry to have disappointed people with a little spot of unsporting behavior. The USGA tells me it's two strokes, and I'll accept their ruling, as I endeavor to play within the rules, and hopefully I can play well and begin to earn back some trust on Sunday."

[billchao]

15 minutes ago, iacas said:

He "purposefully deflected or stopped" the ball.

It's a technicality (and kind of dumb*), but he purposefully deflected the ball by making a stroke so it falls under 14-5, which 1-2 explicitly states because there is a rule that covers making a stroke on a moving ball.

*It's dumb because had he deflected the ball with his putter in the more commonly used sense of the word "deflection", his ball would have kept rolling down the hill anyway, leaving him in a worse position and qualifying him for a DQ. So somehow in this case he made the breach of the rules that was both more advantageous for him and simultaneously not considered a serious breach of 1-2 simply because of a technicality that allows it to be covered by 14-5.

[Chris223]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

This topic - and my newly again (re?)-found dislike for Phil - are what we're discussing. Then you pop off with some "what other people say about him?" That has nothing to do with it. What's that got to do with anything here?

You can be a genuine liar, but you cannot be both genuine and a liar. Phil is a genuine liar, and a liar, but he's not genuine IMO.

Someone mentioned that all his smiles and thumbs up towards fans was all fake and an act.  I don’t believe that to be the case.  That was why I said that.  Why are you so unwilling to let a heat of the moment thing slide, even just a tiny bit.  I’m not asking you to like him, but I question how you can throw 25 years in the trash over that display yesterday.  I can’t get there.  Thats all

[Shorty]

4 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Why are you so unwilling to let a heat of the moment thing slide, even just a tiny bit.  I’m not asking you to like him, but I question how you can throw 25 years in the trash over that display yesterday.  I can’t get there.  Thats all

Because it REVEALS character. It's like saying Lexi has a "brain fart" when she clearly cheats. You could write a list of 200 players from the last 20 years who have never ever done anything remotely like what Phil did. And their relative achievements are not relevant. Phil is an entitled, pretentious, disingenuous wanker and for many, yesterday ruled a line through the benefit of the doubt they chose to give him. If Daly did it people would be talking about a lengthy suspension, not a DQ.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Shorty

[Chris223]

3 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Because it REVEALS character. It's like saying Lexi has a "brain fart" when she clearly cheats. You could write a list of 200 players from the last 20 years who have never ever done anything remotely like what Phil did. And their relative achievements are not relevant. Phil is an entitled, pretentious, disingenuous wanker and for many yesterday ruled a line through the benefit of the doubt they chose to give him. If Daly did it people would be talking about a lengthy suspension, not a DQ.

And has he ever done anything even close to the extent of that on the golf course before in his very long career?  No, its out of character for him, significantly.  I’ve already moved past it.  Are you honestly suggesting that in life you have NEVER done anything someone would consider out of character for you?  Are you perfect?  I’m not, neither is Phil or anyone else

[Vinsk]

6 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Someone mentioned that all his smiles and thumbs up towards fans was all fake and an act.  I don’t believe that to be the case.  That was why I said that.  Why are you so unwilling to let a heat of the moment thing slide, even just a tiny bit.  I’m not asking you to like him, but I question how you can throw 25 years in the trash over that display yesterday.  I can’t get there.  Thats all

Because Phil didn’t own up to that which is exactly what it was. He was smug in saying ‘knowing the rules is an advantage.’ Well if he knew the rules he would’ve let the ball roll out and take an unplayable. Instead he purposefully broke a rule out of frustration. Had he said what @iacas wrote it would’ve saved a lot more face. The action he did was a mistake. But how it was handled, like Lexi is what’s lousy.

[Shorty]

Just now, Chris223 said:

 Are you honestly suggesting that in life you have NEVER done anything someone would consider out of character for you?  

With the entire (golfing) world watching? No.

[Chris223]

4 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Because Phil didn’t own up to that which is exactly what it was. He was smug in saying ‘knowing the rules is an advantage.’ Well if he knew the rules he would’ve let the ball roll out and take an unplayable. Instead he purposefully broke a rule out of frustration. Had he said what @iacas wrote it would’ve saved a lot more face. The action he did was a mistake. But how it was handled, like Lexi is what’s lousy.

