Reed up to his old tricks again.

by 4putt Sun 31 Jan 2021, 10:10 pm

https://fb.watch/3mUS-oDQIO/

by pedro Mon 01 Feb 2021, 1:08 am

He did indeed ask the marker if she’d seen the ball jump. When she said no, I guess it’s pretty easy to assume it plugged - and then subsuquently find some imaginary evidence to support it did.

Regardless, the lie couldn’t have been that bad, and the advantage he’d gain from a free drop would be limited, as he’d still have to drop it in the rough.

I don’t necessarily think Reed tried to cheat and I think we have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

With regard to the TV producers not noticing it earlier. Well, as someone pointed out, they were new and may not have been aware of how the lift and clean thing works out.

by 4putt Mon 01 Feb 2021, 8:01 am

I thought someone would try to defend him.

He cheated. No way was that ball embedded.

by JAS Mon 01 Feb 2021, 8:45 am

I'm not sure, because he has "history" it's easy to draw a quick conclusion that he cheated. Retrospective TV footage showing the bounce would obviously suggest that an embedding was very very highly unlikely but neither an official or anyone in the playing group had the benefit of that before the decision was made.

Having played Torrey at a similarish time of year I have to say the rough can be so lush and thick that in some places its not always 100% clear cut whether a ball is actually plugged or just very deeply nestled.

by 4putt Mon 01 Feb 2021, 9:34 am

I guess I play to a different set of rules to you guys.

If there's any doubt I would play it as it lies and walk off the course with a clear conscience than run the risk of being called a cheat.

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 10:17 am

There is not a cat in hell's chance that ball was embedded after it had already bounced. The lie was dreadful, in about 3 or 4 inches of rough, no way would that embed coming down from a height of only about 2 feet into rough that high.

He knew he was looking at double bogey from there. The one club length 'free drop' enabled him to get up and down from a near perfect lie. I can't think of one other professional player who would have touched that ball before the rules official got there. His 'pace of play' excuse in the interview afterwards was pathetic. I can't believe the rules official and the PGA allowed themselves to be bullied into it.

So you went on and won Patrick. Not that we needed any further proof that you are a cheat, you won it by cheating. Not that it will bother you, but most true golf fans will never have any respect for you or anything you achieve in the game.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 10:26 am

Up to old tricks? Nope. Read the reports on what occurred, instead of jumping to conclusions.

If Reed cheated here, which he didn't, how come none of you are jumping up and down re. McIlroy doing the same thing? Double standards much? Rolling Eyes

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 10:48 am

I watched all the coverage and read all the reports. No jumping to conclusions or double standards from me.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 1:23 pm

4putt wrote:I guess I play to a different set of rules to you guys.

If there's any doubt I would play it as it lies and walk off the course with a clear conscience than run the risk of being called a cheat.

Exactly. It clearly wasn't embedded. Well not in the mud anyway just in the 4 inches of rough. Which as Bluecoverman points out, meant Reed knew he was about to rack up a high number.

Navy

Please read up on both incidents or watch the footage. Rory and Reeds situations played out very differently.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 1:47 pm

I think Iain Carter has written what I was trying to say across the various threads.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/55890260

Iain Carter wrote:Patrick Reed is celebrating the most commanding win of his career but few observers view this superb victory, achieved on a tough US Open course, in such glowing terms.

It does not matter how well a remodelled swing stands up while closing out a top triumph on the PGA Tour if there are question marks over the player's integrity, even when the golfer followed the rules to the letter.

Indeed, in the third round incident that has become the latest controversy to blight Reed's chequered career, he followed similar protocols as the untainted Rory McIlroy did in a separate occurrence in the same round.

But Reed is at the centre of another rules rumpus and the chat in the locker room "isn't great" according to one of his leading competitors. At the same time no one is calling McIlroy's character into question.

This is because reputation does matter.

Reed has previous, while McIlroy is remembered for his sense of fair play. A prime example came when the Northern Irishman gave himself a worse lie than he needed to while replacing his ball during last year's US PGA at Harding Park.

"I've never tried to get away with anything out here," McIlroy said after finishing tied 16th, eight shots behind the American winner last Sunday.

