Another Penalty for Lexi Thompson

[iacas]

34 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

he’s obviously joking

No. It’s not at all obvious.

[ColinL]

20 hours ago, PraiseKek said:

Sure, I agree it's perfectly valid. It's a local rule, and subject to the whim of the USGA's approval. It doesn't have to be up for discussion really for that reason, but it's somehow this attitude of a policy without any logic has crept into the current golf culture. I doubt you will ever get a sensible defense from the USGA as to why this makes sense.

It makes very obvious sense.  A reason for preferred lies is that the abnormal condition of a fairway is such that players can find themselves in lies which are unreasonable to expect them to play from, given that they have kept to the fairway.  It might be thought that to give a player who has hit his ball so far off line that it has landed on an adjacent fairway a preferred lie  would be giving them more  help than they deserve.

 

Edited August 20, 2018 by ColinL

[Vinsk]

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

No. It’s not at all obvious.

I think you know what that meant...

[rehmwa]

40 minutes ago, ColinL said:

 It might be thought that to give a player who has hit his ball so far off line that it has landed on an adjacent fairway a preferred lie  would be giving them more  help than they deserve.

gotta agree - the fact that they ended up in a good spot is the win for a fortuitous mis hit

LCP is a work around anyway vs the hole 'hit it as you find it' philosophy.  I'd think the spirit of the game would be to not use it at all, but if that's not a possibility, to restrict the use to the bare minimum....

 

I know a couple courses where playing the adjacent fairway is sometimes a good choice.  When I do that and pull off the shot, I know I'm just happy that I got the leave.  I'm too oblivious (or rules ignorant) to even think that I could even take more from it.

Edited August 20, 2018 by rehmwa

[Jeremie Boop]

10 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I know a couple courses where playing the adjacent fairway is sometimes a good choice.  When I do that and pull off the shot, I know I'm just happy that I got the leave.  I'm too oblivious (or rules ignorant) to even think that I could even take more from it.

One course I play hole 10 is a par 5 but only because they cut off the fairway with a pond which forces about 200 to get to the green. If you are a longer hitter, you have to lay up with a 4 iron or hybrid unless you can carry about 315-330 in the air. So people were starting to play back up 9 because they could hit a driver and be in short iron/wedge distance. Smart play right? Except then you are hitting into people coming up a hole you just played and it became such a problem that the course owners had to specifically state that it was OB to do that. Similar issue with hole 9 at another course, but it's a par 4 with a large tree at the end of the fairway that blocks the tee shot if you hit too far down the fairway unless you hit it perfectly up the right and side into a 10 yard area. People would play over to 18th fairway to avoid that tree, similar rule was instated because the "smart play" was the more dangerous play for other people on the course. So, basically what I'm saying is, she already got a great break by the course not utilizing internal OB stakes with fairways that close to each other.

That said, I'm constantly lucky in the same way

 

[Vinsk]

I couldn’t find any statement from Lexi as I was curious (perhaps unfairly) to what she had to say. Another article basically deemed her a hero for taking it so well after all she’s been through. I don’t really see how breaching a rule and accepting it is a prestigious act of integrity. 

[Jeremie Boop]

7 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I couldn’t find any statement from Lexi as I was curious (perhaps unfairly) to what she had to say. Another article basically deemed her a hero for taking it so well after all she’s been through. I don’t really see how breaching a rule and accepting it is a prestigious act of integrity. 

In an era of less and less personal accountability and more need of praise for just doing what you are supposed to do, can't say I find this at all surprising.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Jeremie Boop

[rehmwa]

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

I couldn’t find any statement from Lexi as I was curious (perhaps unfairly) to what she had to say. Another article basically deemed her a hero for taking it so well after all she’s been through. I don’t really see how breaching a rule and accepting it is a prestigious act of integrity. 

In other words, the writer for the 'hero' article is a moron.  And no statement from Lexi is perfectly acceptable - non-story, She took her penalty and got on with it.

As for the 'media' - they've completely destroyed the definition of the word 'hero'.  It means nothing now.

[Martyn W]

23 hours ago, Jeremie Boop said:

In an era of less and less personal accountability and more need of praise for just doing what you are supposed to do, can't say I find this at all surprising.

As Bobby Jones said after being praised for calling a penalty on himself: "You might as well praise a man for not robbing a bank."

[iacas]

Lexi was NOT penalized* for this:

* Why not? Because the R&A determined that the grass rebounded back to the original position.

See Rule 8.1: https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=8&subrulenum=1 .

[Missouri Swede]

So she wasn’t penalized because cheating didn’t help her in this case?

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

So she wasn’t penalized because cheating didn’t help her in this case?

She wasn't penalized because the R&A determined she didn't actually bend, move, etc. the grass. It didn't improve or affect her CATS.

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

She wasn't penalized because the R&A determined she didn't actually bend, move, etc. the grass. It didn't improve or affect her CATS.

So her intent appeared to clearly be testing her lie and improving it by moving the grass reeds... but failed so no penalty?

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

So her intent appeared to clearly be testing her lie and improving it by moving the grass reeds... but failed so no penalty?

Intent isn’t all that relevant here.

[Rulesman]

13 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

So she wasn’t penalized because cheating didn’t help her in this case?

Following the Rules is not considered to be cheating.

[Release]

On 8/18/2018 at 7:58 PM, Vinsk said:

https://www.golfchannel.com/article/golf-central-blog/lexi-charges-64-despite-another-penalty/

Seems Lexi might benefit herself to learn the rules better.....

Agree, it ultimately rest on the player's shoulders for reach of a rule.  Even if the onsite rule official gave the incorrect interpretation of the rules, the player will still be responsible for the action taken.

I'm with you on that she's been in the similar situation more than her share, it seemed.  For her best of interests, learn the rules or get a caddy who will have a clue or advise to have the official take a second look.    Whether the penalty matters or not, she needs to get on track so it won't happen as often.  What if the one shot penalty matters in the outcome of a major ?    She's not a young lady anymore.  Should make the most of the remaining years.

[bkuehn1952]

Ultimately the Rules officials decided her actions did not change the lie.  Fine.  It stills looks terrible.  She is clearly making a half-hearted attempt to improve her lie but fails.  

[iacas]

Golf's basic rule: Play the ball as it lies

---

I accepted every lie I was given on Woburn’s devilish Duchess course yesterday, and I had some shockers. I obviously didn’t witness every lie my three playing companions had, or every lie the overall winner of...

That's a pretty poorly written article.

If the lie is restored, it doesn't matter if the player did anything to restore it. If the grass she bent goes back on its own, what's she supposed to do? Touch it? Why? The lie was restored.