Liar, cheater, advocate, different opinion?

[bkuehn1952]

I saw that a player on the Tour accused his competitor of cheating via Twitter or some other social media.  The crux of the matter appears to have been whether the player's ball cleared the hazard and rolled back in or if it failed to clear the water hazard.  The subsequent drop was an issue.

Obviously, player B thought it cleared and rolled back, allowing a drop on the near  side.  Player A felt the drop should be on the far side.  The PGA Tour Rules official ultimately went with Player B's view.  Not happy, Player A decided to go public with his ire.

I think if a Rules official hears both sides and goes with one side, the "loser" needs to accept it and move on unless they KNOW the other player is aware of the situation and lied.  At some point you have to accept that your view may be faulty rather than smear the other guy with the label of cheater.

Any other thoughts?

 

[dennyjones]

I concur.   Once the official makes the call it's time to move on.  

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

I concur. Once the official makes the call it's time to move on.  

The RO wasn't there.

What if Kang did cheat, and the RO - who wasn't there - just believes him, but Dahmen knows he's right?

BTW @bkuehn1952, we have a topic on this already:

 

P.S. Your second choice may be exactly what happened. We can't know.

[rehmwa]

there's a another take of course.

you are SURE the other guy is lying - based on your overinflated self opinion of you being able to follow a ball in flight from a position laterally 30 yards off of the flight line.....vs the player and caddie that were actually standing right from the launch point.

[Piz]

In the OP's egg sample; Player B could honestly believe the ball hit and rolled back while Player A honestly believed otherwise.  Unless Player B is lying...he isn't cheating.  He may be wrong in his perception; but how (short of a Vulcan mind meld) could one conclude that he knew better?

[Martyn W]

Interesting decision about this situation where players disagree. If I remember correctly the two players were Greg Norman and Seve. http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!decision-06,d6-6a-4

 

[colin007]

10 hours ago, rehmwa said:

there's a another take of course.

you are SURE the other guy is lying - based on your overinflated self opinion of you being able to follow a ball in flight from a position laterally 30 yards off of the flight line.....vs the player and caddie that were actually standing right from the launch point.

Well, depending on the line/curvature the ball takes, for instance, if you hook it way left, and I'm watching from right of the tee, I might have a better angle to see it than you do

[Golfingdad]

3 hours ago, Piz said:

In the OP's egg sample; Player B could honestly believe the ball hit and rolled back while Player A honestly believed otherwise.  Unless Player B is lying...he isn't cheating.  He may be wrong in his perception; but how (short of a Vulcan mind meld) could one conclude that he knew better?

This is precisely what I wrote in the other thread as well.

To answer OPs question, I’d let the player know I disagreed and that we should call over an RO.  Then after he tells the RO what he believes, I tell him what I thought I saw, let him make his ruling ... and then I leave it at that and go about my day.

After the fact, I would probably share the story with a few close tour friends to see if they have any info on the guy and when I’m paired with the same player in the future, I probably watch things a tiny bit more closely.  But nothing public.

[rehmwa]

1 hour ago, colin007 said:

Well, depending on the line/curvature the ball takes, for instance, if you hook it way left, and I'm watching from right of the tee, I might have a better angle to see it than you do

I'm operating from the assumptions that both players are honest and relaying what they saw to the best of their ability and now it's just a pissing match.  I think your note applies if you consider Kang hard hooked and is just lying.  Then the other guy would be certain.

In my assumption, I understand what you mean, but I disagree.  You have to be on the starting line to see 3 things - where it started and line, where it ended, how much curve it had.  the rest is inference if you have those 3 things you'll have a better idea than someone with 1.5 of those things.  Seriously, looking at something from the side add major uncertainty.

The best perspective would be someone standing at the edge of the hazard where it bends out near the green  - he would be looking straight up at the flight....

I've seen a ton of examples where a player takes advantage of this kind of situation by claiming a jut of land sticks out enough to claim the ball crossed back out before back into the hazzard.

Maybe the other player can see flight if the guy striking it is blind to some of the flight.  I don't know the specifics.

Edited July 3, 2018 by rehmwa

[Fourputt]

14 hours ago, bkuehn1952 said:

I saw that a player on the Tour accused his competitor of cheating via Twitter or some other social media.  The crux of the matter appears to have been whether the player's ball cleared the hazard and rolled back in or if it failed to clear the water hazard.  The subsequent drop was an issue.

Obviously, player B thought it cleared and rolled back, allowing a drop on the near  side.  Player A felt the drop should be on the far side.  The PGA Tour Rules official ultimately went with Player B's view.  Not happy, Player A decided to go public with his ire.