"In golf you'd rather be on the wrong side of the rules than the right side of them because that's just what our game's about. Our game is about integrity and it's about doing the right thing."

Reed, meanwhile, is viewed in the way a wary shopkeeper regards a posse of school kids approaching the pic-n-mix counter. His every move is scrutinised.

This is the prism in which last Saturday's incident in the greenside rough of the 10th hole of Torrey Pines' South Course has to be viewed, even though Reed acted entirely within the rules.

He marked and picked up his ball which he believed was embedded in the ground and therefore entitled him to a free drop. He, like McIlroy, could not see that his ball had actually bounced into its final resting position.

"No, I didn't see it bounce," answered a ball spotter as Reed approached her. According to rule 16.3 "your ball is embedded only if it is in its own pitch-mark made as a result of your previous stroke and part of your ball is below the ground".

The PGA Tour tweeted the entire incident and subsequently did the same with McIlroy's, which occurred on the 18th hole. There was only one difference, McIlroy did not call over an official to inspect the indentation, while Reed did.

Under the rules, which were updated in 2019, players are expected to "make a reasonable judgement" when taking relief, which Reed can argue he did. Yet he still finds himself in the dock of golf's court of judgement.

"It's guilt by association," a leading referee told me. "The new rules allow you to do this without even notifying your partners which he did (as did McIlroy) so he did more than he had to.

"I said when this rule change came out, it would bite us and here we are."

The "reasonable judgement" element gives scope for different interpretations, which contributes greatly to the furore that followed Reed's drop which led to a successful up and down to save par.

"I would not create a situation like that," said Xander Schauffele, who believes the PGA Tour is protecting Reed. "If my ball's embedded, I usually will wait and call someone and kind of wait until everyone's on the same page."

Schauffele, who finished in a tie for second five shots behind, added: "He did everything by the book according to the official and everyone stood there.

"The talk amongst the boys isn't great, I guess, but he's protected by the Tour and that's all that matters, I guess."

It is a withering assessment from a potential Ryder Cup team-mate of the man they call "Captain America".

"I texted or talked to 15 to 20 current or past tour players, some of them hall of fame members," pundit Brandel Chamblee told the Golf Channel.

"Not a single player was in defence of what Patrick Reed did. This is in direct conflict with what PGA Tour and USGA rules officials are saying."

Reed is golf's modern day villain and incidents such as the two-shot penalty he received for improving his lie at the 2019 Hero Challenge are not forgotten.

There have been other instances which mean his wins, including victory in the 2018 Masters and last year's World Golf Championships event in Mexico, are not celebrated as widely as they are for other players.

More than any other top golfer, Reed needs to be seen to be playing by the rules and, over and above that, in the spirit of those rules and this is where this incident is most troublesome.

The cameras were on him because he was leading the tournament and he was inspecting a lie that only he could see.

When he picked up his ball he held it in the palm of his hand, not by finger and thumb to ensure everyone could see that he was not attempting to clean it. He followed the rulebook but not best practice.

That is not wise for a man with the reputation he has acquired.

There was not an ounce of regret when he was later informed that his ball had in fact bounced rather than embedding directly when it landed. Reed acknowledged it could not have lodged in its own pitch-mark in that scenario.

For him it was enough that he had followed the rules. "All I can really do is focus on today," he said after lifting the trophy.

"And just listen to what the rules officials said and they said that I didn't do anything incorrect." In golf, unlike many other sports, that threshold is simply not high enough.

Reed played brilliantly to beat a top field by five shots. He should be lauded for the threat he promises to be in the majors, Olympics and Ryder Cup this year but the narrative is unsurprisingly elsewhere.

No one wants to be asked whether they cheated en route to victory. That's what happened to Reed on Sunday night even though he broke no rules.

It is because he plays a game that demands doing more than just following the rule book, a lesson it seems the 30-year-old Texan has yet to fully learn.

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 1:50 pm

And why the insistence from Reed about asking playing partners and the volunteer if they had seen it bounce? Because he was already planning ahead, dependent on their answer. If the volunteer had said she had seen it bounce would he have acted differently? Of course he would.

