Mickleson 2_shot or DQ?

[Deleted member 15344]

I’m not a rules official so don’t know, I was merely responding to Blakey asking whether being out of contention changes the penalty which I agree it should not.

On the actual penalty of whether DQ was an option, then this links seems to run through locigally. I know journalists aren’t always correct but I’m struggling to see a floor in the workings that DQ wasn’t an option. Can you explain which bit of the rules in the article is incorrect? (Apologies GM for referencing a rival but they’re overseas)

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/us...-got-it-wrong-when-it-didnt-dq-phil-mickelson

The article is exactly what I was saying - the rule that they should and could apply was the 1-2 and it was serious enough to apply it

I believe that if it wasn’t Mickleson and someone who is less of a name they would have DQ’d but then I doubt someone else would have done it

I don’t mind Mickleson , but there has always been a nagging doubt about it and these sort of instances show it for me , same with the crucifixion of Tom Watson

 

[dewsweeper]

"Crucifixion of Tom Watson " ??????

 

[Deleted member 15344]

"Crucifixion of Tom Watson " ??????

Do you not remember what happened after the 2014 Ryder Cup and Mickelson went after Watson

 

[dewsweeper]

Do you not remember what happened after the 2014 Ryder Cup and Mickelson went after Watson

Yes Phil I do but your hyperbole is over the top imo.

 

[Hobbit]

You need to read Rule 1-2 again then!

But to clarify...

The Exception in Rule 1-2 (about another Rule applying) specifically excludes 1-2 applying!

'Serious Breach' is defined in Note 1 - and would not, of itself, apply to Mickelson's action even if 1-2 was applicable!

I’m quite happy with my understanding of the rule, and what was said by the senior rules official interviewed by the media whilst Mickleson was still playing his round, after Mickleson had been spoken to during his round.

The subjective nature of the committe making a decision on a “serious breach” is where I disagree with their interpretation, and where I think they bottled it.

And just for you, have a few !!! Back at you Richard!!!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Am I the only person who thinks he deliberately missed - and way to heavily as well - knowing that it would then be very obvious that the ball was going to disappear to a place horrible and so giving him the opportunity to make a point about the greens and pin positions by doing what he did. He would have known that he could take S&D were he to miss but that was not what was in his head. He wanted to miss.

 

[Orikoru]

Am I the only person who thinks he deliberately missed - and way to heavily as well - knowing that it would then be very obvious that the ball was going to disappear to a place horrible and so giving him the opportunity to make a point about the greens and pin positions by doing what he did. He would have known that he could take S&D were he to miss but that was not what was in his head. He wanted to miss.

I highly doubt it. More likely he was already annoyed and that added adrenaline caused him to hit too hard anyway.

 

[GG26]

Just seen it. What a shocking example to give to youngsters taking up the game. Whether in the rules or not, that is not within the etiquette of the game that we all learn when we start playing.

 

[Piece]

DQ for me.

 

[IanM]

1)Do I think he cheated? Looked more like a momentary "Heads Gone" to me!

2) Do I think US Golf Officials treat "(American) big names" differently? Oh yes!

 

[clubchamp98]

Am I the only person who thinks he deliberately missed - and way to heavily as well - knowing that it would then be very obvious that the ball was going to disappear to a place horrible and so giving him the opportunity to make a point about the greens and pin positions by doing what he did. He would have known that he could take S&D were he to miss but that was not what was in his head. He wanted to miss.

Yes possibly , wouldn’t put it past him he can be very outspoken.

Like a snooker player if he delibaretly misses the ref puts the ball back and a penalty.
Wont work in golf as you alone play with your own ball.

I am a bit surprised he hasn’t done another press statement to clarify his position now he has calmed down and had time to think about it.

He might have but I havnt seen one!..

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Just seen it. What a shocking example to give to youngsters taking up the game. Whether in the rules or not, that is not within the etiquette of the game that we all learn when we start playing.

Totally. I think the rule will now be changed but how often does it happen. I know they USGA treat their players differently but for the bigger profile of the game it should have been DQ and an example made. Was never going to happen and a hefty fine (if one imposed) hardly going to make a difference

 

[duncan mackie]

Totally. I think the rule will now be changed but how often does it happen. I know they USGA treat their players differently but for the bigger profile of the game it should have been DQ and an example made. Was never going to happen and a hefty fine (if one imposed) hardly going to make a difference

The rules have already changed from 1.1..2019

 

[Steve Bamford]

Am I the only person who thinks he deliberately missed - and way to heavily as well - knowing that it would then be very obvious that the ball was going to disappear to a place horrible and so giving him the opportunity to make a point about the greens and pin positions by doing what he did. He would have known that he could take S&D were he to miss but that was not what was in his head. He wanted to miss.

100% correct - he was taking a shot at Mike Davis and the USGA without uttering a word.

