DQ? Ya right.

[Golfpeasant]

Wow, Wie did great in her tourney...tell someone called her on drop on the 3rd round and was disqualified...

[spackler]

The decision was correct, but the rule is ridiculous. I know people love the arcane aspects of golf, but I really don't understand why a dq should be the result of a incorrectly signed scorecard. Nobody is out there cheating, any time there is found to be a mistake, it's just that, nothing ulterior. When a mistake is found, why can't they just apply the penalty retroactively and not enforce a dq? Didn't a player heading into the final round of a major get dq'd because he and his partner inadvertantly signed each other's scorecards? The penalty is way harsher than the crime.

[Nat Williams]

Once the breach was confirmed, it made sense to proceed with a DQ. Rules are rules, and wether you mean to break them or not is irrelevant.

What I am curious about is the reason for calling in the question in the 1st place. In the story I read, a reporter thought he saw her drop around 12 inches closer to the hole, then sat on this information for a day. Doesn't quite add up, and it sure does seem like he had malicious intent...almost as though he were looking for a reason to go after her.

Is there not a statue of limitations on golf round rule inquiries? I find it hard to believe that with all of the technology involved, and all of the people watching,that ruling can be called in that late. I assume that the rules may be brought into question until the end of a tournament...perhaps until the awards ceremony? Is there an official deadline, or can someone go grab old footage and try to DQ players from finished tournaments?

What if this had been brought to our attention tommorrow? Would she be DQ'd? Or just pressured to return her prize money and remove herself from the standing of that event?

[DavidY]

Based on the rules official on TGC, the ball was closer to the hole by more than a few inches.....don't recall exactly what he had said, but it was like 12-15 inches or so. Wie learned the hard way to always get a ruling from a rules official...and not subscribe to SI again.

Looked at the report at the TGC site, the SI reporter, Bamberger, seemed to be pretty slimey IMO.

Dave

[jeffc]

absolutely ridiculous in my opinion....I read they got out a piece of string and actually measured the distance. Really, how far does it go? Even the videotape was inconclusive. It make golf look like a circus.

[EDSGOLF]

I feel bad for her, this may screw her up for a while. I agree if the video was inconclusive, then let it go.......no need for string!

[LobWedge]

Okay, it's a crappy way to end a tournament, especially your pro debut, but what part of "not nearer the hole" doesn't make sense to you? Closer by 3 feet or closer by 1 inch, it's still closer to the hole than when it started.

She had the option within the rule to re-drop, and then, if it still rolled closer to the hole, place the ball where it first made contact with the ground.

How would you feel if you lost a tournament you were playing by 1 stroke because the "winner" had made the same kind of infraction, and got away with it?

Give credit to Michelle for answering honestly when she and her caddie went back to the 7th with the officials after the tournament to review the drop. She could easily have lied and said it didn't happen that way.

[jeffc]

it's not the rule that bothers me, it's the way it comes about. This happened on Saturday. To do that after the tournament is over is insane. Where does it end? Do we dig up TV footage of the 1972 Masters? If the reporter had an issue with the drop, why not mention it right after it happened, while she could have still signed a correct card. Simple solution to this circus: Put a rules official with every group.

[faldo]

At least she COOL about it in the press-conference. "No matter how certain we are from now on, I'm always going to wait for a rules official". Classy reply for a kid!!

But I still think they should not have bumped Julie Inskster from the end-of-season-event for the top 20. Add her if they want but......

[zoic]

I am really disappointed for her, and I wonder how her caddie must feel. The news stories even mentioned he warned her not to drop nearer the hole. To bad he did not follow through on the warning and get her to drop again and follow the procedure. It sure is hard to imagine they both missed that, but their nerves where probably racing from the excitement of her debut.

[el tigre]

Once the breach was confirmed, it made sense to proceed with a DQ. Rules are rules, and wether you mean to break them or not is irrelevant.

