2018 U.S. Open--Shinnecock

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I turned on the coverage literally seconds after the Phil meltdown. It's been close to an hour now. CAN THEY SHOW A FUCKING REPLAY? I mean, Jesus Christ, you just showed every shot the guy took over the last 3 holes in an 81 round. You'd think you could show us what you're fucking talking about this whole time?
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
I turned on the coverage literally seconds after the Phil meltdown. It's been close to an hour now. CAN THEY SHOW A FUCKING REPLAY? I mean, Jesus Christ, you just showed every shot the guy took over the last 3 holes in an 81 round. You'd think you could show us what you're fucking talking about this whole time?
there is it finally. I ended up going to Youtube at first.
 

Petey

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
81
Kind of thing you do with your drunk buddies in a scramble
It's his birthday, they should have given him a pass. 48 year old California boy, he is just preparing for the senior tour. They should not only allow it, but encourage that play on the senior circuit.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
there is it finally. I ended up going to Youtube at first.
Yep, just saw it too. I have to say, that's a tough call for the rules committee. He definitely violated 14-5 or whatever it is, taking a stroke and hitting a moving ball, but I absolutely see the argument for 1.2, which is altering the course of a shot or something like that, which would be like deflecting a ball, and I'd argue just because he took a stroke in the process of deflecting his prior shot shouldn't alleviate it?

I guess my question is if there is a difference in the penalty if you violate 14.5, versus 1.2?
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,302
Providence, RI
Yep, just saw it too. I have to say, that's a tough call for the rules committee. He definitely violated 14-5 or whatever it is, taking a stroke and hitting a moving ball, but I absolutely see the argument for 1.2, which is altering the course of a shot or something like that, which would be like deflecting a ball, and I'd argue just because he took a stroke in the process of deflecting his prior shot shouldn't alleviate it?

I guess my question is if there is a difference in the penalty if you violate 14.5, versus 1.2?
1.2 would have had him DQ’d. They absolutely should have gone with 1.2 but didn’t because it was Phil. A non-star gets the DQ there. It’s BS and against the spirit of the sport to not enforce the rules evenly across all players. This isn’t the NBA.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
1.2 would have had him DQ’d. They absolutely should have gone with 1.2 but didn’t because it was Phil. A non-star gets the DQ there. It’s BS and against the spirit of the sport to not enforce the rules evenly across all players. This isn’t the NBA.
I had a feeling that must have been the difference. I agree with you. I don't know how they can make that ruling. Phil basically just said he didn't feel like running back and forth and hitting the same shot, so he did it on purpose, and took the 2 shot penalty. I don't get how that ruling makes any sense.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
Why am I listening to Joe Buck pontificate, when in the background, Phil is basically giving a press conference to a hundred reporters? Jesus Christ, just get a mic down there, and let's see how he expands on what he said to Curtis.
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,826
Northern Colorado
So I'm reading on Twitter that a lot of people are pissed at Phil My question to them is, "Who cares?" It's a penalty, he took his medicine, but it's not like he took a dump on the game or the course. He was frustrated.

The only person he hurt there was himself.
Completely agree. Didn't help that Joe Buck spent 20 minutes talking about it and making it worse than it was.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,422
Scottsdale, AZ.
I have to admit that after listening to his interview his actions make more sense. Watching it live I was not used to seeing someone jogging after his ball to make sure it didn’t roll off by putting in motion and taking whatever penalty instead. Yep.. that was a first for me.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I have to admit that after listening to his interview his actions make more sense. Watching it live I was not used to seeing someone jogging after his ball to make sure it didn’t roll off by putting in motion and taking whatever penalty instead. Yep.. that was a first for me.
That's the argument though. He basically violated two rules at the same time. He's acting like he knew they would simply give him a 2 stroke penalty for putting a ball while it was in motion, but he was the one that put it in motion in the first place, and there is a different rule for purposely affecting the course of a shot, which would be a disqualification instead of a 2 stroke penalty.

Frankly, I don't care which way they rule. I'm not a Phil hater or lover, probably root for him more than I root against him, but as more than a casual golf fan, I'd like to know the methodology behind making one ruling over the other.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
I have to admit that after listening to his interview his actions make more sense. Watching it live I was not used to seeing someone jogging after his ball to make sure it didn’t roll off by putting in motion and taking whatever penalty instead. Yep.. that was a first for me.
What were his comments?
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
What were his comments?
He basically said he knew the rule, knew he'd get hit with a 2 stroke penalty, didn't feel like running after the ball and hitting another shot from off the green where he was before, so he hit it and tried to get it as close to the hole as he could.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I'll let you guys judge for yourself. To reiterate, Phil putted his ball, it went by the hole, and was about to go off the green. He ran around it, while it was still moving, and putted it back towards the hole before it ever stopped:

Here is rule 1.2

A player must not (i) take an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play or (ii) alter physical conditions with the intent of affecting the playing of a hole.

Here is rule 14.5

A player must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving.


I feel like he definitely broke both rules. Let's say instead of the ball going off the green, it was going to go into a water hazard. A player can now stop it from going into a hazard, so long as the method he uses to stop it is by taking a stroke (like Phil did with his putter)? Something seems off.
 
Zach Johnson completely went off about the course conditions a short while ago on Sky Sports in the UK - he was asked if the course was close to going over the edge, and to sum up he basically said, "No - it's gone way past the edge."

