So, who you got winning the PGA Championship?

[Larry Gude]

I did read this morning that the players were told all week about the traps, so it should have been on Johnson's mind and, at the least, asked for a ruling before addressing the ball. But, if the trap was behind the ropes and the crowd was allowed to trample thru it all weekend, that sure seems out of the ordinary.

Totally agree as you can see in my first post on the subject BUT if it was a local rule for the tourney AND they emphasized it, then this is on him, 100% and he should have handled it better, way better.

I would have been like :

 

[Otter]

Totally agree as you can see in my first post on the subject BUT if it was a local rule for the tourney AND they emphasized it, then this is on him, 100% and he should have handled it better, way better.

I would have been like :

I didn't see anything on tv last night or this morning. I didn't get the feeling that Johnson was throwing a fit from what I read. What did he do to make you feel he should have 'handled it better, way better"??

 

[Larry Gude]

I didn't see anything on tv last night or this morning. I didn't get the feeling that Johnson was throwing a fit from what I read. What did he do to make you feel he should have 'handled it better, way better"??

He did not have a fit and he handled it probably as well as could be expected.

What I was looking for was one of those rare moments of grace that are pretty common in golf, but not so much everywhere else in society, when something of this magnitude happens.

He kicked it around and said he doesn't make the rules, never even considered it was a bunker, kinda made excuses before finally saying 'I guess I shoulda looked at the local rules more carefully...'

To get my memorable moment, he would have said, in that really tough moment, "Hey, it was in the local rules and it was emphasized. The ruling is proper and I applaud the officials for doing their job, protecting the game and this is all on me. What a stupid I am!"

 

[Tilted]

Wow.

Looks like they ruled properly.

The ruling, in and of itself, was probably proper. The mistake was allowing those conditions and that local rule to exist simultaneously - and more pointedly, the lack of clarity that resulted (with regard to what was 'designed and built' as a sand bunker).

The guy from the PGA that came out and spoke about the situation took a decidedly defensive posture (though not necessarily tone) from the jump. I suppose that was to be expected, but his response was rather disappointing and lacking because he failed to address the primary issue - how was anyone to know (or in this case, have any reason whatsoever to seek someone out to confirm) that sandy patch had been intended to be a bunker. The rule didn't say that all sand on the course or even all sandy patches were to be played as bunkers.

Sure, if there was any question, players could have asked for a ruling. But, that's just it, there wasn't any question in Dustin's mind, and I doubt there would have been any question in most people's minds. I couldn't see any indication that area had been man-made and intended to be a bunker, and CBS went back after the fact and gave us a pretty good view of the area. If it was a bunker, the fans were not only standing in the bunker all day - they were in the bunker with Dustin when he was playing the shot.

Feherty said that he never considered for one second that might have been a bunker. And, he isn't some nervous kid trying to win his first major and, as a possible result, inclined to not be completely aware of what's going on around him. Feherty was the on course reporter. A big part of his job is to get to the ball and size up the situation, and to then tell the viewers anything they might need to know, or anything that might be the least bit interesting (or not), about the situation. He wasn't distracted by thoughts of what he needed to do to win the hole and contemplating a shot decision - his main job was to be aware of what was going on (particularly with lies), and he's been around the block enough to have a pretty good feel for that. If he says that it never occurred to him that sandy patch might be considered a bunker, I tend to give that some weight and think that the same would be true of most of the players. Not that it matters, but it certainly would have been true of me.

The ruling was probably right - that's one of the things about golf, it takes the emotionless (read: even-handed) and context-irrelevant application of the rules pretty seriously. But, allowing the situation to exist to begin with was a mistake - not a mind boggling inept one, but a mistake nonetheless, and one that doesn't reflect well on the PGA's attention to detail.

 

[Larry Gude]

The ruling, in and of itself, was probably proper. The mistake was allowing those conditions and that local rule to exist simultaneously - and more pointedly, the lack of clarity that resulted (with regard to what was 'designed and built' as a sand bunker).

The guy from the PGA that came out and spoke about the situation took a decidedly defensive posture (though not necessarily tone) from the jump. I suppose that was to be expected, but his response was rather disappointing and lacking because he failed to address the primary issue - how was anyone to know (or in this case, have any reason whatsoever to seek someone out to confirm) that sandy patch had been intended to be a bunker. The rule didn't say that all sand on the course or even all sandy patches were to be played as bunkers.
.

