Michelle Wie in training for politics.

[gxer]

Originally Posted by Saint-Just X

Do you think the stigmata cause him discomfort when he's writing his blog ?...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

I don't know what going to happen with the guy. He means well, but this stuff has been eating at him since the Asian invasion and the arrival of Michelle Wie and her parents with their exaggerated sense of entitlement firmly in place, to the LPGA tour.

He might be better off ditching the LPGA tour because the LPGA tour he once loved no longer exists.

[gxer]

Originally Posted by ctmurray

I agree. They needed to talk with her and give her. She got the opportunity to state her side of the event and then also be told in detail about the penalty that was being applied (so she could sign her card with the corrected score and not be DQed). There could have been some mitigating circumstance ( a bee stung her hand holding the club or something) that the video did not show. But in the end I thought the penalty applied to this situation. I happen to think this is somewhat of a silly rule, or too broadly defined in some manner, but you have to stop players from taking practice strokes in hazards and I don't yet have a better way to set up the rule.

The application of the rule to penalize Wiesy's in her situation or anyone in that same situation, where grass is touched accidentally in the aftermath of making a shot is what causes many people to think that golf rules are daft.

She wasn't making a practice shot for god's sake, she played the water shot properly but then accidentally touched the grass after splashing water all over herself. Not only that, but she was only penalized because the ball didn't cross that damn red line, which was drawn far enough away from the water to drive a golf cart on. It's a GD Stupid rule!

[Saint-Just X]

Originally Posted by gxer

I don't know what going to happen with the guy. He means well, but this stuff has been eating at him since the Asian invasion and the arrival of Michelle Wie and her parents with their exaggerated sense of entitlement firmly in place, to the LPGA tour.

He might be better off ditching the LPGA tour because the LPGA tour he once loved no longer exists.

When will he be changing the name of his blog to 'Life (not) on Tour' ?...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

[xman5]

Originally Posted by gxer

The application of the rule to penalize Wiesy's in her situation or anyone in that same situation, where grass is touched accidentally in the aftermath of making a shot is what causes many people to think that golf rules are daft.

She wasn't making a practice shot for god's sake, she played the water shot properly but then accidentally touched the grass after splashing water all over herself. Not only that, but she was only penalized because the ball didn't cross that damn red line, which was drawn far enough away from the water to drive a golf cart on. It's a GD Stupid rule!

Have you left the darkside and joind the Wieside.

Yes a dumb rule.

[gxer]

Originally Posted by xman5

Have you left the darkside and joind the Wieside.

Yes a dumb rule.

No, I will never join the Wieside.

[heddwyn]

gxer, you keep on about the grass being 'accidentally touched' after she has hit the shot. It wasn't 'accidentally touched' she planted the club! There is a difference.

Why do I get the feeling that if a ball goes into a hazard when YOU play, you do not play to the Rules.

[gxer]

Originally Posted by heddwyn

gxer, you keep on about the grass being 'accidentally touched' after she has hit the shot. It wasn't 'accidentally touched' she planted the club! There is a difference.

Why do I get the feeling that if a ball goes into a hazard when YOU play, you do not play to the Rules.

I already said earlier, hang her, I don't care, it just seemed to me that she did not violate the rule under her situation of making that shot and the aftermath of it, but she must have or she wouldn't have been penalized, right?

[gxer]

Another view.
----------------
A Wie bit more
MARCH 29, 2010
by John
Given the comments many of you have made about Wie and her reaction to the entire incident, I must have been distracted by the phone calls and texts I was getting when I watched the discussion in the trailer. I didn’t see the original incident except as shown during the discussion in the trailer. I thought that Wie did ok given that she had two officials hovering essentially telling her she was wrong about what she said she was thinking at the time. I also thought she handled the interview after she came out of the trailer ok. She accepted the ruling although she clearly disagreed with it.

I’ve heard a lot from a lot of people today. Some agreed with me, many didn’t. Its’s a tough call and could be made either way, although I’d have a tough time telling someone they were lying to me. The guy who taught me more about the rules than anyone else called me today to tell me this was the first time he disagreed with me (although he did agree that the Golf Channel should not have been filming the entire process in the trailer).

Here is my question for those who don’t agree. Lets assume that the most honest player you can think of (Bobby Jones in my case) did just what Wie did in the hazard and claimed the he/she thought he was falling. Would you believe him or her?

If so, ask yourself why you don’t believe Wie. Is she inherently less trustworthy (I’m sure some will say she is)? Why doesn’t she deserve the same benefit of the doubt? What has she really done that is worthy of being branded a liar or a least a fabricator of a story?

Many years ago at my first US Mid-Amateur, I had a case where a player denied doing what I know I saw him do from 150 yards away. After a few minutes of discussion, the rover who was more senior than I was took me aside and let the player continue. He said to me, “If he is lying, he is the one who will have to look in the mirror tomorrow morning when he shaves.” If Wie was lying, she’d be the one to have to look in the mirror when she puts on her makeup and know she did. But, who am I to judge that?

A Wie bit more Free Drop

[heddwyn]

What a stupid question. If Jones did the same thing, and we had the same evidence I wouldn't believe him either. In any event Bobby Jones would call the penalty on himself.

Wie grounded the club when the ball was still in the hazard, and not too far from her. You cannot ground the club in a hazard. It's nothing to do with her club brushing the grass at any time during the actual stroke, it's about where she was, where the ball was, where it came to rest and what she did after hitting the ball. I ain't rocket science.

[xman5]

Originally Posted by heddwyn

What a stupid question. If Jones did the same thing, and we had the same evidence I wouldn't believe him either. In any event Bobby Jones would call the penalty on himself.

Wie grounded the club when the ball was still in the hazard, and not too far from her. You cannot ground the club in a hazard. It's nothing to do with her club brushing the grass at any time during the actual stroke, it's about where she was, where the ball was, where it came to rest and what she did after hitting the ball. I ain't rocket science.

She definately ground her club. However pursuant to recent rulings you can ground your club to prevent you from falling.

Her point is that she placed it down for that reason. The official disagrees, so he is basially calling her a liar in ruling against her.

The point is how is it possible for him to know her intent. He can not. You can not prove from the tape intent. In the tape,yes she does not appear to be falling when she places the club down. Again does she need to be shown to be tipping over, If she felt that she was unsteady but not falling at the moment, but may fall in a few seconds, you will not see that on the tape. After all she is standing on a rock in a pond with her bare foot.

She should be easily able to argue that she placed it down to steady herself. She is the only one that can know if she is falling or may fall, it is not possible for the official to know this. So in essence she is being called a liar. In this case they need to accept the players word and the player would have to live with the truth if she is lying.