I am in no way in favour of being critical simply because of previous history. But I find very little defence for Reed on this occasion.

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 1:53 pm

That's Xander Schauffelle as well as Jordan Spieth won't play with him in the Ryder Cup then!

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 2:00 pm

BlueCoverman wrote:That's Xander Schauffelle as well as Jordan Spieth won't play with him in the Ryder Cup then!

This could be Navy's route to playing in the RC. A captains pick for the only person left who will play with Reed.

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 2:04 pm

Navy can't be American, he follows rugby! Laugh

by Shotrock Mon 01 Feb 2021, 2:20 pm

Here's what I do not understand:

IF Reed (or anyone) asked their playing partner (and obviously opponent) to determine the ball is plugged ... and they opine "NO" ... then are we suggesting they are the judge and jury? What if it's truly so far plugged (and in a fairway) that only 10% is above ground and the playing partner (opponent) says it's not plugged?

I think (could be wrong) the only time an opponent can decide your fate is in concessions in match play.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 2:54 pm

BlueCoverman wrote:I watched all the coverage and read all the reports. No jumping to conclusions or double standards from me.

Just bias then?

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 2:56 pm

McLaren wrote:
4putt wrote:I guess I play to a different set of rules to you guys.

If there's any doubt I would play it as it lies and walk off the course with a clear conscience than run the risk of being called a cheat.

Exactly. It clearly wasn't embedded. Well not in the mud anyway just in the 4 inches of rough. Which as Bluecoverman points out, meant Reed knew he was about to rack up a high number.

No. You have no clue as to its lie. McIlroy's was also "just in the 4 inches of rough".

McLaren wrote:Navy

Please read up on both incidents or watch the footage. Rory and Reeds situations played out very differently.

I have, Mac. I've watched the clips and I've read the reports from Reed, which no-one, no-one, is contradicting. It's OK. I know you're biased so I'm not surprised.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 3:02 pm

McLaren wrote:I think Iain Carter has written what I was trying to say across the various threads.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/55890260

Iain Carter wrote:Yadda, yadda yadda...

I get the point, Mac. Yes, Reed's previous doesn't help, but the idea you assume he's cheating here is as pathetic as it's based on f-all. He gets a bad rap, simply because he's not 'likeable' and, more to the point, he doesn't give a 4X what you think.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 3:03 pm

BlueCoverman wrote:And why the insistence from Reed about asking playing partners and the volunteer if they had seen it bounce? Because he was already planning ahead, dependent on their answer. If the volunteer had said she had seen it bounce would he have acted differently? Of course he would.

I am in no way in favour of being critical simply because of previous history.But I find very little defence for Reed on this occasion.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 3:04 pm

McLaren wrote:
BlueCoverman wrote:That's Xander Schauffelle as well as Jordan Spieth won't play with him in the Ryder Cup then!

This could be Navy's route to playing in the RC. A captains pick for the only person left who will play with Reed.

For the US? picard

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 3:56 pm

Shotrock

I think he was probably fine in terms of the rules, in a sort of literal way. But there was something pretty fishy about the way Reed moved the ball before anyone else got a look. He may well be within his rights to expect to be able to make the judgement solely be himself as per the rules but I am not sure he has earned that right in terms of his competitors trust in him to make the correct call.

I am sure he wasn't thinking about the broader picture during the incident, but if we do it is clear this situation has further damaged his reputation. Can sponsors really be that interested in associating with his brand at this point?

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 3:56 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:
BlueCoverman wrote:That's Xander Schauffelle as well as Jordan Spieth won't play with him in the Ryder Cup then!

This could be Navy's route to playing in the RC. A captains pick for the only person left who will play with Reed.
For the US? :picard:

Was just a joke.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 4:01 pm

Navy

A lot of cheating in golf is something only the player themselves can really confirm. In this instance to be 100% sure Reed cheated or tried to heavily manipulate the rule to his advantage we would probably need him to fess up.

I am not sure I have ever said he definitely cheated in this case, but what is for sure is the manner in which he quickly moved the ball means no one else can verify if it was imbedded. All we have left is the word of Patrick Reed. Is it really that pathetic to assume he probably expanded the definition of imbedded to the max?