What I am curious about is the reason for calling in the question in the 1st place. In the story I read, a reporter thought he saw her drop around 12 inches closer to the hole, then sat on this information for a day. Doesn't quite add up, and it sure does seem like he had malicious intent...almost as though he were looking for a reason to go after her.

Is there not a statue of limitations on golf round rule inquiries? I find it hard to believe that with all of the technology involved, and all of the people watching,that ruling can be called in that late. I assume that the rules may be brought into question until the end of a tournament...perhaps until the awards ceremony? Is there an official deadline, or can someone go grab old footage and try to DQ players from finished tournaments?

What if this had been brought to our attention tommorrow? Would she be DQ'd? Or just pressured to return her prize money and remove herself from the standing of that event?

Yes, there is a statute of limitations on rule enquiries:

34-1. Claims and Penalties
b. Stroke Play
In stroke play, a penalty must not be rescinded, modified or imposed after the competition has closed. A competition is closed when the result has been officially announced or, in stroke-play qualifying followed by match play, when the player has teed off in his first match.

[LobWedge]

Yes, there is a statute of limitations on rule enquiries:

34-1. Claims and Penalties
b. Stroke Play
In stroke play, a penalty must not be rescinded, modified or imposed after the competition has closed. A competition is closed when the result has been officially announced or, in stroke-play qualifying followed by match play, when the player has teed off in his first match.

If that is the case then she should be appealing her DQ to the tour. The poll question at the start of the thread is more like 2 questions. Certainly every competitor should have to play by the rules, but so should the committee as referenced by Rule 34-1.

I am not sure as to the logic of taking the word of a reporter seemingly after the fact and applying a penalty based on speculation. I have always been against using information provided by an outside agency (fan, reporter, etc.) to assist in a ruling. That's like going to an NHL game and telling a ref from over the glass tha he missed a call, and then he goes and calls the penalty based on what you told him.

[el tigre]

If that is the case then she should be appealing her DQ to the tour. The poll question at the start of the thread is more like 2 questions. Certainly every competitor should have to play by the rules, but so should the committee as referenced by Rule 34-1.

From what I heard the DQ was applied correctly. The committee was informed during Sunday's round, and the DQ was applied after she finished her Sunday round and handed in her scorecard, but prior to her score being posted.

As I understand it, the reporter's word was the cause of the investigation but not the determing factor. It was Wie herself who indicated where she dropped the ball when asked to so after Sunday's round. Still, with a limited field of 20 players you think they could afford to have one rules official per group.

[mpare]

There is something disturbing about all of this. The reporter works for SI. If he's covering golf, he presumably knows the rules of golf. Why he sat on this is anyone's guess. More troublesome,though, for me is that this really doesn't help the game of golf. Yes, the rules are to be applied objectively and fairly. And, yes, players are expected to self-enforce these rules. Clearly, Michelle Wie (under the watchful eyes of her caddie, her fellow competitors, the galleries, the markers, etc...) attempted to do just that. She unintentionally (yes, I know, intention has nothing to do with the outcome of the ruling) was out in her drop by anywhere from 2 inches to a foot in terms of being closer to the hole than permitted. Officials apparently had to measure this to be sure. In the end what lessons were learned:

1. The rules are the rules and will be enforced impartially regardless of the offender. This is a good thing.

2. SI's reporter has a slow reaction time. He might consider covering a slower game. Clearly, golf moves too fast for him.

3. Michelle Wie wisely, in my estimation, will never again take a drop or apply the rules without a rules official at her side. This is not a good thing for the game. It slows up play, but what alternative does she have? She certainly has no interest in being DQ'd in the future. The presence of the official to verify the interpretation and the application of the rule will help ensure that this does not happen again. The official will provide her an immunity, if you will, from the watchful eyes of spectators, TV viewers, and, yes, reporters.

[covanant]

Why is the pga listening to what a reporter says anyway?
Thats like a hockey fan telling the ref to call a penalty.
Why was this not caught by a pga official?