I think if a Rules official hears both sides and goes with one side, the "loser" needs to accept it and move on unless they KNOW the other player is aware of the situation and lied.  At some point you have to accept that your view may be faulty rather than smear the other guy with the label of cheater.

Any other thoughts?

 

Another "It depends" case for me.  95% of the time, I'd not dispute the ruling, in part because I was involved in exactly such a dispute in a club tournament.  The guy who disputed my act was 40-50 yards off the line of flight of my ball and really had no justification aside from his own opinion, and I did have a witness who backed my view and who had a much better angle than my accuser did.

However, I can imagine a scenario where the accuser does have a better look at the path of the ball and could better see exactly what the ball did - such as a shot where the ball is hooking or slicing a considerable amount so that the observer well off the line actually does have a better angle to see it.  In such a case I might take it all the way to the point of refusing to sign for that hole, or at least if I did sign, I would do so under protest and I'd make sure that it's known in the general membership what the circumstances were.  I might make an enemy, but there are times when one does have to stand on principle.  

When I'm a situation where my dropping point is not obvious, I will usually try to get some verification from my fellow competitors - ask whether they saw what happened and if I'm pretty close to the right spot for my drop.  If I am asked the question by another - and this happens often on a couple of holes on my home course - I will give the best answer I can.  If neither of us has absolute certainty, we may simply decide to agree on a consensus decision as to the dropping point and play on from there with no dispute and no subsequent acrimony.

Edited July 3, 2018 by Fourputt

[GolfLug]

42 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

This is precisely what I wrote in the other thread as well.

To answer OPs question, I’d let the player know I disagreed and that we should call over an RO.  Then after he tells the RO what he believes, I tell him what I thought I saw, let him make his ruling ... and then I leave it at that and go about my day.

After the fact, I would probably share the story with a few close tour friends to see if they have any info on the guy and when I’m paired with the same player in the future, I probably watch things a tiny bit more closely.  But nothing public.

Yes, I agree with this and the sentiment. I am more on the cynical side of how honest people are but at the end of the day it is an honor system so you gotta honor the honor system. I would certainly do my part and spread the word though, not necessarily while standing on a roof top, but definitely in the circle. I actually have in a couple of instances, and yes word travels and yes, it makes a difference once someone gets put on notice. 

[Golfingdad]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

In my assumption, I understand what you mean, but I disagree.  You have to be on the starting line to see 3 things - where it started and line, where it ended, how much curve it had.  the rest is inference if you have those 3 things you'll have a better idea than someone with 1.5 of those things.  Seriously, looking at something from the side add major uncertainty.

Not always.  In a case such as below, being off the line (blue guy) is a better angle and I think what @bkuehn1952 had in mind.

[Club Rat]

33 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Nice drawing, 😁

Where's the Steaks???

You could of used Ham Bones, Pork Chops or T-Bones. LOL

[Papa Steve 55]

Cheating requires intent. both may 100% believe in what they think they saw. Its not cheating to defend your POV, even if your wrong.

[Fourputt]

16 minutes ago, Papa Steve 55 said:

Cheating requires intent. both may 100% believe in what they think they saw. Its not cheating to defend your POV, even if your wrong.

This is why I posted that most of our disputes end up with us proceeding on a consensus agreement, a resolution that all parties can live with.  And it usually leans in the favor of the player unless there is powerful evidence to refute him.

[iacas]

9 hours ago, rehmwa said:

In my assumption, I understand what you mean, but I disagree.  You have to be on the starting line to see 3 things - where it started and line, where it ended, how much curve it had.  the rest is inference if you have those 3 things you'll have a better idea than someone with 1.5 of those things.  Seriously, looking at something from the side add major uncertainty.

What Drew said.

4 hours ago, Fourputt said:

This is why I posted that most of our disputes end up with us proceeding on a consensus agreement, a resolution that all parties can live with.  And it usually leans in the favor of the player unless there is powerful evidence to refute him.

The consensus with this one seems to be that Kang took a bad drop.

I've yet to hear anyone "come out of the woodwork" to say his drop was fine.

[Rulesman]

7 hours ago, iacas said:

What Drew said.

The consensus with this one seems to be that Kang took a bad drop.

I've yet to hear anyone "come out of the woodwork" to say his drop was fine.

How many actual witnesses have come forward to say his drop was not fine

[boogielicious]

18 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Not always.  In a case such as below, being off the line (blue guy) is a better angle and I think what @bkuehn1952 had in mind.

4 years of Engineering School. 😜