PGA Tour: US Open in the (US's) Steel City: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).The USGA stages the US Open at its favourite course, Oakmont, this week, just a few minutes outside Pittsburgh famous for its sporting Steelers, its Pirates, its Panthers and even its Penguins, who this weekend won ice hockey's Stanley Cup. Ironic then that, just as Pittsburgh, the Steel City, celebrates its latest sports championship, it should parade a Stanley Cup made in Sheffield.

2).And golf's most recent Major winner, Danny Willett, also travels from Sheffield, much more under the radar than Lord Stanley's Cup, with media attention focussed on who didn't win the Masters rather than the steely performer who kept his head to win the green jacket.

3).This will be Danny Willett's first competitive visit to Oakmont but one would think he has just the game to thrive on US Open lay-outs. Three Englishmen earned a Top Ten finish at Oakmont's 2007 US Open, led by Nick Dougherty, followed by Casey and Rose. Nick's no doubt got more desirable thoughts on his mind, but Casey and Rose are among 17 golfers here this year who made the cut nine years ago, led by Cabrera, of course, and followed by local boy Jim Furyk. Others include:
Toms & Watson (T5), Snedeker (T23), JJ Henry (T26), Hanson, McDowell & Schwartzel (T30), Westwood & Jeev Milkha (T36), Ogilvy (T42), Zach Johnson (T45), Els (the 1994 winner, T51) and Dufner (62nd).

Ryan Moore, an injured Mickelson, Donald, Kjeldsen, Garcia, Goosen, Scott & Stenson all missed the cut.

4).Ernie Els was the 1994 Champion, US Open specialist Jeff Maggert top tenned, Furyk, in his first US Open, finished T28 (tied with Nicklaus), while Mickelson also made the cut.

Lastly, Bill Haas made the Q-Finals of the 2003 US Amateur here, while JB Holmes, Hurley, Levin, McGirt and Senedker also qualified for Match Play.

5).Oakmont remains the one and only golf course designed by WC Fownes; originally farmland on the outskirts of Pittsburgh, the members lined fairways with trees which have now been almost completely removed, restored to the members' idea of its original design. The rough will be deep and the greens will be fast, lightning fast, specially greased by the USGA with every encouragement from members who will be thrilled to see the best pros embarrassed rather than merely identified.
Conventional wisdom has been that it favours a high-ball hitter. Low-ball hitting Larry Nelson took a lesson from 1953 Champ Ben Hogan as he tried to adjust his swing specially for Oakmont prior to Nelson's 1983 win.

6).The course will play about 7,250 yards, to a par of 70, approximately the same as 2007 when top ten finishes by Furyk, Toms and Verplank proved that precision and putting were as important as length off the tee. Although many of the Par-4's will be 470+ yard brutes, six are short by today's standards and straight "driving irons", and less, will be equally important as accuracy with the driver. Five over par won it in 2007 and no-one is expecting anyone to finish 72 holes under par.

7).This will be the second year of Fox TV doing the coverage and let's hope their effort is more professional and watchable than last year's (when they weren't helped by the unfamiliar moonscape of Chambers Bay).
Joe Buck was dreadful as anchor man (Will Ferrell would have been an improvement), but Greg Norman has been kicked out in favour of Paul Azinger who has transferred from ABC/espn. Zinger is articulate and perceptive, but not good at getting to know the golfers off his parochial radar. A bit like Johnny Miller then.

8).This will also be the penultimate week for European Tour golfers to qualify for The Open Championship via the "top five not otherwise qualified, but inside the Top 20 of the Race 2 Dubai". As I read it, the current leaders are Luiten, Karlberg, Soomin Lee, Hend and Beef, followed by Dredge and Wang. Beef looks like the only one playing this week - last chance will be in Germany next week.

9).Phil Mickelson has famously earned/suffered six 2nd place finishes in US Open competition and he certainly warmed up well (with, yes, another runner-up finish) in Memphis. Kuchar is making a habit of getting close in Majors and has finished Top 30 in his last six US Opens; plus he's been in terrific form over the past three months.
At Chambers Bay we saw Americans (3), Aussies (3), South Africans (3) and Irish N&S (2) fill out the top 11 finishers. Would expect a similarly cosmopolitan leaderboard this year.