[dbleber]

I totally agree, a reporter has no right and should hold no ground on a ruling call. And if fans could call penalties you Leaf fans would be screwed!!!

[Big Johnny69]

According to the Golf Channel tonight, if the tournament had been concluded (for which they claims happens when the money list for the tournament is handed over to news agencies in most cases) Wie's penalty would have been null and void if it was brought to attention then. Personally I think the tournament is concluded once the final group signs their scorecards/or conclusion of a playoff. The Golf Channel said they had to wait until Wie was done her round Sun to confirm with her what happened. And I think it was after all play was completed but I am not sure. If that is the case Wie got DQed because of a matter of minutes. I say if it is not caught the day of then it is a moot point. I know rules are rules but some provisions should be made to prevent things like this from happening again. Look at that game between the Angels and White Sox. If something along the rules of golf was implemented the teams would have gotten back on the field, after replays were seen by umpires after the game, and continued where they left off. But they didn't. Mistakes are made and if they are not caught at the time of then so be it. I believe Wie and her caddy thought they were doing the right thing. That's why they didn't ask a rules official. And if their FCs didn't catch it either than let it be. Reporters, or worst yet viewers at home, should not be allowed to referee sports.

Bit of a rant, sorry all.

[spackler]

Straight from SI's mouth:

By Alan Shipnuck, Sports Illustrated

Every profession has its rules. In golf, there are 34 of them, but each comes with so many corollaries that the USGA's official handbook on the subject comprises 72 pages. In sportswriting, the rules are mostly unwritten, but there is one that every scribe knows by heart: You report the news, not make it. Last week at the LPGA Samsung World Championship, the role of professional golfer and professional journalist collided in an unexpected way.

Early Saturday afternoon in Palm Desert, Calif., on the 7th hole of her third round as a professional, 16-year-old Michelle Wie hooked her approach into a bush and took a penalty drop for an unplayable lie. Watching from about six feet away, SI senior writer Michael Bamberger was struck by the possibility that Wie had violated Rule 20--7, which states that a drop must be no nearer the hole than where the ball originally lay. After the hole was deserted, Bamberger examined the area where Wie took her drop, concluding that it had been "a full pace" closer to the hole.

Bamberger not only knows the rules, he also knows how to apply them -- in 1985 he spent a year caddying on the PGA Tour, and in 1990 he caddied for a season on the European Tour. But last week, Bamberger was traveling on a different passport, as a reporter. As Wie continued her third round, he continued to think about the drop, wondering if there were extenuating circumstances that dictated its location. (He also knew that she was flustered because her round had gotten off to a rocky start, and she may have been rushing because her group was in danger of being put on the clock for slow play.) "It never occurred to me to call in a rules official," says Bamberger, who has been at SI since 1995. "I felt the correct thing was to go to Michelle first. I wanted to hear what she had to say. That's a reporter's first obligation."

After completing her one-under-par 71, Wie walked from the final green directly to a scoring trailer to sign her scorecard. When Bamberger finally spoke with her, Wie was confident that her drop had been proper but had no specifics to set his mind at ease.

Bamberger had a sleepless night on Saturday knowing that if he reported Wie, and if it was determined that she had broken a rule, she would be disqualified. It would be unprecedented for a reporter to affect the outcome of a tournament in such a manner, but Bamberger felt compelled to pursue the matter. "Adherence to the rules is the underlying value of the game," Bamberger says. "To stand in silence when you see an infraction is an infraction itself."

The next morning he went to the NBC compound to review footage, hoping it would change his mind. It didn't. He also revisited the 7th hole and again paced off Wie's drop. Now convinced that Wie had indeed committed an infraction -- "I don't think she cheated. I think she was simply hasty," he says -- Bamberger alerted rules officials.