We disagree. I was hot around the collar in Johnsons favor just looking for a lame explanation by the official but, I didn't see a defensive response, at all. What I heard was clear and to the point tinged with a splash of sympathy for the player but dominated with a 'the rules is the rules' tone I'd expect from an official.

 

[Tilted]

I didn't see it, just read the recap on the WaPo..This is total bs if the crowd has been going thru it all tourney..One of the quotes from Johnson was that he didn't even know it was a bunker..

Feherty said it didn't even occur to him that might be a bunker. I don't think the vast majority of people would think that was a bunker (i.e. that it was built and intended to be a bunker), and I don't even think the possibility that it might be would would occur to most people.

 

[Larry Gude]

Sure, if there was any question, players could have asked for a ruling. But, that's just it, there wasn't any question in Dustin's mind, and I doubt there would have been any question in most people's minds. I couldn't see any indication that area had been man-made and intended to be a bunker, and CBS went back after the fact and gave us a pretty good view of the area. If it was a bunker, the fans were not only standing in the bunker all day - they were in the bunker with Dustin when he was playing the shot.

Feherty said that he never considered for one second that might have been a bunker. And, he isn't some nervous kid trying to win his first major and, as a possible result, inclined to not be completely aware of what's going on around him. Feherty was the on course reporter. A big part of his job is to get to the ball and size up the situation, and to then tell the viewers anything they might need to know, or anything that might be the least bit interesting (or not), about the situation. He wasn't distracted by thoughts of what he needed to do to win the hole and contemplating a shot decision - his main job was to be aware of what was going on (particularly with lies), and he's been around the block enough to have a pretty good feel for that. If he says that it never occurred to him that sandy patch might be considered a bunker, I tend to give that some weight and think that the same would be true of most of the players. Not that it matters, but it certainly would have been true of me.

The ruling was probably right - that's one of the things about golf, it takes the emotionless (read: even-handed) and context-irrelevant application of the rules pretty seriously. But, allowing the situation to exist to begin with was a mistake - not a mind boggling inept one, but a mistake nonetheless, and one that doesn't reflect well on the PGA's attention to detail.

I have not seen the local rules sheet and I have not heard anyone confirm that this was a point of emphasis so, all I have is the officials explanation. Given the nature of the course, over 1,000 bunkers, repeat, BUNKERS, it seems right to me that they certainly foresaw the potential for a behind the ropes situation and would have made it clear in the local sheet as well as making it a point of emphasis; if you are in sand anywhere on this course, it was built as and shall be played as a bunker, no grounding your club.

Feherety owes an apology IF he knows that the officials did put it on the sheet and did emphasize it. It does not matter what David or Johnson thought or considered at the moment, in the moment. Sand is sand and should always give pause. Johnson messed up as I understand it. And so did Feherety. To his credit, David mentioned that he NEVER grounded his club in sand in competition even if he was pretty sure it was a waste area and not a bunker for this very reason.

I think this is cut and dried and a great, tough job by the officials.

 

[Larry Gude]

Feherty said it didn't even occur to him that might be a bunker. I don't think the vast majority of people would think that was a bunker (i.e. that it was built and intended to be a bunker), and I don't even think the possibility that it might be would would occur to most people.

I agree and that is why we have the rules and why we have officials.

If it was just on the local sheet, I can see more sympathy for Johnson. If it was also emphasized, this is on him, 100%.

 

[Tilted]

Local rules.

The official came out and said that they went over this with the players not only on the local rules sheet given to each player but emphasized that ALL the sand areas would be played as built and intended; as bunkers and, AND that the player need be aware that this includes bunkers that may be behind the ropes.

But, that's not quite what the rules sheet said. It said that '[all] areas of the course that were designed and built as sand bunkers will be played as bunkers (hazards)' (emphasis mine). I don't think many (if any) people would see that area and think it was designed and built as a sand bunker. That's the issue. The local rule - that bunkers would be played as bunkers regardless of condition - is not in dispute and speaks for itself, but only in so far as it goes.

It was a good, proper ruling, well within the spirit and intent of the rules.

My initial reaction was wrong and would be the same as me arguing a pond or OB behind the ropes should suddenly not count.