10).Imagine Rory will play well again, but does Oakmont favour him with his terrific driving, or take that edge out of his hand too many times? Kaymer is playing well again without winning and Stenson is overdue a Major.
Seven Europeans finished in the leading dozen at this year's Masters; five Englishmen, led by Danny Willett of course, plus Kjeldsen (good e.w. bet?) and Rory.
No idea of a winner, probably Day or Rory if they can maintain their focus, but don't like their prices, 16's bar the "Top Three". Schwartzel has been in good form most of the year and looks a good each way shout at about 66's.
But wouldn't it be appropriate if Danny Willett brought the USGA's trophy back to Sheffield? (No, it wasn't made in Sheffield.)

6 horse race? Five if Furyk bogeys 18.
Shane, DJ, Sergio, Piercy and Grace. Can't see anyone else overtaking all of them.

(Hope all you in GB&I are not having to endure the Fox coverage. Much improved earlier this week - awful today. Don't know how to tell a story thru pictures, yacking all the time.)

sportform wrote:Lee Westwood can win this.

It looks like one from five. Not sure Furyk has done enough. Dustin has to be slight favourite at this stage.

What at gag by Westwood ... holy cow. 80??+

DJ taking relieve from the TV tower, then hits over it?

Oh Lordy , major to possibly be decided on video evidence. USGA do seem to get themselves into a predicament.
Poor old Dusty bin.
Westwood racking up scores like me at the local muni.

DJ with possible 1 shot penalty on 5 for the ball moving on the green. Least they've told him so he knows he has to win by 2

Shocking stuff from the usga, they must make a decision. Very unfair on the player to be put in doubt like that.

Apparently when tv folks were talking with him he was adamant it wasn't him that caused it to move however, it sounds like the wording of the decision could screw him. If not him, what?

Sergio with a horror of a lie in the church pews. That's going to be him done

Maybe not grumpy

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:If not him, what?

Westwood's bad major karma?

Nobody knows where they stand, it's ridiculous. He'said already he didn't make it move, he didn't ground his club, so no penalty. Rules officials shouldn't be having an influence like this. It's clearly affecting DJ now and taking away from what's been a great tournament.

USGA = what a self-important bunch of dolts

The amount of times I've seen a commercial about the one set of rules, for everyone, covering everything. Doesn't say how freaking complicated they are to understand.

Fox describing it as as if the USGA had made the decision but didn't want to say it without telling DJ

Fantastic up and down from DJ on 16.

C'mon DJ!!!!!!

The USGA officials that were hurriedly and rapidly jabbing pins into voodoo dolls of Lowry and Piercy have achieved the desired effect.

Ha! They didn't need the voodoo dolls for pea-brain Sergio (but he may win a major yet).

Not today however!

Fantastic shot DJ. Well done.

Well barring an absolutely putting melt down, Fair to say DJ has handled this all pretty well in the circumstances.

Well Played DJ

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:Fantastic shot DJ. Well done.

Yep, he's not going to 6 putt from there..the monkey is finally off his back. Pleased for him, great effort.

Game. Set. Match.

DJ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Strange end to the tournament, but kudos to DJ.

Puts the result beyond all doubt but what about the effect on other players. I hope but sincerely doubt the USGA will learn something from this

Shane running out of steam after an early morning start. Matbe he SHOULD lose 3-4 stone?

What's Westwood's excuse ... SHOULD he lose 3-4 stone?

DJ the winner, USGA the loser.
Again.

They'll probably qualify anyway, but Furyk, Piercy and Lowrey receive exemptions into next year's Masters.
Golfers who may otherwise not qualify for next year's US Open but who are now exempt, include Na, Summerhays and, obviously Piercy,
3rd consecutive year no English, Welsh or Scottish golfer finished in the US Open Top Ten. Must do better . . . . . . . .

YESSSSSS!!!! HUGE CONGRATS TO DJ!!!!!!! THE FIRST OF MANY!

Farce decision from the USGA.

This is what the players had to say about the DJ fiasco:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/players-rip-usga-handling-dj-ruling/?cid=golfchannel_majorshomepage_us_open_latestnews_position_3_link_1

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/players-tweet-congrats-dj-keep-ripping-usga/?cid=golfchannel_majorshomepage_us_open_latestnews_position_5_link_1

What I can't understand is: How come Fox invite these USGA flunkies in to their booth to attempt to justify the unjustifiable, and don't challenge them at all. T0ssp0ts.

