nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

PGA Tour Thread

GreeBo

Please use this thread for discussing anything to do with the "current" event on the PGA Tour.

Find more posts tagged with

pga tour

Quick Links

Comments

Tom.D.BJJ

Its cheating pure and simple

First Up

Same category as Tiger getting the gallery to shove a boulder out of his way. Not cheating, just poor sportsmanship. (And yes, I know its a business.)

Russman

Tom.D.BJJ wrote: »

Its cheating pure and simple

Whatever about the sprinklers (at least there's kind of, sort of, a way for those to be ok - sometimes the rules help you), the missing ball looked really bad. They were all way too willing to just accept it. Then again, when Bones was getting a yardage Phil had to move his bag out of the way and step to the side because they were actually on the forward tee for a different hole, so if there was a ball there in the first place it probably wasn't a random find and chances are it was Phil's.

tritriagain

First Up wrote: »

Same category as Tiger getting the gallery to shove a boulder out of his way. Not cheating, just poor sportsmanship. (And yes, I know its a business.)

The sprinkler situation was poor sportsmanship but surely the lost ball situation is just pure bs. If it takes only the word of a fan all the pros should position a fan so if ball goes missing you have cover. Dustin could have done it when ball went missing. Mind you it would have been embarrassing when ball eventually fell from tree. There is no way you would get away with this at an amateur comp.

Russman

First Up wrote: »

Not cheating, just poor sportsmanship.

This ^^^^ exactly.

First Up

tritriagain wrote:

The sprinkler situation was poor sportsmanship but surely the lost ball situation is just pure bs.

Tiger had one of those too - hit it into a maintenace yard and got a free drop as someone saw someone with a ball.

Tom.D.BJJ

First Up wrote: »

Not cheating, just poor sportsmanship.)

Banditry, cheating or poor sportsmanship. Call it what you want, but i think its pretty much the same thing.

ForeRight

The ball on the tee that was "picked up" was downright nonsense.

As if a ball landed smack bang in the middle of a tee box and nobody saw it straight away landing.

The original shout from a fan then when Phil was looking in a totally different direction was "maybe somebody picked it up" to which imo Phil pounced on and it looked like there was pressure put on the fan who then said yeah it was there(pointing to middle of tee box) and someone picked it up.

Absolute BS!!!! Disgraceful from the referee and Phil.

First time in the bushes he was giving it billy big balls mr moral saying I know this looks bad bla bla bla... second time he didn't give a crap and just went in with his driver to get his relief no big show about it.

It's disgusting the plaudits he is getting over his round now. I'd love someone to question him on it all.

First Up

Tom.D.BJJ wrote:

Banditry, cheating or poor sportsmanship. Call it what you want, but i think its pretty much the same thing.

No, you can't call it cheating. That involves a deliberate breaking of the rules. If a star player goes through a ritual dance with an official live on TV, its not cheating - just bullying.

Phil (or more often Tiger) get ridiculously favourable rulings because the officials know how the US golf industry works. It reflects badly on everyone involved but the real culprit is the PGA who put the officials in that situation.

Seve OB

I was watching the Phil show last night. Can't say I blame him for taking the relief, but who the F is putting sprinklers in bushes.
There should be a rule where you only get free relief from a sprinkler head if it is on closely mown areas.
Didn't see the ball pickup incident. But surely if someone picked up his/a ball and toddled away with it then it's tough titty? I mean, aren't you supposed to identify your ball? How could he do that if there was no ball? The only time I believe you get free relief without having to identify your ball is if it known or virtually certain that it is in GUR.
Sure in that case DJ should of had a free drop when his ball went in the tree.
Rory just didn't fire. Can't of helped watching Phil act the maggot all day, but he stayed in touch. That shot on about 13 which hit the pin and bounced back down the green just kind of summed up his day, just one of those that is not going your way. That ball was sure to finish within a couple if feet.

Some Ace by Thomas. Never seen anything like it.

Looking forward to tonight. Can see this between DJ, Rory & Thomas. Phil could be a surprise but don't so. It would be great to see a good shoot out will all 3 firing on all cylinders.

Nonevernomore

We never seen the sprinklers in the two bushes so I suppose we have to take Phil's word for it that it was obstructing his shot. The missing ball looked extremely dodgy. Why would you have to search for the ball if it was just lying perfectly on the tee box?

Anyway, as poster above said, Rory had a few bad breaks and it didn't go well for him last night. Tonight's his night. 65 and the win!

Running Balance

The commentary made it sound like phil was using the handle of a brush to play golf when i flicked over. I love phil but the commentary was over the top not to mention the amount of talk of what kind of grass seed is on the greens..

Tonight could be amazibg ib fairness

HighLine

Rory, DJ and Justin Thomas in the final 3 ball tonight... now this will be fun!

WHIP IT!

I'm really placing my faith in the golfing Gods to 'level things up' karma-wise with Mickelson tonight.

After the home-town calls he got yesterday, it'd leave a real sour taste if he went on to win here.