From high school, through college and now on the PGAT he has been caught improving his lie. He cannot complain that people are having a go it him over this based on that history.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 4:26 pm

Not that I want betting companies to be the arbiters of what is in the spirit of the rules (we have been there) or that I don't realise there is some marketing angle to this, but a betting firm has refunded some bets due to Reeds controversial drop.

Golf digest wrote:Shortly after the conclusion of the tournament, PointsBet announced it was giving a refund on all pre-tournament outright winner wagers. The move was made due to Reed's controversial drop during Saturday's third round at Torrey Pines.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/sportsbook-refunds-all-pre-tournament-bets-due-to-patrick-reed-controversy?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=golfdigest

by I'm never wrong Mon 01 Feb 2021, 4:42 pm

McLaren wrote:Please read up on both incidents or watch the footage. Rory and Reeds situations played out very differently.

Just for clarity Mac, can you post a link where Sabbatini examines McIlroys embedded ball? All I have seen is that McIlroy asks Sabbatini for what he does next. (because the rule has changed from dropping as close to original spot to now a club length.)

by BlueCoverman Mon 01 Feb 2021, 4:44 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
BlueCoverman wrote:I watched all the coverage and read all the reports. No jumping to conclusions or double standards from me.

Just bias then?

Certainly not. Reed will be in my Fantasy League team this week naturally! Laugh

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:07 pm

I'm never wrong wrote:
McLaren wrote:Please read up on both incidents or watch the footage. Rory and Reeds situations played out very differently.
Just for clarity Mac, can you post a link where Sabbatini examines McIlroys embedded ball? All I have seen is that McIlroy asks Sabbatini for what he does next. (because the rule has changed from dropping as close to original spot to now a club length.)

That is it. And McIlroy said in his interview about it that he consulted Sabbatini.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:21 pm

McLaren wrote:Navy

A lot of cheating in golf is something only the player themselves can really confirm. In this instance to be 100% sure Reed cheated or tried to heavily manipulate the rule to his advantage we would probably need him to fess up.

I am not sure I have ever said he definitely cheated in this case, but what is for sure is the manner in which he quickly moved the ball means no one else can verify if it was imbedded. All we have left is the word of Patrick Reed. Is it really that pathetic to assume he probably expanded the definition of imbedded to the max?

From high school, through college and now on the PGAT he has been caught improving his lie. He cannot complain that people are having a go it him over this based on that history.

I get the point, Mac, and I don't disagree that he's made it difficult for himself over belief re. this instance. That said though, I think that given the tarring and feathering that goes on re. cheating in golf (as if it's rare Laugh

), it should really be the case that players are given the benefit of the doubt. TBH, I think it would be fun if Reed felt he wanted to explore slander/libel cases - can't imagine he will, but has the Tour ever sanctioned him, officially, as a cheat? If not, then previous is really heresay, isn't it and I would imagine he might have some good cases.
All the high school etc stuff is heresay. This sort of thing is tough to 'prove' and it's too easy to trash someone's reputation when one doesn't know for sure that it's the case.

Anyway, it appears accepted on here that he cheated the other day. I'm not going to join in.

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:22 pm

McLaren wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:
BlueCoverman wrote:That's Xander Schauffelle as well as Jordan Spieth won't play with him in the Ryder Cup then!

This could be Navy's route to playing in the RC. A captains pick for the only person left who will play with Reed.
For the US?

Was just a joke.

Ah. OK, didn't realise. I've laughed now...

by **navyblueshorts** Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:23 pm

BlueCoverman wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:
BlueCoverman wrote:I watched all the coverage and read all the reports. No jumping to conclusions or double standards from me.

Just bias then?

Certainly not. Reed will be in my Fantasy League team this week naturally!

by I'm never wrong Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:32 pm

McLaren wrote:
I'm never wrong wrote:
McLaren wrote:Please read up on both incidents or watch the footage. Rory and Reeds situations played out very differently.
Just for clarity Mac, can you post a link where Sabbatini examines McIlroys embedded ball? All I have seen is that McIlroy asks Sabbatini for what he does next. (because the rule has changed from dropping as close to original spot to now a club length.)