Following her final round Wie was taken by LPGA officials back to the 7th hole to re-create her drop. Official Robert O. Smith concluded that the drop had been 12 to 18 inches closer to the hole than the unplayable lie, a two-stroke penalty. Because Wie did not add those strokes, she was disqualified per Rule 6 for signing an incorrect scorecard, forfeiting fourth-place money of $53,126. That evening, on the verge of tears, she faced reporters, saying, "I'm really sad that this happened, but you know, the rules are the rules. I respect that. I don't feel like I cheated or anything. ... [The drop] looked right to me. But I learned my lesson -- I'm going to call a rules official every single time." It was a sour end to what to that point had been a celebratory week for both her and women's golf, but one careless mistake will not diminish Wie's brilliant future.

The situation has stirred emotions because of Bamberger's role. There is widespread precedent for onlookers reporting penalties. Every week the PGA Tour receives multiple phone calls from TV viewers who think they have spotted infractions. To some, spectators who report violations are busybodies. In fact, third parties -- even reporters -- who point out rules infractions are protecting the field and preserving the integrity of the competition.

Last week Bamberger picked up an unlikely supporter in B.J. Wie, Michelle's fiercely loyal, protective father. He knows that his daughter, for all her prodigious physical talents, is still a teenager with much to learn. No doubt, now she will be more careful in applying the rules. On Sunday evening B.J. saw Bamberger in the press room and said, "Good job, Michael." Then he shook his hand.

[Golfpeasant]

They looked at the tape, and couldnt tell. They paced it off, and couldn't tell. And then they took a line-tape from the flag to the spot and said "OK, DQ".

Wow, Michael Bambergers eyes are better than any technology existing. He had an axe to grind, and he did it just in time.

Apparently, her caddy gave him a few sharp comments. Good for him. I hope she never does an interview with SI again.

[DavidY]

"It never occurred to me to call in a rules official," says Bamberger, who has been at SI since 1995. "I felt the correct thing was to go to Michelle first. I wanted to hear what she had to say. That's a reporter's first obligation."

IMO, this statement pretty well sums my impression of Bamberger. He must think that we are all so stupid or naive to believe him.....NOT! IMO, he wanted to be a big part of Wie's DQ...and he had succeeded by waiting another day to act. Not sure what his future at SI is....but if it was me, he would be out of there. Sure, Wie screwed up her drop...but that doesn't mean he should wait another day to report it....he should know better if he was at all genuine.....IMO.

Dave

[NoBack]

Has anybody seen the new video of the incedent? It's from behind the bush. I've seen it twice now and wow. SI's position of timing aside, but you really have to watch the replay. MW took the drop and put the first club in one direction and on the second club length, the club was dropped on the ground quickly in another direction which did look way off. She also did it very quickly and actually let the club drop on the ground. Watch the video

[BC MIST]

Has anybody seen the new video of the incedent? It's from behind the bush. I've seen it twice now and wow. SI's position of timing aside, but you really have to watch the replay. MW took the drop and put the first club in one direction and on the second club length, the club was dropped on the ground quickly in another direction which did look way off. She also did it very quickly and actually let the club drop on the ground. Watch the video

Bang on. The video clearly shows that there was an obtuse angle formed when she placed the club down to get her two club lengths and in the last placement, the end of the club was closer to the hole than the end of the club with the first. It appeared too, that she did this in haste and that the club actually rotated at least 180 degrees, WHILE her caddy fished the ball out of the bush. Had he seen her take her two club lengths incorrectly, I am sure he would have said something.

IMO it is unfair to compare rulings in golf to those in major team sports. In baseball, hockey, etc., all calls are JUDGEMENT calls, done at the discretion of the referees. In golf there are NO judgement calls. You broke the rules or you did not, and in this case Michelle did and it is irrelevant as to who reported the infraction. If any one of us was there and saw Michelle make the mistake, would you have called out, "I think you dropped the ball closer to the hole?" Highly unlikely.

