Richie Ramsey- Guilty or not guilty?

[theeaglehunter]

I just watched the start of the coverage of today's final round at Celtic Manor and was alerted by the Sky sports team to the incident with Richie Ramsey yesterday. I'm not sure if everyone will have seen it, but Ramsey having placed his ball (the clean and place ruling was in play due to inclement weather conditions) proceeded to check for casual water by 'stamping' / 'treading' around his ball. From the camera angle this looked highly dubious and it seemed he was treading directly behind his ball, before declaring that there was no casual water and proceeding to play the shot. It is difficult to decide whether or not he did improve his lie as the camera view just isn't good enough, however the whole action is certainly open to criticism in much the same way the Kenny Perry incident that was posted previously was.

Ramsey gave an interview on the range this morning and was adament that he had not improved his lie and as such did not incur a 2 shot penalty, something the European tour chief referee said would be left up to the players integrity as the tv coverage proved to be inconclusive in deciding whether his lie had improved. Ramsey definitely came across as distressed by the incident and from the interview he gave I would be convinced that his honesty should not be crticised as he very much seemed to be telling the truth.

Having watched the coverage a few times though, I'm in agreement with Howard Clark that the actions were definitely dubious, and I am still not convinced that Ramsey acted within the rules / spirit of the game (despite feeling sorry for him, and wanting to believe him during his interview). Clark said that as far as he was aware when testing for casual water you should tread in the place that your feet will be having adressed the ball, not directly behind where the ball was lying. This makes sense to me, and therfore even if his lie didn't improve (we can only take Ramsey's word for it) his actions were naive and certainly open to interpretation.

What do people think then, guilty (like Kenny Perry was found to be when his incident was posted a while ago), or not guilty as we need to trust the integrity of a genuine young golfer?

 

[brendy]

Id say if the guy knew a camera was on him whether during or after the incident, he would not lie as the camera cannot. I would say that from filming my own practice sessions the odd time that the camera, depending on how high it was mounted can give the impression of being very close to something on ground level when there could be feet or even yards in it.
Id say give the guy the benefit of the doubt n this one, especially when it was lift clean and place.

 

[freddielong]

I have not seen the incident but was there a chance he was trying to guage how the ball was lying and trying to see if the ball was in a wet spot. Again I am assumeing he was on the fairway (as he was able to place his ball) would he have had a bad lie or a lie that could be improved especially as he had just placed it.

 

[level5s]

how would he be able to improve his lie by standing/stamping behind the ball? When he cleaned and placed the ball surely it would have been sitting nice.

 

[vig]

I've seen the coverage and it does look like he is testing to see if water is coming to the surface. I make my assumptions by the way he is treading.

I think it is a little further back than I would have deemed him to be improving his lie.
I don't think the club would impact in the area.

I thought I heard one of the commentators say that he had incurred a penalty because he didn't mark the original position. I may be wrong but i'm sure I heard one of them say that

BTW Dougherty is making a right pigs ear of it today

 

[theeaglehunter]

I thought I heard one of the commentators say that he had incurred a penalty because he didn't mark the original position. I may be wrong but i'm sure I heard one of them say that

That was a separate incident that came this morning whilst completing his third round. He blamed it on his mind being frazzled, which is fair enough, but it is still an elementary mistake. He picked up his ball and as you say didn't mark it. It was only once he had completed the 18th that he was informed of this infringement, by the chief referee, and he changed the score on his card- which is fortunate as if not a DQ could have arisen for signing for an incorrect score.

 

[mono217]

Not guilty in my opinion the camera was decieving.

 

[thecraw]

To be honest the only thing bang-out-of-order is Howard Clark implying that a fellow professional was attempting to cheat.

To say that you should only be checking where your stance is for casual water is absolute tosh. I always check behind/in the vacinity behind the ball as well as. If you catch it slightly heavy with casual water behind the ball it can end up disasterous.

Ramsay is not a cheat and to question his integrety is shocking.

 

[Dodger]

Craw I too found Clarks tone a bit mysterious......not guilty your magistrate in my opinion.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think Clarke was doing what he is paid to do and that is be a pundit and as such look for a story. That said seeing the camera angle etc its hard to know exactly how close to the ball he is stamping and so I think its only right to leave it up to a players integrity.

I think tour players would make it very known behind the scenes if they thought a player had perhaps behaved inappropriately especially one new to the tour and I'm sure Ramsey wouldn't want any sort of finger of suspicion to foloow him around (thinky Monty, Singh and Clarke who have all been accused over the years and in the case of Singh still has the cheat label thrown at him by the press every so often). Not guilty - Just

 

[Imurg]

My that was a close call..
I reckon he's treading abit further back than it looks on the camera shot but he's walking a fine line.
Benefit of the doubt in my opinion - but why do Perry, Mclroy, Ramsey etc etc take it so close to the edge? They're asking for trouble and sooner or later someone's going to get it!

 

[CliveW]

What surprises/angers me about the whole incident is the fact that it was a viewer who phoned in and accused him of cheating. Neither Richie's playing partners or officials saw anything wrong at the time, nor when they were questioned later did they say they saw anything wrong.
Where will this lead to if the viewing public start to interfere with sport?

 

[Yerman]

Honesty maintained! Only Ramsey really knows the truth but everyone now knows everything is being watched and Golf is one of the few sports where cheating isn't acceptable. Just don't understand why so many footballers take it up.

 

[Tommo21]

My that was a close call..
I reckon he's treading abit further back than it looks on the camera shot but he's walking a fine line.
Benefit of the doubt in my opinion - but why do Perry, Mclroy, Ramsey etc etc take it so close to the edge? They're asking for trouble and sooner or later someone's going to get it!

Perry was not close to the edge, he was over the edge big time and got away with it.

 

[Spoff]

Ramsey definitely came across as distressed by the incident and from the interview he gave I would be convinced that his honesty should not be crticised as he very much seemed to be telling the truth.

Having watched a couple of episodes of Lie To Me on Sky One I beleive Ramsey's physical actions and facial expressions were telling a different story to the words coming out of his mouth.

If he didn't try to improve his lie why leave it until the following day to make a decision?

 

[Yerman]

the tournament referee told him he would wait to the next morning to speak to him again before ruling.