Patrick Reed

[Grant85]

I think you need to appreciate 3.3.b (3) a little more.
It applies to the club golfer as much as the professional tournaments and is a very common sense rule.

In simple terms if you know, or could have known, that you returned an incorrect score on a hole you get DQ - if you don't/can't the score gets corrected. Most consider this sensible.

Tiger's situation is explained fully on an earlier post in this thread. Not relevant here.

The crux of this particular incident is whether PR sort to gain an advantage knowing he was breaching a rule (and subsequently neither raising uncertainty with the committee nor including a penalty that followed from his known actions) or that he honestly believed that his known (seemingly accepted) actions were not a breach of the rules (because the action was away from his line of play).

The committee seem to have ruled that it wasn't far enough away (so he gets a penalty) but that this was an error of judgement (and that he could have reasonably believed that he hadn't breach the rules and incurred a penalty through his actions). That is their decision to make - however surprisingly the outcome.

I do agree with the perspective that the incident doesn't seem to reflect well on either player or committee.

My understanding with the Tiger situation was that he signed for an incorrect score and should have been DQd, given the rules at the time. Indeed, I think we can assume that most other golfers would have been. But they bent over backwards to find a way / loophole etc. to allow him to continue.

My understanding since then is that rules have also been amended to take into account an honest mistake, or things that are picked up on TV coverage after the round, in order for a more common sense / lenient approach to signing for an incorrect score.

In Patrick's case, the penalty was assessed during play and he knew he was adding 2 shots on by the time he finished his round. Had the circumstances been different, for example, and he wasn't playing during live coverage, or he was in a bigger field and not in the lead at the time, I think we might be able to guess that this may not have been spotted. And if it was the kind of thing that was spotted later in the day, or the following day, then the rules would now allow for him to be assessed the penalty and continue in the event (with tournament committee approval).

As I said, there still appears to be a malicious element to Reed's actions that feel like a bigger crime than we often see in golf, where people are usually not aware they've grounded a club or moved a ball or taken an incorrect drop etc. I guess similar to Phil at the 2018 US Open where he was surely expecting to be DQd and in fact even offered to withdraw.

 

[sunshine]

My understanding with the Tiger situation was that he signed for an incorrect score and should have been DQd, given the rules at the time. Indeed, I think we can assume that most other golfers would have been. But they bent over backwards to find a way / loophole etc. to allow him to continue.

Your understanding is incorrect. See earlier posts for the explanation.

 

[Swango1980]

My understanding with the Tiger situation was that he signed for an incorrect score and should have been DQd, given the rules at the time. Indeed, I think we can assume that most other golfers would have been. But they bent over backwards to find a way / loophole etc. to allow him to continue.

My understanding since then is that rules have also been amended to take into account an honest mistake, or things that are picked up on TV coverage after the round, in order for a more common sense / lenient approach to signing for an incorrect score.

In Patrick's case, the penalty was assessed during play and he knew he was adding 2 shots on by the time he finished his round. Had the circumstances been different, for example, and he wasn't playing during live coverage, or he was in a bigger field and not in the lead at the time, I think we might be able to guess that this may not have been spotted. And if it was the kind of thing that was spotted later in the day, or the following day, then the rules would now allow for him to be assessed the penalty and continue in the event (with tournament committee approval).

As I said, there still appears to be a malicious element to Reed's actions that feel like a bigger crime than we often see in golf, where people are usually not aware they've grounded a club or moved a ball or taken an incorrect drop etc. I guess similar to Phil at the 2018 US Open where he was surely expecting to be DQd and in fact even offered to withdraw.

It does make you wonder, how often has he got away with something in the past when it hasn't been broadcast live. Because, unless you are leading, most players (unless you are called Tiger Woods) get very little coverage on TV. Even if you are in contention, during the first round or two, when the leaderboard is very volatile and scores are close, someone like Patrick Reed may not get a whole lot of coverage on TV.