If this is true, that it was on the local rules sheet then that is all there is to it. If it is also true that the officials EMPHASIZED this to the players then I lost a boat load of respect for Johnson because he should have bucked up and said so, clearly, in his post round interview. This was a golden moment that could have become legend for the game, and for him, in that classic, honorable way of the player always taking full responsibility in the best spirit of the game.

That what was on the local rules sheet? That that area was designed and built as a bunker was not on the rules sheet, and that's the issue. The local rule, in itself, is not the issue - and the clarity of the local rule doesn't change the character of the actual issue at all. Again, they didn't say that all sandy patches will be played as bunkers.

 

[Larry Gude]

But, that's not quite what the rules sheet said. It said that '[all] areas of the course that were designed and built as sand bunkers will be played as bunkers (hazards)' (emphasis mine). I don't think many (if any) people would see that area and think it was designed and built as a sand bunker. That's the issue. The local rule - that bunkers would be played as bunkers regardless of condition - is not in dispute and speaks for itself, but only in so far as it goes.

I am arguing that we were all caught up in the moment, that, because the crowd was standing right there, it took out of our minds that this could be a bunker. However, there is no doubt in my mind, lookig back at it, that he hit out of a bunker and it seems clear to me, not having been there, that the officials told the players, clearly, "Look, there is sand all over the freaking place around here so, we're gonna play it ALL as a hazard, no matter where it is, including behind the ropes.

Let's leave the general pubics perceptions out of this, shall we? Most of them, most of us, don't know the rules and play the game casually and would have given one another that one which would be incorrect.

 

[Tilted]

I have not seen the local rules sheet and I have not heard anyone confirm that this was a point of emphasis so, all I have is the officials explanation. Given the nature of the course, over 1,000 bunkers, repeat, BUNKERS, it seems right to me that they certainly foresaw the potential for a behind the ropes situation and would have made it clear in the local sheet as well as making it a point of emphasis; if you are in sand anywhere on this course, it was built as and shall be played as a bunker, no grounding your club. That's the point - that was not the situation and is not what was on the rule sheet. This isn't the actual rules sheet, but it was released by the PGA in response to this incident and contains the local rule in question.

Feherety owes an apology IF he knows that the officials did put it on the sheet and did emphasize it. It does not matter what David or Johnson thought or considered at the moment, in the moment. Sand is sand and should always give pause. Johnson messed up as I understand it. And so did Feherety. To his credit, David mentioned that he NEVER grounded his club in sand in competition even if he was pretty sure it was a waste area and not a bunker for this very reason.

I think this is cut and dried and a great, tough job by the officials.

But what Feherty said didn't speak to what was on the rules sheet and emphasized. No one claims that it was empasized that all sandy patches were intended to be bunkers. They claimed that all areas that were intended to be bunkers were to be played as bunkers even if their condition has been degraded.

No one disputes that the local rule existed and that the players should have been aware of it.

 

[Otter]

Still, pretty amazing that the TV guys, on the course reporter, Johnson and his caddy all missed the fact that he was in a bunker. I looked last night for the TV sequence of Johnson playing the 18th on youtube..couldn't find it..I did hear an update on the radio in realtime, saying Johnson just needed a par on the 18th, and had driven into the rough on 18 but had a good lie. It wasn't til later that I read that he was penalized for grounding in a bunker. I figured he must have hit his 2nd shot into a greenside bunker and it happened there..Was thinking, gawd, this is the same guy that blew another major with an 82 and now this..doh!!! lol

 

[Larry Gude]

Again, they didn't say that all sandy patches will be played as bunkers.

Oh, come on! That was a bunker! If the ropes had been back behind it and it wasn't trampled all week long and the crowd hadn't been up his ass while he made the swing, I think we'd have all gone "Oh ####! He grounded!!!"

I get the perception, I get the sense of injustice BECAUSE it was behind the ropes and because people were right there. However, OB is sometimes behind the ropes, water hazards are sometimes behind the ropes.

I do not like, at all, that they declared bunkers behind the ropes that people might be camping in as hazards. However, until I hear otherwise, that is in fact what the rule was and it was, should have been clear, to Johnson.

 

[Tilted]

I am arguing that we were all caught up in the moment, that, because the crowd was standing right there, it took out of our minds that this could be a bunker. However, there is no doubt in my mind, lookig back at it, that he hit out of a bunker and it seems clear to me, not having been there, that the officials told the players, clearly, "Look, there is sand all over the freaking place around here so, we're gonna play it ALL as a hazard, no matter where it is, including behind the ropes.