Whatever happened to journalism in this country/world?

A bit of pure irony that after the near misses like he's had, he wins on the toughest greens there are and takes a controversial ruling in his stride.

Now the controversial ruling...
He spotted his ball moving BEFORE he addressed it, told a rules official, both the rules official and his playing partner agreed there was no penalty, TV evidence backed that up. SO....wtf were the USGA doing a) butting in on the 12th creating uncertainty b) still dishing out a 1 shot penalty.

I shudder to think what the farce would have been like if he'd only finished one shot in front

JAS wrote:told a rules official, both the rules official and his playing partner agreed there was no penalty,

This is what concerns me JAS. On the field of play, a referee has said there is no penalty. I always thought, that if the referee makes a decision: that decision, right or wrong, stands. To have it reviewed afterwards undermines the referee.

It implies that any decision - if captured on camera - will be reviewed later?  Just not practical and unfair.

Edit. Just looked at Rule 34-2  If a referee has been appointed by the Committee, his decision is final.  How does that look now?

Predictable collapse from the fat

Under the rules, and given that it was decided he "caused the ball to move" Johnson should have replaced his ball instead of putting from the new spot. Has this been explained?

I am not sure how he can be judged to have caused the ball to move but none the less the rules official told him to play it from the new spot.

LL Cool Nay wrote:I am not sure how he can be judged to have caused the ball to move but none the less the rules official told him to play it from the new spot.

I know that and I think the decision was ridiculous BUT how has the fact that he didn't replace the ball and played from the wrong spot been explained?

Have a look at THIS VIDEO and I think he does replace it according to Pail McGinley, although you don't actually see him move it back.

Did he ground his putter? If not, he didn't cause the ball to move, by definition.

I don't see any other sensible option other than the USGA hold their hands up up and say " Actually, SORRY we Frak up badly. We should never have interfered with the player SEVEN holes after our referee with the group confirmed to the player it wasn't a penalty. We made him accept a one shot penalty to assuage our ego's. Had it really been a penalty i.e. Had he caused it to move, he would have had to have replaced it, the fact that he didn't do that in reality should have mean a 2 shot penalty or a DQ for signing for the wrong score but that would have made us look even more stupid so can we just leave it at that pretty please!!"

Actually just found this...

Although The USGA handled the Dustin Johnson incident like a bunch of amateurs the penalty they levied was correct. As below.
Q.
A player’s ball in play moves and he is unsure whether he caused it to move in breach of Rule 18-2. The player asks for a ruling from a referee. Based on the evidence, the referee determines that the player did not cause the ball to move and instructs the player to play the ball as it lies without penalty. After the player plays, the Committee assesses the same evidence or additional evidence that was not available at the time and determines that the player had caused the ball to move. What is the ruling?
A.
Rule 34-3 does not prevent a Committee from changing a ruling (see Decision 34-3/1). As the player caused the ball to move, he was required to replace the ball with a penalty stroke under Rule 18-2. When he failed to doso, he played from a wrong place. However, as he did so at the instruction of a referee, he does not incur the general penalty under Rule 18 for playing from a wrong place. Nevertheless, he does incur the penalty stroke underRule 18-2 as he caused the ball to move before the ruling from the referee. The player must continue with the ball played from the wrong place.

Having said that, with a worldwide audience and the USGA trying to get more people to play the game they only succeeded in making the game look ridiculous.
Can you imagine the Wimbledon final and the umpire advising a player in the third set that they may have to over rule a line call made in the 1st but they would advise after the match?
Still maintain that if the referee called it on the 5th the decision should stand.

Don't think I've ever seen the players more unanimous about something, other than paying (or not paying) taxes. Good for them.

Back to Oakmont for more fun in ten-ish years' time.

The USGA needs some dustin' off...

JAS

Nice find, as annoying as it was to see how things played out it would seem the correct ruling was used if the USGA thought that DJ moved the ball.

What remains bizarre even in light of that ruling is why they thought DJ moved the ball. Have the USGA provided any statement which details why they thought it was DJ that moved the ball and not that the ball moved due to the green conditions?

There's a fairly lengthy video on GolfChannel.com that shows a discussion between USGA officials and Golf Channel folks on the subject.