Question: Had it happened in the Ryder Cup, and his opponent hadn't seen it (naturally), I assume the referees / Committee would tell him ASAP once it had been flagged on TV?

 

[Curls]

Exactly the same thing.

 

[Jacko_G]

There are a heck of a lot of cheat rumours about Player.

His caddy is suspected of dropping another ball at the 74 (I think) Open Championship.

 

[robinthehood]

There are a heck of a lot of cheat rumours about Player.

His caddy is suspected of dropping another ball at the 74 (I think) Open Championship.

We're seeing entire nations banned from sport for state sponsored cheating. It's goes without saying there are and have been many cheats in golf at all levels.
Simply cannot be any other way.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

We're seeing entire nations banned from sport for state sponsored cheating. It's goes without saying there are and have been many cheats in golf at all levels.
Simply cannot be any other way.

There is a naivety in how people within golf believe it is pure white. It just does not stack up. It is a long way better than most sports but to think nothing ever happens is not credible.

 

[Grant85]

There is a naivety in how people within golf believe it is pure white. It just does not stack up. It is a long way better than most sports but to think nothing ever happens is not credible.

Yes - if you think of most other sports, a referee or umpire makes the decisions. And it is deemed acceptable to try and claim for certain decisions or to influence the referee in some way.

In golf, this is not really the case. Albeit we see a lot of instances of free relief given due to the number of paths, sprinklers, aerials, stands etc. and there are plenty of occasions where players use this to their advantage, despite having played a bad shot. I agree that there has probably been a fair amount of cheating over the years but it is the fact that golfers don't really have a referee to appeal to that it is thought of as a more honourable sport.

I wasn't aware of 'the incident' but I think it's very unlikely something like that would happen these days. Officials would not agree to stand down and most players are too aware of their own image to make such a request... albeit I think the likes of Kuchar and Reed seem not to care about their own image.

 

[clubchamp98]

This is my take on this.
Reed looked at his lie and thought” I have no chance of keeping that on the green.”
So move a little sand in increments gives me a chance of at least Fringe.
That’s what he got ..

I have always wondered how good these pros would be out of the bunkers I played on the local munis.
Now I know, it’s like a professional foul in football we all know it’s wrong
But Reed should have been DQd imo for deliberate cheating.

 

[cliveb]

I have always wondered how good these pros would be out of the bunkers I played on the local munis.

That's a remark I hear a lot. I've been guilty of saying it myself. We all envy the fact that the pros seem to only ever play on manicured courses with perfectly raked bunkers containing nice fluffy sand.

But to be realistic, I would lay money on a tour pro knowing exactly what to do if he found himself in a footprint in one of my course's horrible hard packed bunkers.
But I'd also lay money on him no longer preferring to be in there than the rough!

 

[duncan mackie]

This is my take on this.
Reed looked at his lie and thought” I have no chance of keeping that on the green.”
So move a little sand in increments gives me a chance of at least Fringe.
That’s what he got ..

I have always wondered how good these pros would be out of the bunkers I played on the local munis.
Now I know, it’s like a professional foul in football we all know it’s wrong
But Reed should have been DQd imo for deliberate cheating.

The tour pros are in a different league with regard to ball striking - and will handle most such situations without any issues.

It's nothing like a professional foul in football, nothing. The primary referee in golf is the player themselves.

You cannot accidentally cheat at golf, so the reference to deliberate is unnecessary.

If he was cheating he should be sanctioned by the tour(s). If he broke a rule that carried a penalty of DQ he should be DQ'd.

 

[Swango1980]

That's a remark I hear a lot. I've been guilty of saying it myself. We all envy the fact that the pros seem to only ever play on manicured courses with perfectly raked bunkers containing nice fluffy sand.

But to be realistic, I would lay money on a tour pro knowing exactly what to do if he found himself in a footprint in one of my course's horrible hard packed bunkers.
But I'd also lay money on him no longer preferring to be in there than the rough!