How many god damn times do I have to admit it was BAD what he did and how he handled it?  Good god I am done with this thread.  He hasn’t lost me as a fan over it, I still enjoy watching him play.  

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, billchao said:

It's a technicality (and kind of dumb*), but he purposefully deflected the ball by making a stroke so it falls under 14-5, which 1-2 explicitly states because there is a rule that covers making a stroke on a moving ball.

Like many others, I think 14-5 is meant to deal with a situation where, say, your ball is moving downward in the rough and you try to hit it before it goes deep down in there, or things like that.

Otherwise a lot of "deflections" one could say are just "strokes" to avoid the DQ.

At the very least you have to concede that he did his action purposefully and with the intent to influence a ball in play. I understand what you're saying, but I'm pretty sure you understand what I'm saying, too.

3 minutes ago, billchao said:

*It's dumb because had he deflected the ball with his putter in the more commonly used sense of the word "deflection", his ball would have kept rolling down the hill anyway, leaving him in a worse position and qualifying him for a DQ. So somehow in this case he made the breach of the rules that was both more advantageous for him and simultaneously not considered a serious breach of 1-2 simply because of a technicality that allows it to be covered by 14-5.

I still don't think it's "covered" by 14-5 just because you can argue that he made a "stroke" at it. He also "purposefully" "influenced a ball in play" and did so with intent.

The penalty should not be greater than the advantage gained. That happened here. He should have been DQed. I think the USGA got it wrong, and I think a big part of why they got it wrong is that it's Phil Mickelson, AND because of what happened to Dustin Johnson, and because of John Daly.

The John Daly situation is in some ways even worse - He wasn't trying to hole the shot or really to play a stroke. He just used what he had in his hands to take out his frustration. It was essentially the same act as if he had just kicked the ball.

I didn't have TST back in 1999 or I'd have argued that John Daly wasn't actually making a stroke and that the more severe penalty should have applied to him, too.

Either way, there's overlap, and thus I think the severity should be considered. What Phil did goes well beyond a two-stroke penalty IMO, if for no other reason than you could make a "stroke" at a ball in motion and deflect it into the hole and save yourself more than two strokes.

Even Mike Davis's explanation was bullshit - he said that 1-2 is, as an example, to stop someone from stopping a ball from going OB… but if one makes a "stroke" at a ball going OB, how would he rule then? The difference in the rulings can't be based on whether the player makes a "stroke" when the act is so egregious.

I feel as though 14-5 was intended for lesser situations, not a situation where a player intentionally deflects his own shot to prevent the ball from going into a bad spot.

Imagine this situation: a player in four-ball blades a shot from a greenside bunker over the green, and his partner reaches above his head and swings his putter and deflects the ball to two feet on the green. Did the partner also "make a stroke" or did he "purposefully take an action to deflect a ball in play"?

Just now, Chris223 said:

Someone mentioned that all his smiles and thumbs up towards fans was all fake and an act. I don’t believe that to be the case. That was why I said that.

Cool. I'm not discussing that, nor is that the topic here.

13 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

Why are you so unwilling to let a heat of the moment thing slide, even just a tiny bit.  I’m not asking you to like him, but I question how you can throw 25 years in the trash over that display yesterday.  I can’t get there.  Thats all

Two things:

• His lies were not "heat of the moment." Not at all.
• I wasn't a huge fan beforehand. He'd won me over, but I wasn't a card-carrying lifelong Phil Phanatic. So a fairly egregious single act (or two acts - hitting the ball in motion and then lying about it) is enough to flip the bit from 1 to 0 for me.

Imagine if when he was 75 and in his autobiography he admitted to having cheated to win his first Masters. You don't think that would be enough - a single, heat-of-the-moment act - to reverse your take on his entire career? If he did that I wouldn't be surprised if they removed him from the World Golf Hall of Fame!