What kind of feelings would the world have of Michelle if we saw a blatant infraction of the rules made with no penalty, and then have her win the tournament. She would be scarred for life. Golf is not played this way, thank goodness. The rules are not open to interpretation, only misinterpretation. Sadly, Michelle got what she deserved and as we learn a lot by our mistakes, she will bounce back from this and be stronger than ever.

In today's Citizen, there is an inference by CAM COLE, a reporter and pseudo golf expert, that Michelle cheated. Where's the tar and feathers?

[Big Johnny69]

BC, in your post you state other sports are judgement calls. Well in this instance Michelle judged that she made the correct drop, and most around her did as well or someone would have said something. And until they took out that string, or whatever else they used, it was judged that Michelle made the correct drop. Like I said, if baseball used the same method by going back over a situation after the fact then maybe the Angels are on their way to the world series. I know rules are rules, but mistakes are made and in a lot of cases with professional sports are missed. Calgary Flames game six anyone? I would not think that Michelle was a cheater or hold it over her head for the rest of her career. I would think that she made the wrong move and she would learn for next time. I'm sure if she had gone on to win it would not have been the first time a rules violation was missed.

[NoBack]

Well in this instance Michelle judged that she made the correct drop, and most around her did as well or someone would have said something.

I dunno
I agree with BC on this one. I disnt see anyone tell her she was wrong. And there were many of them around. Geoff, did you see the newest replays?

[sharkshooter]

Straight from SI's mouth:

By Alan Shipnuck, Sports Illustrated


Bamberger not only knows the rules, he also knows how to apply them -- in 1985 he spent a year caddying on the PGA Tour, and in 1990 he caddied for a season on the European Tour. But last week, Bamberger was traveling on a different passport, as a reporter. As Wie continued her third round, he continued to think about the drop, wondering if there were extenuating circumstances that dictated its location. (He also knew that she was flustered because her round had gotten off to a rocky start, and she may have been rushing because her group was in danger of being put on the clock for slow play.) "It never occurred to me to call in a rules official," says Bamberger, who has been at SI since 1995. [bold added]

So, it is said he knows the rules, but he says he didn't know he should call a rules official. Either he is an idiot, SI is embellishing to hide their embarassment, or, he wanted to be the news.

Any way you look at it, I think his press credentials should be revoked.

[BC MIST]

BC, in your post you state other sports are judgement calls. Well in this instance Michelle judged that she made the correct drop, and most around her did as well or someone would have said something. And until they took out that string, or whatever else they used, it was judged that Michelle made the correct drop. Like I said, if baseball used the same method by going back over a situation after the fact then maybe the Angels are on their way to the world series. I know rules are rules, but mistakes are made and in a lot of cases with professional sports are missed. Calgary Flames game six anyone? I would not think that Michelle was a cheater or hold it over her head for the rest of her career. I would think that she made the wrong move and she would learn for next time. I'm sure if she had gone on to win it would not have been the first time a rules violation was missed.

By judgement calls I was referring solely to rules officials and not any of the players. Golfers make errors in judgement frequently and Michelle just took her two club lengths without thinking and without any advice or assistance. Simple but costly mistake.

The other interesting ruling was Annika getting relief from the temporary moveable obstruction. The official gave her line of sight relief to the hole, but she wanted more(to get a better lie) stating that she wanted to play the shot well right of the hole as the terrain sloped right to left.

The official stood his ground as she tried to manipulate him.

[jeffc]

I disagree BC...

All calls by officials in other sports are Not judgement calls. Some are. Some are not.

[LobWedge]

BC, in your post you state other sports are judgement calls. Well in this instance Michelle judged that she made the correct drop, and most around her did as well or someone would have said something. And until they took out that string, or whatever else they used, it was judged that Michelle made the correct drop. Like I said, if baseball used the same method by going back over a situation after the fact then maybe the Angels are on their way to the world series. I know rules are rules, but mistakes are made and in a lot of cases with professional sports are missed. Calgary Flames game six anyone? I would not think that Michelle was a cheater or hold it over her head for the rest of her career. I would think that she made the wrong move and she would learn for next time. I'm sure if she had gone on to win it would not have been the first time a rules violation was missed.