I really enjoy watching this kind of golf, but I wonder how much of that is down to just how easy - too easy, according to Ewan Murray and Butch Harmon on Sky - by comparison normal PGA Tour conditions are. I do think Phil was absolutely wrong to do what he did and deserves to be DQed.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,422
Scottsdale, AZ.
Well I was saying the same thing to a group on Thursday. So many PGA tournaments have perfect conditions, little wind, open fairways. I honestly get tired of watching -16 , -21 type scores, fish in a barrel. The US Open usually perks me up , a different beast , links style .
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I don't know guys. Have any of you had a chance to play TPC Norton the week before or the week after these guys come through there for the Deuchebank? They absolutely destroy that course usually (after Vijay shot a 61 there in a driving rainstorm, they added like 1,000 trees and about 300 yards, IIRC) to the tune of -20 winners, but it's still amazingly hard. I'd be shocked if most 10 handicaps can play that course from where they play from, and shoot 100. I think these guys are just really, really fucking good, so it's really hard to actually set up a course that they can't feast on.

The problem is they are so good that the only way to set up a course that feasts on them, you have to go to the point of just about making it unfair. IMO, if you hit a good golf shot, you should be rewarded for it. These guys are hitting great shots, and they just have no chance to hold a green, or get it within 50 feet of a hole. They're putting the ball to the hole, and then having it come back down to them. That's mini-golf shit, IMO.

And here's the Zach Johnson interview. He's pissed.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
^ you mean +13 I assume?

I understand it must be frustrating to hit perfect shots and the course just betraying you, but everyone is in the same boat.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
^ you mean +13 I assume?

I understand it must be frustrating to hit perfect shots and the course just betraying you, but everyone is in the same boat.
Yep, typo. Definitely not -13.

Let me be clear too. I'm not worried about the poor player's feeling about the course being unfair. I'm just talking about it as a spectator. In a game where skill and talent is just about everything, courses like this bring a little too much luck into the equation for me, which is why I don't like it.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
I like seeing the struggle but it's fair to question how much of the result ends up being luck when it's like this, yes
 
I don't know guys. Have any of you had a chance to play TPC Norton the week before or the week after these guys come through there for the Deuchebank? They absolutely destroy that course usually (after Vijay shot a 61 there in a driving rainstorm, they added like 1,000 trees and about 300 yards, IIRC) to the tune of -20 winners, but it's still amazingly hard. I'd be shocked if most 10 handicaps can play that course from where they play from, and shoot 100. I think these guys are just really, really fucking good, so it's really hard to actually set up a course that they can't feast on.

The problem is they are so good that the only way to set up a course that feasts on them, you have to go to the point of just about making it unfair. IMO, if you hit a good golf shot, you should be rewarded for it. These guys are hitting great shots, and they just have no chance to hold a green, or get it within 50 feet of a hole. They're putting the ball to the hole, and then having it come back down to them. That's mini-golf shit, IMO.
My home course from age 9 to 18 was a PGA Tour venue, so I think I have a pretty good feel for this topic. (IIRC, -27 was the best 72-hole score in a Tour event at my course.) The issue for me is that advances in golf club and ball technology have disproportionately favored professionals who can get the most out of it - in the old days, they were of course still much better than 10-handicappers, but they didn't hit the ball so much further and spin the ball so much more than them as they do now.

I think the setup for the first two days on the course was perfect, and I think the wind got stronger today than the USGA was expecting - they wanted to increase the difficulty level by one notch and wound up increasing it by four or five notches. I still don't think it's "unfair" for these guys, given all of the technological advantages they have - the 7th green in 2004 was unfair, whereas this is just tough. And luck *should* have some role to play in golf; golf was invented and first played on linksland, where crazy bounces are commonplace rather than exceptional. I would, though, like to see a bit more water on the course overnight and slightly slower greens tomorrow.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Phil should absolutely be DQ’d.

Seems we can’t have a US Open without setup complaints. The only recent one I can think of where there was no set up/conditions issues was Oakmont.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,330
Southwestern CT
The USGA isn't going to suspend him. He'll apologize, act embarrassed, and move on. His fans will forget about it, and his haters will add it to the pile.
I remember all the righteous outrage at Tiger making an improper drop at the Masters. And now Phil does something worse that anything I’ve ever seen from a pro golfer not named John Daly and everyone is all “oh, it’s just Phil.”

He should be DQ’d and there’s really not a question about it.
 
I remember all the righteous outrage at Tiger making an improper drop at the Masters. And now Phil does something worse that anything I’ve ever seen from a pro golfer not named John Daly and everyone is all “oh, it’s just Phil.”

He should be DQ’d and there’s really not a question about it.
By the by, what have you seen from John Daly that was worse than what Phil did? (What Phil did was pretty egregious...and him trying to justify it rather than apologize for it afterwards was even worse.)
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,422
Scottsdale, AZ.
To state the obvious I think it’s about balance. Wind is always a real crusher on most links style courses and factor in the wind drying out greens, well it makes things real tough. It has a unique set of challenges and there are times where I think perfectly great shots get unfairly penalized. But overall , I’ll take the pros being tested by fairly unique conditions just because it’s different. But to each their own.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
By the by, what have you seen from John Daly that was worse than what Phil did? (What Phil did was pretty egregious...and him trying to justify it rather than apologize for it afterwards was even worse.)
Didn't John Daly once turn around on a tee box, and rip a driver right over the spectators heads while shitfaced? And that's probably on the "well, it's just Daly being Daly part of the spectrum." Amazingly, golf seemed a little less self-righteous back then. It's like it's making a circle from stuffy to not as stuffy to stuff again. The stuffiness curve is pretty much the same as Tiger's career.