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/chamblee-confronts-usga-officials-over-dj-ruling/?cid=rr_editorial_p5

The USGA rules official states that it's balance of probabilities and weight of evidence to determine whether the player caused the ball to move. They look at proximity of player and club and the time elapsed although they also use the word proximity again.

The question really is: "if not DJ, what caused it?" The wording in the decisions on the rules of golf opens it up because it says even if there is doubt the player can be assessed the penalty.

Regardless of the rules, the USGA is responsible for a coitus interruptus. The tournament was drained from any intensity on the back 9. Players were walking around like zombies. Fans and TV viewers didn't know what to think.
Only highlight came after the round when Paulina repeatedly tried to pull down her very short dress trying to prevent TV viewers from having first row view to the 19th hole.

JAS wrote:Actually just found this...

Although The USGA handled the Dustin Johnson incident like a bunch of amateurs the penalty they levied was correct. As below.
Q.
A player’s ball in play moves and he is unsure whether he caused it to move in breach of Rule 18-2. The player asks for a ruling from a referee. Based on the evidence, the referee determines that the player did not cause the ball to move and instructs the player to play the ball as it lies without penalty. After the player plays, the Committee assesses the same evidence or additional evidence that was not available at the time and determines that the player had caused the ball to move. What is the ruling?
A.
Rule 34-3 does not prevent a Committee from changing a ruling (see Decision 34-3/1). As the player caused the ball to move, he was required to replace the ball with a penalty stroke under Rule 18-2. When he failed to doso, he played from a wrong place. However, as he did so at the instruction of a referee, he does not incur the general penalty under Rule 18 for playing from a wrong place. Nevertheless, he does incur the penalty stroke underRule 18-2 as he caused the ball to move before the ruling from the referee. The player must continue with the ball played from the wrong place.



Having said that, with a worldwide audience and the USGA trying to get more people to play the game they only succeeded in making the game look ridiculous.
Can you imagine the Wimbledon final and the umpire advising a player in the third set that they may have to over rule a line call made in the 1st but they would advise after the match?
Still maintain that if the referee called it on the 5th the decision should stand.

Thanks as always for that............

Players clearly unhappy that the USGA is, by implication, calling DJ and Westwood lairs.
Out pouring of appreciation from the pros for Dustin's excellence, but also perhaps for overcoming everything the USGA was throwing at the leaders.

USGA should better focus on why it takes twosomes 4 3/4 hrs to play 18 holes.

JAS wrote:Actually just found this...

Although The USGA handled the Dustin Johnson incident like a bunch of amateurs the penalty they levied was correct. As below.
Q.
A player’s ball in play moves and he is unsure whether he caused it to move in breach of Rule 18-2. The player asks for a ruling from a referee. Based on the evidence, the referee determines that the player did not cause the ball to move and instructs the player to play the ball as it lies without penalty. After the player plays, the Committee assesses the same evidence or additional evidence that was not available at the time and determines that the player had caused the ball to move. What is the ruling?
A.
Rule 34-3 does not prevent a Committee from changing a ruling (see Decision 34-3/1). As the player caused the ball to move, he was required to replace the ball with a penalty stroke under Rule 18-2. When he failed to doso, he played from a wrong place. However, as he did so at the instruction of a referee, he does not incur the general penalty under Rule 18 for playing from a wrong place. Nevertheless, he does incur the penalty stroke underRule 18-2 as he caused the ball to move before the ruling from the referee. The player must continue with the ball played from the wrong place.

Having said that, with a worldwide audience and the USGA trying to get more people to play the game they only succeeded in making the game look ridiculous.
Can you imagine the Wimbledon final and the umpire advising a player in the third set that they may have to over rule a line call made in the 1st but they would advise after the match?
Still maintain that if the referee called it on the 5th the decision should stand.

Hmmn. Was this written and added to the USGA website last night?

Not the best day day / morning for golf, golf officials or rules. The very essence of the game is to trust the the individual to call any issues on themselves and this is exactly what DJ did. This rule is so vague that the referee and a host of officials took an eternity to determine what appears to be a subjective decision. Thanks to JAS for the info and it appears that there may be some sort rationale to this but in my understanding it was DJ actually standing too close to the ball that may have caused it to move on the glass like surface. 

This to those that don't play that often or too seriously not to mention potential new golfers, will do nothing to encourage.