I'm pretty sure that, in comparison to us, the pro's would be a million times better out of our club bunkers. Even in a footprint, they'd have a pretty good idea technically on what type of shot needs to be played and being able to execute it (albeit, it will still be very difficult for them to get close to the pin like they would out of a normal lie). Don't let Patrick Reed's cheating fool you. In general, I'd expect him to get a lot closer to the pin out of his original lie than I would from a great lie. He was just trying to improve his own chances by cheating (allegedly).

I've never seen the pro's live. But my mates went to The Open many years ago. Garcia hit his drive quite close to them, but he was in high, thick, messy rough. He still had 200 yards or more to the green. When he approached them, he jokingly asked them "what club from here" and then he showed them he was using a 6 iron. He then launched it onto the green, from a position where they said they'd struggle to advance it 30-40 yards out of the rough, or avoid pulling it way left (and one of the guys plays off 6).

So, I'd expect that most of us would be in awe of what the professionals are capable of from all sorts of different lies (and assuming they are not cheating). The major thing that DOES work in their favour in comparison to us, is that the courses are more open so that spectators can get around, so less chance of losing a ball (and also more people to look for their ball when they are off line). At my course, if they missed a fairway it is in the jungle, so either an automatic lost ball or literally no chance to play a shot due to having no stance whatsoever. So, to be really safe they'd probably have to take no more than a mid to longish iron of most tees. Even so, I still reckon they could quite easily go round in the low 60's (par 70) on a decent day.

 

[clubchamp98]

That's a remark I hear a lot. I've been guilty of saying it myself. We all envy the fact that the pros seem to only ever play on manicured courses with perfectly raked bunkers containing nice fluffy sand.

But to be realistic, I would lay money on a tour pro knowing exactly what to do if he found himself in a footprint in one of my course's horrible hard packed bunkers.
But I'd also lay money on him no longer preferring to be in there than the rough!

He would know what to do ,but he would not be playing a lovely splash to 6”.
That’s my point ,Reed knew he had no chance so made his odds better by cheating.

 

[clubchamp98]

The tour pros are in a different league with regard to ball striking - and will handle most such situations without any issues.

It's nothing like a professional foul in football, nothing. The primary referee in golf is the player themselves.

You cannot accidentally cheat at golf, so the reference to deliberate is unnecessary.
R
If he was cheating he should be sanctioned by the tour(s). If he broke a rule that carried a penalty of DQ he should be DQ'd.

Well I think he was and should have been DQd.
The only person who is 100% sure is Reed!.

My reference to professional foul is he knew he had no chance and gambled there were no cameras on a waste area.
But if he did get caught it’s only a two shot penalty, that’s lenient for me.
But that’s just my opinion.

 

[clubchamp98]

I'm pretty sure that, in comparison to us, the pro's would be a million times better out of our club bunkers. Even in a footprint, they'd have a pretty good idea technically on what type of shot needs to be played and being able to execute it (albeit, it will still be very difficult for them to get close to the pin like they would out of a normal lie). Don't let Patrick Reed's cheating fool you. In general, I'd expect him to get a lot closer to the pin out of his original lie than I would from a great lie. He was just trying to improve his own chances by cheating (allegedly).

I've never seen the pro's live. But my mates went to The Open many years ago. Garcia hit his drive quite close to them, but he was in high, thick, messy rough. He still had 200 yards or more to the green. When he approached them, he jokingly asked them "what club from here" and then he showed them he was using a 6 iron. He then launched it onto the green, from a position where they said they'd struggle to advance it 30-40 yards out of the rough, or avoid pulling it way left (and one of the guys plays off 6).

So, I'd expect that most of us would be in awe of what the professionals are capable of from all sorts of different lies (and assuming they are not cheating). The major thing that DOES work in their favour in comparison to us, is that the courses are more open so that spectators can get around, so less chance of losing a ball (and also more people to look for their ball when they are off line). At my course, if they missed a fairway it is in the jungle, so either an automatic lost ball or literally no chance to play a shot due to having no stance whatsoever. So, to be really safe they'd probably have to take no more than a mid to longish iron of most tees. Even so, I still reckon they could quite easily go round in the low 60's (par 70) on a decent day.