13 minutes ago, Shorty said:

You could write a list of 200 players from the last 20 years who have never ever done anything remotely like what Phil did.

Yup. You're giving him a pass because you like him, @Chris223. I'm not.

8 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

No, its out of character for him, significantly.

I don't think it is. I think the lying after the fact is exactly his character.

You're seemingly also giving him a pass on the insider trading scandal, and the $900k in ill-gotten gains there, I guess.

6 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Because Phil didn’t own up to that which is exactly what it was. He was smug in saying ‘knowing the rules is an advantage.’ Well if he knew the rules he would’ve let the ball roll out and take an unplayable. Instead he purposefully broke a rule out of frustration. Had he said what @iacas wrote it would’ve saved a lot more face. The action he did was a mistake. But how it was handled, like Lexi is what’s lousy.

The Lexi comparison is apt, IMO.

2 minutes ago, Chris223 said:

How many god damn times do I have to admit it was BAD what he did and how he handled it?  Good god I am done with this thread.  He hasn’t lost me as a fan over it, I still enjoy watching him play.  

We know you still like him.

It wasn't enough for you to stop being a fan of his. It was enough to tip the scales, flip the bit, for me. I do not like liars.

---

One last bit… Phil lost a lot of respect in the locker room, from what I'm hearing, too. You can see the reactions of some of his peers on Twitter, too, but I've heard from some instructor and player friends that the locker room is not being kind to Phil right now.

This isn't just some fans being upset, @Chris223. We understand you're willing to overlook it, but you do you.

[billchao]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

Like many others, I think 14-5 is meant to deal with a situation where, say, your ball is moving downward in the rough and you try to hit it before it goes deep down in there, or things like that.

Otherwise a lot of "deflections" one could say are just "strokes" to avoid the DQ.

At the very least you have to concede that he did his action purposefully and with the intent to influence a ball in play. I understand what you're saying, but I'm pretty sure you understand what I'm saying, too.

I still don't think it's "covered" by 14-5 just because you can argue that he made a "stroke" at it. He also "purposefully" "influenced a ball in play" and did so with intent.

The penalty should not be greater than the advantage gained. That happened here. He should have been DQed. I think the USGA got it wrong, and I think a big part of why they got it wrong is that it's Phil Mickelson, AND because of what happened to Dustin Johnson, and because of John Daly.

The John Daly situation is in some ways even worse - He wasn't trying to hole the shot or really to play a stroke. He just used what he had in his hands to take out his frustration. It was essentially the same act as if he had just kicked the ball.

I didn't have TST back in 1999 or I'd have argued that John Daly wasn't actually making a stroke and that the more severe penalty should have applied to him, too.

Either way, there's overlap, and thus I think the severity should be considered. What Phil did goes well beyond a two-stroke penalty IMO, if for no other reason than you could make a "stroke" at a ball in motion and deflect it into the hole and save yourself more than two strokes.

Even Mike Davis's explanation was bullshit - he said that 1-2 is, as an example, to stop someone from stopping a ball from going OB… but if one makes a "stroke" at a ball going OB, how would he rule then? The difference in the rulings can't be based on whether the player makes a "stroke" when the act is so egregious.

I feel as though 14-5 was intended for lesser situations, not a situation where a player intentionally deflects his own shot to prevent the ball from going into a bad spot.

Don't get me wrong - I agree with you. Intent matters. I would have given him a DQ. All I'm saying is the that way the two rules are written, I can see how they came to this conclusion.

Basically once they ruled he made a stroke (which he clearly did), it automatically fell under 14-5 because of the first exception to 1-2. There's no ambiguity there in how it's written at all.

[Chris223]

Thats just crap, I don’t even know how to respond to that, especially coming from you.  Where did I EVER bring anything away from the golf course into my discussion about Phil and me being a fan.  Remember when I said athletes aren’t saints?  I’m a Phil fan who enjoys watching him play golf and still do after yesterday... doesn’t make him a role model, pro athletes make horrific role models.  I don’t know enough about all that off the course stuff he’s been involved in to comment so to say “oh i guess you’re giving him a pass on that too” is total crap.