That is it. And McIlroy said in his interview about it that he consulted Sabbatini.

Consulted Sabbatini about what Mac? His embedded ball or procedure? Show me where it was about the embedded lie.
Because if it was just procedure, then the only difference between Rory and Reed is that Reed consulted a rules official about his lie and Rory didn't. Both got advice re procedure.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:37 pm

You can find the interview with Rory everywhere. I am not about to do your googling for you. Read it and make up your own mind.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 5:53 pm

INW

Here is any easy way to think about this. The rules of golf rely on player honesty, although not perfect we pretty much have to assume each player is honest until proven otherwise. In Reeds case there is reason to believe he isn't honest. This leaves us wondering whether that ball was really imbedded for Reed, while for Rory I am more than happy to believe he did not try any shenanigans.

by I'm never wrong Mon 01 Feb 2021, 6:07 pm

McLaren wrote:You can find the interview with Rory everywhere. I am not about to do your googling for you. Read it and make up your own mind.

Yet you always ask us to explain and link to specific pages. One rule for you eh?

by beninho Mon 01 Feb 2021, 6:14 pm

The only person who knows if he cheated is Reed. But, it does seem unlikely that it was embedded based on the replay. I find it strange that he asked if it bounced, well before he got there. I really can't see how any rules official could confirm anything, when he didn't actually see the lie.

Do I trust Reed, do I bollix.

by beninho Mon 01 Feb 2021, 6:17 pm

Though, I would like to see more players making decisions themselves, without the need to call in an official

by Shotrock Mon 01 Feb 2021, 6:33 pm

From Mark Lye (on the Golf Channel) to Sir Nick (on CBS), they both made a big deal on the "call your playing partner over." Of course, that has nothing to do with the rules, just the importance of keeping things as clear as possible for PR purposes.

In the court of public opinion as well as in the locker room, I think Reed has lost this one.

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 8:30 pm

Shotrock wrote:

In the court of public opinion as well as in the locker room, I think Reed has lost this one.

I think this is the main point. Whatever the rules book says Reed has added more to fuel to the fire in terms of his negative public and peer perception.

by GPB Mon 01 Feb 2021, 8:39 pm

One difference between Rory's and Reed's incident: Rory's ball bounced and it is possible (IMOunlikely) that it returned to its own pitchmark. The replay that I saw doesn't rule out that possibility.

The replay on Reed's ball that it definitely did not return to its own pitchmark.

The PGATour rules official at the scene of Reed's incident, Brad Fabel, concurred that there was a "lip" and the ball could have been embedded. Since we know that the ball bounced there are these possibilities

1. Outside agency (volunteer and/or marshall) stepped on the bal.
2. Ball landed in another players pitchmark
3. Reed exerted a downward force on the ball before picking it up, to make the indentation in ground.
4. Reed and Fabel's standard for an embedded ball is looser than a $20 hooker

Numbers, IMO, #1 and #2 are highly unlikely.

Scenario #3 is the most sinister, yet very possible, given Reed's reputation. Reed asked the volunteer if the ball bounced as she replied that she didn't see it bounce. That opened the door for Reed to claim an embedded ball if he didn't like the lie. His actions were very curious. He squatted down and spent a long fiddling with the lie. He didn't immediately set the ball aside.

Scenario #4 is troubling. Assuming #3 did not happen, how can a player reasonably assess the ball being embedded given that ball bounced and did not return to its own pitchmark. IMO, in legal terms, Reed made "leading" statements to Fabel to make him concur that the ball was embedded.

I think Reed did something nefarious with the golf ball to make look like the ground was impacted. And I make this judgment mostly based on Reed's soiled reputation.

==========

I also think CBS has a lot of culpability in the Reed incident. That shot was shown on the broadcast prior to Reed inspecting his lie and calling in Brad Fabel. No one on the CBS broadcast team was apparently watching the telecast. If they did, they did not speak up. Nick Faldo, Ian Baker Finch, Frank Nobilo, Jim Nantz, and Rules Booth Official Ken Tackett. Not one of them spoke up.