Geoff, what BC means is that the majority of rules calls made in other sports are done in real-time as the infraction occurs with very little to no benefit of consulting a rules official, or rule book before proceeding, unlike golf.

You don't have to be a "cheater" to break a rule. You may have all the best intentions, but you can still be wrong. I don't believe for one second that Michelle was intentionally breaking the rule. Unfortunately for her, it still doesn't make it right. Let's say that you get nabbed for going 80 km/h in a 60 km/h zone when you could swear that the limit was 80, but it had changed to 60 a while back and you just didn't notice. You didn't mean to speed, but you did. Doesn't make it right, just makes it unfortunate, and you still have to pay the penalty.

I would rather face a DQ for an honest mistake, and learn from it, than always have the spectre of doubt hanging over me for something that I did or didn't do wrong and it wasn't resolved. As Lorne Rubenstein mentioned in his column today, Vijay Singh has made a gazillion dollars around the world and was #1 for a brief time, but people still talk about his scorecard tampering incident on the Asian tour over 20 years ago.

[bbbeam]

One related rules question and two comments:

As the incorrect drop occurred in the third round, the only way for Wie to not be DQed is if the ruling was made before she signs her third round score card correct? The stories and posts above seem to indicate that if the ruling was made before the end of the tourney then she could have added a two stroke penalty and not been DQed. I believe the only time to add a two stroke penalty that occurs in the 3rd round is before the score card for that round is signed. Maybe someone with tournament golf experience could reply.

Comment 1: Bamberger claimed to be ‘wearing his reporters’ hat on Saturday and as such had to ask Wie about the incorrect drop instead of mentioning it to a rules official. Was he not wearing the same hat the next day knowing his ‘great act of consciences’ would result in Wie being DQed? It just sort of has the foul stench of “headline grabbing” to me.

Comment 2: only one other reply mentions the fact that the greatest impact this event will have is to make the PRO game even that much slower. Imagine how much more excruciatingly long rounds will become now that every player will be asking for a rules official every time they need to take a drop, or ask if the mark on a green is a ball mark or a spike mark, or watch as they take a back swing near a bush to make sure no piece of the bush breaks off etc. etc. etc. For the integrity of the game and the pace of play, players, their caddies and their playing partners need to be able to make simple rule decisions on their own. Good luck on that ever happening again after this weekend.

Brian

[jeffc]

One related rules question and two comments:

As the incorrect drop occurred in the third round, the only way for Wie to not be DQed is if the ruling was made before she signs her third round score card correct? The stories and posts above seem to indicate that if the ruling was made before the end of the tourney then she could have added a two stroke penalty and not been DQed. I believe the only time to add a two stroke penalty that occurs in the 3rd round is before the score card for that round is signed. Maybe someone with tournament golf experience could reply.

Comment 1: Bamberger claimed to be ‘wearing his reporters’ hat on Saturday and as such had to ask Wie about the incorrect drop instead of mentioning it to a rules official. Was he not wearing the same hat the next day knowing his ‘great act of consciences’ would result in Wie being DQed? It just sort of has the foul stench of “headline grabbing” to me.

Comment 2: only one other reply mentions the fact that the greatest impact this event will have is to make the PRO game even that much slower. Imagine how much more excruciatingly long rounds will become now that every player will be asking for a rules official every time they need to take a drop, or ask if the mark on a green is a ball mark or a spike mark, or watch as they take a back swing near a bush to make sure no piece of the bush breaks off etc. etc. etc. For the integrity of the game and the pace of play, players, their caddies and their playing partners need to be able to make simple rule decisions on their own. Good luck on that ever happening again after this weekend.

Brian

yes, the infraction would have had to be pointed out (and proven) before she signed her 3rd round card.

with respect to comment 2, I couldn't agree more.