I have played with many pros some tour pros .
I know what they are capable of ,but when is the last time you saw a pro golfer with a lie like that in a bunker.
I have seen Sergio go ape because “There’s to much sand in these bunkers” many times ,one this year I think.

Don’t let the fact they are good cloud the fact everyone hits bad shots even the pros.
But if I had perfect bunkers I would be quite decent myself.

 

[Swango1980]

I have played with many pros some tour pros .
I know what they are capable of ,but when is the last time you saw a pro golfer with a lie like that in a bunker.
I have seen Sergio go ape because “There’s to much sand in these bunkers” many times ,one this year I think.

Don’t let the fact they are good cloud the fact everyone hits bad shots even the pros.
But if I had perfect bunkers I would be quite decent myself.

I agree, but this wasn't my point. It's all relative to a player, so of course the worse the lie is, the harder the shot is and more chance of hitting a bad shot. For everyone.

My point was that, the pros (in general) would still be much much better than most of us at playing a shot out of a sandy footprint. So, if they were to play at our home clubs and get the same sort of lies as us, I wouldn't expect this to significant reduce their scoring in comparison to playing their perfectly maintained courses, unless they start actually losing golf balls. In fact, they'd probably score much better at a lot of our club courses given the yardages are often significantly shorter and they'd be capable of getting themselves within "scoring" range of the green much more frequently.

 

[clubchamp98]

I agree, but this wasn't my point. It's all relative to a player, so of course the worse the lie is, the harder the shot is and more chance of hitting a bad shot. For everyone.

My point was that, the pros (in general) would still be much much better than most of us at playing a shot out of a sandy footprint. So, if they were to play at our home clubs and get the same sort of lies as us, I wouldn't expect this to significant reduce their scoring in comparison to playing their perfectly maintained courses, unless they start actually losing golf balls. In fact, they'd probably score much better at a lot of our club courses given the yardages are often significantly shorter and they'd be capable of getting themselves within "scoring" range of the green much more frequently.

I agree with you but Reeds lie was shocking !! but much better when he removed the sand behind the ball.
That gave him a reasonable chance of playing a decent shot.
You could be sent to Coventry if you did that at a golf club .
Once is accidental but twice ???

 

[Swango1980]

I agree with you but Reeds lie was shocking !! but much better when he removed the sand behind the ball.
That gave him a reasonable chance of playing a decent shot.
You could be sent to Coventry if you did that at a golf club .
Once is accidental but twice ???

100%. Yes, going back to the original thread, as I've said before in my opinion he cheated. And, he was trying to gain a significant advantage. Not condoning him in any way, and had he played from the original lie I have no doubt he'd pretty much have to accept he was going to struggle not to lose at least one shot in comparison to playing from a decent lie. My last comments were solely based on the previous comment made by someone that "what if the pro's had to put up with the lies we get at our less than perfectly presented courses?", to which I was saying that I reckon they'd still be pretty damn impressive all the same (i.e. they wouldn't start getting themselves into as much a mess that a lot of us do when we find ourselves in very bad positions / lies). As for Patrick Reed, he would definitely do well playing at our courses. With no camera's following him, he'd probably do as he pleases. In fact, he probably wouldn't be bothered if anyone caught him red handed.

 

[patricks148]

TBH it could have been much worse he could have been caught practicing on the course

 

[duncan mackie]

Well I think he was and should have been DQd.
The only person who is 100% sure is Reed!.

My reference to professional foul is he knew he had no chance and gambled there were no cameras on a waste area.
But if he did get caught it’s only a two shot penalty, that’s lenient for me.

I appreciate I'm repeating myself but if you are going to cheat at golf there's no point in playing - it's up to the player to include a penalty that they know they have incurred, and nothing to do with being caught.

All of which is why DQ is not the proper sanction for such an action - suspension or banning would be.