And my point is that, by all indications, that is NOT what the players were told.

Let's leave the general pubics perceptions out of this, shall we? Most of them, most of us, don't know the rules and play the game casually and would have given one another that one which would be incorrect.

That's true - most casual players would say, 'man drop that ball over here, you shouldn't have to play out of that ####'.

 

[Larry Gude]

Still, pretty amazing that the TV guys, on the course reporter, Johnson and his caddy all missed the fact that he was in a bunker.

I think that is what is feeding the sense of 'controversy' where there is none; the rules were clear. That said, none of us like egg on our face and we all, the caddy, player and announcers as well, we caught up in a tense, exciting moment in an intense exciting finish. I applaud the officials for getting on it as quick as they did and allowing him to finish the hole first. Had they not, there would have been a bunch of calls from rules officials and tight assed players from all over the globe pointing out he was in a bunker and grounded his club.

 

[Larry Gude]

And my point is that, by all indications, that is NOT what the players were told.

By 'all indications', you are excluding what the official said on national TV, yes?

I'd like to see the sheet and hear other players comments.

 

[Larry Gude]

That's true - most casual players would say, 'man drop that ball over here, you shouldn't have to play out of that ####'.

However, if it is you and me on a Sunday, there is no rope and no drunks standing in the bunker and if were playing for a few bucks, I'm guessing we'd play it as a hazard.

 

[Tilted]

Oh, come on! That was a bunker! If the ropes had been back behind it and it wasn't trampled all week long and the crowd hadn't been up his ass while he made the swing, I think we'd have all gone "Oh ####! He grounded!!!"

I get the perception, I get the sense of injustice BECAUSE it was behind the ropes and because people were right there. However, OB is sometimes behind the ropes, water hazards are sometimes behind the ropes.

I do not like, at all, that they declared bunkers behind the ropes that people might be camping in as hazards. However, until I hear otherwise, that is in fact what the rule was and it was, should have been clear, to Johnson.

It should have been clear to Dustin that areas intended and built to be bunkers were to be played as bunkers, regardless of condition. That point is not at all in dispute.

But, no, I probably wouldn't have considered for one second that area was intended and built to be a bunker. They went back and showed some pretty good video of the area, and there was nothing indicating it was a man-made area. But, as you said, let's leave the amateur public's perception out of it and rely on the one man who was there and whose job it was to be aware of and comment on such things. Feherty knows a thing or two about golf and he was right there (and went back after the fact for a more deliberate look), and he said it hadn't even occurred to him that it might be a bunker - not that he didn't think it was a bunker, but that it hadn't even occurred to him that it might be.

 

[Larry Gude]

It should have been clear to Dustin that areas intended and built to be bunkers were to be played as bunkers, regardless of condition. That point is not at all in dispute.

But, no, I probably wouldn't have considered for one second that area was intended and built to be a bunker. They went back and showed some pretty good video of the area, and there was nothing indicating it was a man-made area. But, as you said, let's leave the amateur public's perception out of it and rely on the one man who was there and whose job it was to be aware of and comment on such things. Feherty knows a thing or two about golf and he was right there (and went back after the fact for a more deliberate look), and he said it hadn't even occurred to him that it might be a bunker - not that he didn't think it was a bunker, but that it hadn't even occurred to him that it might be.

David was in CYA mode. When, on air, he said 'I don't even see a lip' one of the drunks standing next to him immediately pointed the lip out.

Again, my reaction at the time was, as I posted, no way this can be a bunker BEHIND the ropes with tents pitched in it, a Jiffy John and three hundred beer cups. However, the official said it was in the local sheet AND they emphasized it AND, upon reflection, to me, it seems right that they would have done so given the nature of the course and obvious potential for this situation.

We got lost in the moment. Especially Johnson. The officials...did not.

 

[Tilted]

By 'all indications', you are excluding what the official said on national TV, yes?

I'd like to see the sheet and hear other players comments.

I linked a PGA release including the rule in question in a previous post.

I'm not excluding what that official said at all, I'm saying he didn't say that all sand on the course would be played as a bunker.


Damnit, I've got important stuff to post about (like these new divorce insurance policies I read about over the weekend) and I'm stuck here talking about this silly stuff, that neither you or I really care about, because its more fun than talking about the important stuff that gets really old after a while.