 

[brendy]

He has since come out and apologies to a few reporters, some have said that it is too little too late and that it'll have a lasting effect. I have to say that if anyone thinks golf has suffered any harm from this needs to look at the reasons for it happening in the first place. Augusta has tricky greens but don't think I remember anyone getting so mightily frustrated that they did something out of the norm like this.
Other areas of the game are also having their issues, you only have to look at Branden Grace taking a ludicrous drop in a bunker (Wentworth about a year ago) when building a stance so much so that he found his way to the lining under the sand. No shame there neither, his reply to criticism was that he knew the rule as he had it applied in china previously too! Plenty of dubious drops have been given in the past, not shouting Fore, balls found in rough etc etc.

One moment of sheer frustration by one player (human like the rest of us) in a ludicrously prepared US Open will have no lasting damage given what else has happened on courses while televised.

 

[Capella]

The rules have already changed from 1.1..2019

Really? I wasn't aware that they changed anything about hitting a moving ball. What does the new rule say?

 

[sjn]

Which doesn't apply here! He made a stroke at it! It wasn't 'purposely deflected or stopped by player....'! Had he stepped on it, or kicked it back, then that exception would have applied. Otherwise there would be no instance where the body of 14-5 would apply, without the exception you refer to also applying (whether deliberate or not!)!

What nonsense Of course is was purposely deflected.

 

[duncan mackie]

With all this talk of the rules need to be changed etc, it's worth looking forward to 1st Jan when the rule for making a stroke at a moving ball has been removed and the situation would be dealt with under the "person stops or deflects the ball" rule. Under the new rules the player will get a two stroke penalty, but for a deliberate breach, the spot where the ball would have ended up will have to be estimated and a ball dropped at that spot. Hence, a two stroke penalty for no advantage.

Really? I wasn't aware that they changed anything about hitting a moving ball. What does the new rule say?

I apologise profusely for taking at face value pogle's post #71 quoted above. I should have known better!

This is incorrect (in the current draft) and 10.1 d remains worded in the same way as the rules currently (if anything it's worded more clearly in that if you make a stroke at a moving ball the stroke counts, the ball is played as it lies and you add a 2 stroke penalty...).

If anything the specific (but in this case exempted) wording of 1.2 isn't in the new rules in the same way either.

So, it will be interesting to see if they implement a change, or not (suggesting that they remain comfortable that the penalties meet the underlying principle of the penalty exceeding potential benefit).

My apologies once again - will be all my own work in the future!

 

[duncan mackie]

With all this talk of the rules need to be changed etc, it's worth looking forward to 1st Jan when the rule for making a stroke at a moving ball has been removed and the situation would be dealt with under the "person stops or deflects the ball" rule. Under the new rules the player will get a two stroke penalty, but for a deliberate breach, the spot where the ball would have ended up will have to be estimated and a ball dropped at that spot. Hence, a two stroke penalty for no advantage.

I'm afraid this is incorrect on most levels.

For a putt, from the putting green (as here) , that is deliberately stopped or deflected the stroke is cancelled and replayed with a 2 stroke penalty added (which is exactly the same as if you had declared the result unplayable and replayed the last shot!).

Also 10.1 d covers playing a moving ball in exactly the same terms as the current rule - if anything it sets out the additional 2 stroke penalty, stroke at moving ball counts etc even more clearly!

Now, whether there's a change or Michleson clause introduced we will have to wait and see.

 

[Slab]

He has since come out and apologies to a few reporters, some have said that it is too little too late and that it'll have a lasting effect. I have to say that if anyone thinks golf has suffered any harm from this needs to look at the reasons for it happening in the first place. Augusta has tricky greens but don't think I remember anyone getting so mightily frustrated that they did something out of the norm like this.
Other areas of the game are also having their issues, you only have to look at Branden Grace taking a ludicrous drop in a bunker (Wentworth about a year ago) when building a stance so much so that he found his way to the lining under the sand. No shame there neither, his reply to criticism was that he knew the rule as he had it applied in china previously too! Plenty of dubious drops have been given in the past, not shouting Fore, balls found in rough etc etc.

One moment of sheer frustration by one player (human like the rest of us) in a ludicrously prepared US Open will have no lasting damage given what else has happened on courses while televised.

When reading this I cant help but think about all the sympathy (or lack of) shown to Simon Dyson for his one moment of madness in tapping down a spike mark also for a two shot penalty (that he didn't add)

Didn't stop the European Tour charging Dyson with a 'serious breach of the Tour's code of behaviour' though and applied a couple months ban (which is weird cos he breached a rule that carries a 2 shot pen, same as Phil)

Maybe the USGA/PGA don't have such a code for their events


edit to add:
From Dyson reports:
The panel, found that Dyson 'deliberately pressed down the spike mark to improve his position, despite knowing it was against the rules'

My take on PM incident:
The Slab, found that Mickelson deliberately made a stroke at a moving ball to improve his position, despite knowing it was against the rules

Whats the diff?