rules are rules
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Smart money is with manboobs!
Next: FS: 1998 Arnold Palmer "Golf's Heart and Soul" Part I & Part II Set
From: aeiouy on 30 Mar 2010 04:46 Sucks because I think it's one of those deals where, yes she broke the letter of the rule but not the spirit of the rule. http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/03/michelle-wie-argues-she-was-offbalance-after-being-penalized-for-grounding-club-in-hazard.html
From: Tom Reese on 30 Mar 2010 07:00 On Mar 30, 4:46 am, "aeiouy" <aei...(a)vowels.com> wrote: > Sucks because I think it's one of those deals where, yes she broke the > letter of the rule but not the spirit of the rule. > > http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/03/michelle-wie-argues-she-was-o... In my opinion, she wasn't even close to losing her balance. It bothers me that she tried to weasel out of it by lying. The violation would not have occurred if the water hazard boundary was the actual edge of the water instead of an arbitrary line painted on the grass. That's the stupid part in my opinion.
From: Alan Campbell on 30 Mar 2010 13:58 In message <6eea2c46-42f7-4ad5-a496-16770656410d(a)35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Tom Reese <tomreese(a)comcast.net> writes >On Mar 30, 4:46�am, "aeiouy" <aei...(a)vowels.com> wrote: >> Sucks because I think it's one of those deals where, yes she broke the >> letter of the rule but not the spirit of the rule. >> >> http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/03/michelle-wie-argues-she-was-o... > >In my opinion, she wasn't even close to losing her balance. It bothers >me that she tried to weasel out of it by lying. > >The violation would not have occurred if the water hazard boundary was >the actual edge of the water instead of an arbitrary line painted on >the grass. That's the stupid part in my opinion. > The line looked as if it is in the correct place. It should never be the edge of the water, it should be where the ground breaks down *towards* the water, where the water course is contained. Remember the level of the water can rise and fall. -- Alan Campbell
From: Zuke on 30 Mar 2010 14:04
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Tom Reese wrote: > On Mar 30, 4:46 am, "aeiouy" <aei...(a)vowels.com> wrote: >> Sucks because I think it's one of those deals where, yes she broke the >> letter of the rule but not the spirit of the rule. >> >> http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/03/michelle-wie-argues-she-was-o... > > In my opinion, she wasn't even close to losing her balance. It bothers > me that she tried to weasel out of it by lying. > > The violation would not have occurred if the water hazard boundary was > the actual edge of the water instead of an arbitrary line painted on > the grass. That's the stupid part in my opinion. If she had picked up the club before the ball rolled back into the hazard would the penalty still apply? I think one of the commentators said that if she used a differenct club to hit her second shot from the hazard the penalty might not apply. That doesn't sound correct to me. The worst was the commentator who said if she had played more junior golf she would have known the rules because the routinely took the kids off the course for 2 hour rules sessions. Sounds like your typical rules nut. Probably didn't give the kids even a glass of water during the boring ordeal Nothing makes the rules guys happier than finding an arcane way to penalize a player. Mainly because they can't break 80 themselves. Oh they'll sympathize but I guarantee when they are driving out of the entrance at the end of the day there is a small smile playing on their lips. Now, I am not talking about the LPGA guy in this situation--it seems a pretty open and shut case on this one. I actually saw one of these nut cases during a big match play tournament for the semi-finals of the city want to penalize a guy who picked up his opponents ball from the cup and toss it to the other guy who missed it and the ball rolled on the green for "testing the surface of the green". It was right out of Wodehouse. Fortunately saner heads prevailed. Remember, it's all in the interest of "protecting the field". |