Reply to thread | Syracusefan.com
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Chat
Football
Lacrosse
Men's Basketball
Women's Basketball
Media
Daily Orange Sports
ACC Network Channel Numbers
Syracuse.com Sports
Cuse.com
Pages
Football Pages
7th Annual Cali Award Predictions
2024 Roster / Depth Chart [Updated 8/26/24]
Syracuse University Football/TV Schedules
Syracuse University Football Commits
Syracuse University Football Recruiting Database
Syracuse Football Eligibility Chart
Basketball Pages
SU Men's Basketball Schedule
Syracuse Men's Basketball Recruiting Database
Syracuse University Basketball Commits
2024/25 Men's Basketball Roster
NIL
SyraCRUZ Tailgate NIL
Military Appreciation Syracruz Donation
ORANGE UNITED NIL
SyraCRUZ kickoff challenge
Special VIP Opportunity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Off-Topic
Other Sports
2021 PGA Tour
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 3708974, member: 1969"] When rules officials say "textbook" they are assuming it based on the player answering the questions with integrity as this is a clearly stated underlying assumption in the USGA rulebook and an inherent assumption of players on the PGA tour. PGA rulings are usually meant if someone followed the rules and procedures properly. Based on what they asked and what they saw there was no rules broken. 1) Did the ball bounce? Reed said he didn't think so, which was a fair answer (I don't blame him for not seeing it bounce) 2) Was there an embedded ball mark or some other ground irregularity? Yes 3) Was the golf ball impacted by the mark? Yes, according to Patrick only. 4) Was Patrick allowed to move the ball before the official came? Yes So based on the above the official said it was all textbook. Note that the official never needs to actually see the ball, because the USGA rules and PGA tour assume players are playing with integrity. The problems we have though are the following: a) We know for a fact that Reed's ball did not cause the ground irregularity in question. It is just physically not plausible. b) The area was a little soft so a ground irregularity is likely. But we have no clue if that irregularity was impacting Reed's ball. And the official can give us no comfort on that either. So calling over the official was just a useless act, and some will claim its a charade. The official just verified there was a mark in the area, nothing more. c) We are left relying on Reed's word that the irregularity was against his ball. [B]Considering there was no bounce, considering he moved the evidence, considering his past, should we believe him? Hass he earned the inherent integrity that is assumed by PGA tours professionals?[/B] I haven't mentioned the fact that when he was about 30 feet from the ball after it was located he was already asking if it bounced before he even arrived at the ball. He was already seeking embedded ball relief -- now that might be because he knew the tour was generous in the embedded rule in the wet rough. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?
Post reply
Forums
Off-Topic
Other Sports
2021 PGA Tour
Top
Bottom