Paddingtonwolf
Flaming Galah
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 78,264
- Reaction score
- 8,456
Nonsense. It is a blatant DQ breach of the rules, not a 2 shot penalty breach. Golf exists on the honesty of the players and this is beyond acceptable.
I disagree. He knew the rules and deliberately hit the moving ball toward the hole. It's a clear two shot penalty in the rules. If he'd have stopped it or deflected it to stop it rolling off the green then yes that's a DQ.
It's a storm in a teacup if you ask me. He's nowhere near the business end. He's not depriving anyone of prize money. He was just mucking around because he knew he was out of contention. Probably a bit stupid for a high level pro to do at a major tournament, but at the same time it's just a game and no-one has been put out by it other than those that are choosing to get way too offended by it.
How is stopping a ball a worse punishment than actually going and hitting it?
As much as it’s all a bit stupid as 1) he’s out of contention 2) it was a moment of rage 3) the course is an absolute joke so is going to make you angry, so it is all a little OTT in the reaction.
However your justification for it makes no sense and is bizarre.
Neither you or Bear play golf do you?
I do play. As recently as last week.
Yeah it was cheating and a stupid thing to do. He deserves criticism. However, he purposely did it in a way that he knew the rules would stop him being disqualified. Like I said, as he was so far out of contention it really isn't worth getting so upset about.
They applied the correct penalty. He didn't stop or deflect the ball, but struck it towards the hole whilst it was moving. I don't understand why people are struggling to understand this.
I'd suggest you need to read the rules.
He played a stroke at a moving ball. That's different to stopping or hitting it away from a hazard or danger.
---
"Phil didn't purposely deflect or stop the ball, which is talked about in the reference under Rule 14-5. He played a moving ball."
"That's where we clarified that, Phil, you actually made a stroke at a moving ball, and so we have to apply that rule (14-5).
"That's different than if he had deliberately just stopped the ball or whacked it in another direction or something like that. So it's just, it's us applying the rules."
If people choose to interpret the word "deflect" in the rules as the same as playing a stroke, then that's up to them. That's not what the rules intend to mean though. A stroke isn't a deflection. That's why there are two separate rules and two separate punishments, to distinguish the two.
In the end Mickelson played a moving ball in a way that was advantageous in a similar way to stopping or deflecting it, which blurs the line between the two. I can understand the uproar but the officials have to apply the rule to whichever one he actually did, regardless of the result or advantage gained.
He's taken advantage of the rules IMO which is out of order and very unsporting. Players are rightly upset and he deserves a lot of stick for it because it's tantamount to cheating. I still don't think the officials deserve as much criticism though. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place and have to apply the rules correctly to the individual offence by the letter of the law.
IMO Mickelson really should withdraw and forfeit any prize money if he had any real sportsmanship or respect for his fellow pros.