C'monnnn Rory!

FixdePitchmark

Happened to me before ball was stolen.

So had to look up rule . Will post rule later . But considerEd an outside agent and if certain you do replace ball without penalty.

I think we are going down wrong route if we say he cheated ?

Anyway he would have got a ruling each time . I imagine .

As Mexico and a golf course. You can only imagine how much water need to grow a golf course . Sprinklers everywhere

mickmackey1

The general consensus seems to be that this is one of the best courses of the entire year.

First Up

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

As Mexico and a golf course. You can only imagine how much water need to grow a golf course . Sprinklers everywhere

Mexico City gets plenty of rain. Its not Abu Dhabi for Pete's sake.

FixdePitchmark

First Up wrote: »

Mexico City gets plenty of rain. Its not Abu Dhabi for Pete's sake.

For Pete's sake you should look up weather stats - there is about 5 to 6 months with little or no rain.

Anyway - are we saying he made up the sprinkler - that is ridiculous stuff.

GS11

Disgraceful from Phil last night, glad to see the comments here,worried some might be defending him, sickening if he ends up winning this.

First Up

FixdePitchmark wrote:

For Pete's sake you should look up weather stats - there is about 5 to 6 months with little or no rain.

Its not exactly a desert.

Aurora1966

Just to let ye all know they do have sprinklers in bushes and trees in Mexico due to the hot climate and thats how the course appears lush and green, they are everywhere over there

First Up

Aurora1966 wrote:

Just to let ye all know they do have sprinklers in bushes and trees in Mexico due to the hot climate and thats how the course appears lush and green, they are everywhere over there

On my visits to Mexico City I go for a run in Chapultepec Park (same name as the golf course but not right beside it). Its a park with grass and stuff and not a sprinkler in sight anywhere.

Some times of year are drier than others but it is not a dry wasteland at any time of year.

Golfgraffix

Are we saying that Phil was lying, that there were no sprinklers?

If so and it's true then he was cheating. If not and there was a sprinkler that he was standing on or that his bell was on then the rules allow for it.

No ?

rickis tache

first competition I will watch through to the end this year. for me the season starts tonight. some leader board.

First Up

Golfgraffix wrote:

Are we saying that Phil was lying, that there were no sprinklers?

I'm sure the rules official checked the sprinkler. But if he couldn't make a swing anyway then it hardly matters there was one. That's where the ruling was against the spirit of the game.

I wonder if someone like John Paramor from the R&A was there would Mickelson have got the same ruling for that or the "lost" ball.

Golfgraffix

First Up wrote: »

I'm sure the rules official checked the sprinkler. But if he couldn't make a swing anyway then it hardly matters there was one. That's where the ruling was against the spirit of the game.

I wonder if someone like John Paramor from the R&A was there would Mickelson have got the same ruling for that or the "lost" ball.

I agree on the last ball, someone had to have been 100% sure that it was picked up.

As for the sprinkler if it was there and he was in it then he was entitled to relief, even a ref like Paramor can't decide what rules to allow and what ones he won't.

I will be villafied here but if it was me I would take the drop. I will qualify that remark with only if the sprinkler was genuinely there.

bren2001

Golfgraffix wrote: »

I agree on the last ball, someone had to have been 100% sure that it was picked up.

As for the sprinkler if it was there and he was in it then he was entitled to relief, even a ref like Paramor can't decide what rules to allow and what ones he won't.

I will be villafied here but if it was me I would take the drop. I will qualify that remark with only if the sprinkler was genuinely there.

I'd take the drop as well. The rules screw me over enough that if I saw one to my benefit, I'd bloody well ulitise it (assuming the sprinkler was there and in my natural stance for the shot). No official could have stopped Mickleson.

All this seems like a load of nonsense. He played inside the rules (didn't see the lost ball one so I'm not referring to that).

WHIP IT!

The speed with which it went from a random fan saying "i think someone picked up a ball over there" to Phil having a free drop was what I found really surprising. It was so readily and eagerly accepted by all concerned. And, if the ball was supposedly on the teebox of an adjoining hole, how could a fan pick it up?? Never saw a fan walkway cross a teebox. And yes, I realise it wasn't a teebox that was 'in play' on the hole.

First Up

Golfgraffix wrote:

As for the sprinkler if it was there and he was in it then he was entitled to relief, even a ref like Paramor can't decide what rules to allow and what ones he won't.

The rule says you get relief if the sprinkler interferes with your stance or intended line of swing. For that to apply, you should have to first demonstrate your stance and/or line of swing. If you can't because of other factors (like being in the middle of a bush) then the rule doesn't (or shouldn't) apply.

HighLine

Phil starting off with another rules official being called in on the first.

With regards to the sprinkler head, the key part of the immovable obstruction rule is the exception ...

"Exception: A player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interference by anything other than an immovable obstruction makes the stroke clearly impracticable or (b) interference by an immovable obstruction would occur only through use of a clearly unreasonable stroke or an unnecessarily abnormal stance, swing or direction of play."