Yes, that's what I said.
Patrick Reed
- Thread starter Parsaregood
- Start date
Yes, that's what I said.
robinthehood
Hacker
Surely there must have been some sort of shot? Or does that rule not apply to this situation?
larmen
Head Pro
The ball hitting it in flight, or the club hitting it during a swing?
I have taken a couple of blobs in rounds because a hybrid costs me £200+ and my set of irons didn’t come free either.
There was a video of Fowler (?) recently where he played a chip shot from a path. In slow motion his sponsor got goot coverage, but I was thinking that a new wedge cost me a hundred pounds if I try that one.
I was thinking of the ball hitting it, as in Reed's case the obstacle was about 5 yards in front of him.
The idea of calling the players bluff and asking them to try the shot is slightly tongue-in-cheek though as it won't happen, but it does amuse me how they get a free drop from some very dodgy places - I know it's all within the rules and they are entitled to do it!
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
They all do it and at the first sign of trouble and hitting it into the rough there are some looking for a dodgy advertising hoarding, TV cable or in this case an aerial
Slime
Tour Winner
You just couldn't write it!
Jacko_G
Blackballed
THE HATERS ARE GONNA HATE!
??????????️
??????????️
HankMarvin
Tour Rookie
Great win by Patrick.
chrisd
Major Champion
Aren't they just ??
inc0gnito
Assistant Pro
How did the crowd react?
robinthehood
Hacker
Someone shouted mashed potatoes.
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
I don't like him but you have to respect his ability, especially with all of the furore around the Kostis comments surrounding him. Personally I'd have preferred someone else to have won but the best player triumphed
robinthehood
Hacker
Would be nice to see Rory convert a few more top 5s in to wins.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Pretty sure I saw him kick a few balls out of the rough onto the fairway. To be fair, choosing between him and Bryson to win is a bit like choosing between Liverpool and Man City to win the league (as a Utd fan)
Marshy77
Journeyman Pro
Great win, he played some great golf yesterday. As myself and few others have been saying in this thread, his mentality is as good as any player out there and that will continue to win him tournements along with his talent. Like Doherty and Rich Beem were saying yesterday - Reed is a fantastic player, looks so easy for him and he's a big time player.
Jacko_G
Blackballed
Radar wanted to push buttons.
Radar has turned into a bit of a tit these days, used to be a breath of fresh air, now he's full of his own felf importance. Great win for Reed and Radar wants to rehash cr,ap that has followed Reed all week. Give the guy a break and congratulate his play and concentrate on his play.
IanM
Journeyman Pro
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 13,451
- Location
- Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
He can certainly play...... he lets himself down on occasions, and boy, mud rerally sticks
Swango1980
Well-known member
To be fair to Radar, he only gently pushed those buttons in his questions, and he'd be criticised by fans if he didn't try to push a little. After all, they are topical. But, I think he was generally respectful, and actually gave Reed the chance to provide answers that, in a way address how he has dealt with the criticism. I think McGinley in commentary was a little more persistent in keeping the issue of cheating highlighted all week. Every time footage shows a Reed shot, McGinley seemed to make some comment about the accusations following Reed.
I've been in the "Reed is a cheat" side of the debate generally throughout. And, in my head, I have still got loads of question marks around him. However, being devils advocate:
We have heard accusations of Reed improving his lie in rough, most notably by Kostis. However, it does appear that many players do this, potentially without worrying about being penalised by Rules. Why? Because, they can set club behind ball so long as they don't press down. They can waggle (which will touch grass behind ball). They can change their mind and do this all over again. Inevitably, this could cause a disturbance in grass behind ball, and who is going to penalise them? So, when Reed was highlighted as doing this, it may well be no different to many other players, and only Reed is being targeted because, it is Reed.
Fast forward to the sand incident. It wasn't a bunker, so in his mind he may have been in the similar mindset as to what he is when he is in the rough. He didn't actually set the club behind ball, but he did waggle when deciding what shot to play. This waggle caused sand to move, twice. Now, he is accused for improving his lie, and he took the penalty. But, trying to get into his head, perhaps when his club touched the sand during the waggle, he instinctively didn't see it being any different to hitting grass behind the ball when in the rough? He may also well have thought that it touched the sand far enough behind the ball, not to improve his lie (in terms of not touching sand immediately up against the ball). Again, a bit like in the rough, where the waggle will touch grass behind ball, but not necessarily the grass immediately surrounding the ball. Obviously, a big difference between being in sand and grass is, grass has a chance to pop back into position, sand doesn't.
