Phil Breaks the Rules Again

[iacas]

Phil Mickelson has found himself in breach of the Rules of Golf once again.

At least he didn't lie about it and insult his fans afterward.

Just a brain fart this time around.

Unfortunately that clip also includes the announcers bumbling through stuff. Of course you can violate a rule without a ball in play. Of course you can violate a rule on the tee box.

C'mon guys. These rules aren't that difficult, and… if you don't know, don't give your opinion.

[Papa Steve 55]

Yeah, he called this one on himself.

[GolfLug]

Lot of brain farts for a sharp experienced fella lately. 

[billchao]

Obviously he was just trying to have a little fun out there. It's something he's been thinking about doing for a long time 😜

[Patch]

My wife thinks very highly of him because of a conversation they had many years ago. He took the time to speak with her at tourney we attended. 

[Shindig]

43 minutes ago, iacas said:

Unfortunately that clip also includes the announcers bumbling through stuff. Of course you can violate a rule without a ball in play. Of course you can violate a rule on the tee box.

C'mon guys. These rules aren't that difficult, and… if you don't know, don't give your opinion.

I can't think of a sport that includes a ball that doesn't have dead ball penalties.

For that matter, you don't need to be playing to have a penalty.  In medal play, you can't practice on the course day-of before your tee time.  That's one of the first specific-to-competition rules I learned when I joined a league.  These announcers have played, right?

[Hardspoon]

56 minutes ago, iacas said:

Unfortunately that clip also includes the announcers bumbling through stuff. Of course you can violate a rule without a ball in play. Of course you can violate a rule on the tee box.

C'mon guys. These rules aren't that difficult, and… if you don't know, don't give your opinion.

Awful.  For better or worse, the kind of person who becomes a TV announcer (for any sport, really) is the kind of person who fills "dead air" with their words...whether or not they have anything intelligent to say.

At least the Rules Official new instantly it was a penalty.

[David in FL]

He questioned it before he made his shot.  At that point, he still had time to move his tee so that he wouldn’t be in violation.  Why the hell did he still play the shot from where he was?!

[Hardspoon]

From Deadspin's comments section:

I chuckled.

[Missouri Swede]

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

He questioned it before he made his shot.  At that point, he still had time to move his tee so that he wouldn’t be in violation.  Why the hell did he still play the shot from where he was?!

Once he violated 13-2 (improving his line of play), re-teeing the ball in a different position wouldn't un-do it:

Quote

13-2/14

 Breaking Branch Interfering with Backswing on Teeing Ground

Q.On the teeing ground, a player broke off a branch of a tree which was interfering with his swing. The player maintained that such action was not a breach of Rule 13-2 because his ball was not yet in play. Was the player correct?

A.No. The player was in breach of Rule 13-2 for improving the area of his intended swing. Although Rule 13-2allows a player to eliminate irregularities of surface on the teeing ground, it does not allow him to break a branch interfering with his swing. The penalty would apply even if the player, before playing his next stroke, re-teed elsewhere on the teeing ground - see Decision 13-2/24.

(Yes, I know it's a different action, but it's still a violation of 13-2 on the teeing ground.  I think it still applies for this question.)

[David in FL]

9 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

Once he violated 13-2 (improving his line of play), re-teeing the ball in a different position wouldn't un-do it:

(Yes, I know it's a different action, but it's still a violation of 13-2 on the teeing ground.  I think it still applies for this question.)

I think you’re right.  Thanks!

[saevel25]

I am glad Phil went up to a rules official to get an official ruling. 

What is most absurd is the announcers trying to validate Phil's actions by making up excuses. 🤦‍♂️

Edited July 9, 2018 by saevel25

[Vinsk]

39 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I am glad Phil went up to a rules official to get an official ruling. 

What is most absurd is the announcers trying to validate Phil's actions by making up excuses. 🤦‍♂️

Well they’re the same type that felt Lexi was a victim.

[Rulesman]

10 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

Once he violated 13-2 (improving his line of play), re-teeing the ball in a different position wouldn't un-do it:

(Yes, I know it's a different action, but it's still a violation of 13-2 on the teeing ground.  I think it still applies for this question.)

I would agree, but didn't the referee, when he came back (at about 2.50), agree with Phil that it wouldn't be a breach? Or did I misunderstand what they were saying?

Edited July 9, 2018 by Rulesman

[Hardluckster]

5 hours ago, Rulesman said:

I would agree, but didn't the referee, when he came back (at about 2.50), agree with Phil that it wouldn't be a breach? Or did I misunderstand what they were saying?

In my view, the official either:

(1) made a mistake telling Phil that he could have avoided a penalty by teeing in a different spot, or

(2) misunderstood and thought that Phil was asking if he had moved the tee before stomping down the grass (this seems very unlikely to me, as it would really make very little sense - of course if he moved and didn't stomp the grass there is no penalty).

[saevel25]

40 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

In my view, the official either:

(1) made a mistake telling Phil that he could have avoided a penalty by teeing in a different spot, or

(2) misunderstood and thought that Phil was asking if he had moved the tee before stomping down the grass (this seems very unlikely to me, as it would really make very little sense - of course if he moved and didn't stomp the grass there is no penalty).

I think the RO had a good idea that Phil broke a rule. Phil asked if it would have been no issue if he just moved the ball more to the side. Phil was just extrapolating his line of thinking at the time. Then the RO came back and informed Phil he indeed broke the rule.

[Hardluckster]

5 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I think the RO had a good idea that Phil broke a rule. Phil asked if it would have been no issue if he just moved the ball more to the side. Phil was just extrapolating his line of thinking at the time. Then the RO came back and informed Phil he indeed broke the rule.

I may be mistaken, but it appeared to me that when the official returned to inform Phil of the penalty, he was asked if moving to a new spot on the tee box would have negated the penalty. He seemed ito suggest that had Phil moved his tee he wouldn't have incurred the penalty. That is incorrect, of course. 

[Hardluckster]

https://twitter.com/pgatour/status/1016002491090161664?s=12