Anyone of them could have prevented the free drop if they spoke up. They could have contacted the rules officials to radio Brad Fabel to tell him that the ball had bounced and did not return to its own pitchmark

I can't understand with all the social media muckrakers, that this is not getting any traction,

by McLaren Mon 01 Feb 2021, 8:54 pm

GPB

The more I think about this I think it is simply the case that the public and his peers have no confidence in Reed to do the right thing.

This case has highlighted that even when following the letter of the rules of golf you can still cast doubt on the situation if the player involved does not fulfill the requirement the rules have for a player to partake in a degree of honesty.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 02 Feb 2021, 9:38 am

McLaren wrote:You can find the interview with Rory everywhere. I am not about to do your googling for you. Read it and make up your own mind.

So. Can't back up the detail you alleged to have taken place then?

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 02 Feb 2021, 9:41 am

beninho wrote:The only person who knows if he cheated is Reed. But, it does seem unlikely that it was embedded based on the replay. I find it strange that he asked if it bounced, well before he got there. I really can't see how any rules official could confirm anything, when he didn't actually see the lie.

Do I trust Reed, do I bollix.

Why? The ground was wet; everyone knew that and the fact they could get relief from plugged lies. The official was confirming what Reed did as a result of declaring the ball plugged. You're extrapolating.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 02 Feb 2021, 9:41 am

beninho wrote:Though, I would like to see more players making decisions themselves, without the need to call in an official

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 02 Feb 2021, 9:47 am

Shotrock wrote:From Mark Lye (on the Golf Channel) to Sir Nick (on CBS), they both made a big deal on the "call your playing partner over." Of course, that has nothing to do with the rules, just the importance of keeping things as clear as possible for PR purposes.

In the court of public opinion as well as in the locker room, I think Reed has lost this one.

That would be that same Faldo who did this?

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/golf-a-sorry-story-of-rough-and-roll-1352839.html

I saw this at the time. Everyone and their dog knew what had happened. Hardly a paragon of "the spirit of the game", eh? Perhaps don't lecture others on this sort of thing, Nick.

by Davie Tue 02 Feb 2021, 10:05 am

GPB wrote:
1. Outside agency (volunteer and/or marshall) stepped on the bal.

This seems at least plausible. Not sure why more hasn't been made of it

by McLaren Tue 02 Feb 2021, 2:57 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:You can find the interview with Rory everywhere. I am not about to do your googling for you. Read it and make up your own mind.
So. Can't back up the detail you alleged to have taken place then?

As I said you can easily find the interview. Make your own mind up.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 02 Feb 2021, 5:25 pm

McLaren wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:You can find the interview with Rory everywhere. I am not about to do your googling for you. Read it and make up your own mind.
So. Can't back up the detail you alleged to have taken place then?

As I said you can easily find the interview. Make your own mind up.

You made the chuffing claim; your job to evidence. Except you can't, can you? Using the new 'Reed Clause', I take past performance in this area on your part to draw the conclusion that your claim has no grounds

.

by McLaren Tue 02 Feb 2021, 5:56 pm

Navy, what are you going on about? Are you saying the Rory interview doesn't exist?

by beninho Tue 02 Feb 2021, 6:40 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
beninho wrote:Though, I would like to see more players making decisions themselves, without the need to call in an official

You dont? I woukd have been more comfortable with Reed, just picking, marking it and dropping it, after advising his playing partners, then the fudge he made of it. If, you are confident that the ball is embedded you follow the rules.

I heard on tge NLU pod a good point. If Rory says it was embedded would you trust him? If Reed says it, woukd you trust him the same?

by I'm never wrong Tue 02 Feb 2021, 7:00 pm

McLaren wrote:Navy, what are you going on about? Are you saying the Rory interview doesn't exist?

My point Mac is that you said Rory consulted with Sabbatini about whether the balll was embedded. All I can find is that McIlroy told Sabbatini his ball was embedded and consulted with him as what to do next.
So what I am saying is that someone else checked what Reed did, but no one did with McIlroy.

by Sponsored content