So, if this was the case, and it seems to tie in with his defence, then he may honestly have thought that he was doing nothing devious at all at the time he did it. But, when pointed out to him, he took the penalty and accepted he had a bit of a brain freeze, but didn't really use words very well
Grant85
Head Pro
Didn't see the end last night and obviously a pretty impressive finish from Reed when the tournament was on the line.
One thing I haven't seen much mentioned about was an incident on Saturday at the 1st hole.
Reed had hit his shot left, not miles from the green, but in trouble. Riley said on commentary that it was in a bush and he had no shot.
Then he managed to get a ruling on line of sight due to a mast next to the bush. He dropped it to the side of the bush with a reasonably clear shot onto the green. Made 4.
The ruling must have been that Reed claimed he would otherwise have played the shot from the bush and so got free relief. If he claimed he couldn't play the shot, then he would 1st have taken relief under penalty (2 club lengths, back between you and the hole or back to the tee etc.). Then potentially a further (free drop) for line of sight.
Riley seemed to suggest that this was very fortuitous but had initially claimed he had no shot. Beemer and Murray were very careful with what they said as they will both have known Reed would have had to tell the rules official he would have played a shot out of the bush if the mast hadn't been there.
I saw Westwood at Portrush last year, being in a gorse down the right hand side of a hole. He was effectively in an animal burrow and the rules official asked him the question that if the ball wasn't in the rabbit scrapings, would he have played it. In reality he probably could have gotten a club on it, but Westy straight away said... no I wouldn't play it from down there. So takes a penalty drop back a few paces.
Just a guess as the camera's didn't show exactly where Reed's ball was... but my opinion (from Riley and the commentator's reaction) is he wouldn't have risked playing that shot and effectively lied to get a free drop.
One thing I haven't seen much mentioned about was an incident on Saturday at the 1st hole.
Reed had hit his shot left, not miles from the green, but in trouble. Riley said on commentary that it was in a bush and he had no shot.
Then he managed to get a ruling on line of sight due to a mast next to the bush. He dropped it to the side of the bush with a reasonably clear shot onto the green. Made 4.
The ruling must have been that Reed claimed he would otherwise have played the shot from the bush and so got free relief. If he claimed he couldn't play the shot, then he would 1st have taken relief under penalty (2 club lengths, back between you and the hole or back to the tee etc.). Then potentially a further (free drop) for line of sight.
Riley seemed to suggest that this was very fortuitous but had initially claimed he had no shot. Beemer and Murray were very careful with what they said as they will both have known Reed would have had to tell the rules official he would have played a shot out of the bush if the mast hadn't been there.
I saw Westwood at Portrush last year, being in a gorse down the right hand side of a hole. He was effectively in an animal burrow and the rules official asked him the question that if the ball wasn't in the rabbit scrapings, would he have played it. In reality he probably could have gotten a club on it, but Westy straight away said... no I wouldn't play it from down there. So takes a penalty drop back a few paces.
Just a guess as the camera's didn't show exactly where Reed's ball was... but my opinion (from Riley and the commentator's reaction) is he wouldn't have risked playing that shot and effectively lied to get a free drop.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Can't comment specifically on that, but presumably the referee got involved so it was on his shoulders. If it was very possible he was lying, I'm pretty sure the referee can still make a subjective decision as to whether he gets relief or not (i.e. make judgement like the commentators). I've seen many players before try and get relied (e.g. McIlroy and Kuchar spring to mind), and the referee has not allowed it. So, I wouldn't criticise Reed for this. If he managed to argue his case, and the referee went along with it, that is on the referee's shoulders. After all, all players will try and get a ruling if they think it will work out in their favour.
I suppose, if you have something like a bush or tree that could be very much in play with a reasonably bad shot, when setting up the course, grandstands, scoreboards and TV equipment (towers and cables), it probably needs to be taken into account that this should be placed in positions to minimise the impact on player shots
