why golf sucks

bugstud · #1 10-17-2005, 06:53 AM

espn story

I really like sports where you can get someone dq'ed days later on inconclusive tape evidence instead of saying something about it when it's happening.

pokerdirty · #2 10-17-2005, 08:54 AM

yeah, i saw this. this was really sketchy. the sad thing was, if it was anyone other than wie or sorenstam, it would have been overlooked.

nolanfan34 · #3 10-17-2005, 11:25 AM

I love that the SI guy somehow could tell that she was getting an advantage by a whole foot??? Hard to believe that she really got much of an advantage, but I guess a rule is a rule. Still pretty weak though.

Michelle will just have to cry herself to sleep with her $10 million in endorsement dollars...

Clarkmeister · #4 10-17-2005, 11:32 AM

The worst is how much of a setup it sounds like:

[ QUOTE ]
Johnston (Wie's caddy), who has spent the last 12 years caddying for Juli Inkster, got into a heated discussion with Bamberger as Wie and her family left Bighorn (after the DQ on Sunday night) in a steady rain.

Johnston was bothered that Bamberger, who was at the seventh green when Wie took the drop, waited a day before raising it with tour officials. Had she been notified Saturday before signing her card, she would not have been disqualified.

Bamberger said he paced it off after Wie, playing in the final group Saturday, finished the hole.

"I did it in crude way -- 'Let's see what she has to say.' I was hopeful she could convince me," in the Saturday interview, Bamberger said. "I thought about it more and was just uncomfortable that I knew something. Integrity is at the heart of the game. I don't think she cheated. I think she was just hasty."

Asked why he didn't bring it up before the third round ended, Bamberger said, "That didn't occur to me. I was still in my reporter's mode. I wanted to talk to her first."

[/ QUOTE ]

HDPM · #5 10-17-2005, 12:45 PM

Didn't see it. The part I don't like is waiting until the end of the tournament. It should have been addressed before the end IMO. However, Michelle should realize it is much better for her that she was DQ'd. For a couple reasons. One is that she learned a good lesson. She asked for a favorable ruling earlier and got it. She needed to be careful with her drops. And yes, she is going to be under the microscope her whole career. She needs to get used to it. She is the one making millions. She is the one who is talking about playing the PGA Tour even though she hasn't won even a women's tour event. She isn't an amateur anymore. She took the cash and needs to learn how to deal with it.

The way the whole thing was done is weird. But it is way better she was DQ'd than to have to listen to crap for years over it. Look at what happened to Montgomery over the bad ball replacement issue. People are going to be whispering about him being a cheater forever. No matter the euro tour dealt with it, etc..., he will still hear about it. And Michelle would hear about it if there happen to be any bitchy little backstabbers on the LPGA tour. Think there are any? As it stands she took a drop that was marginally bad and they had to measure out to determine was bad. She was DQ'd over it, so I just don't think she will hear it from the other players. Unclear she could handle a monte type situation very well. So probably better she got DQ'd.

One thing I worry about is slow play. I watched some of the tournament and saw Grace Park take way too long on the par 3 she blew. Granted, she had a whiff and an unplayable and a drop etc.... But after all that she took way too long to play IMO. All the pros do I guess. If Michelle has to get an official for every drop it will be brutal. Already her caddy lines her up and helps her a lot. If the LPGA goes with the awful USGA decision allowing rangefinders, things will get slower. A couple weeks ago the LPGA played a poorly designed trump National which helped slow play, but they were getting around in 6 hours. IOW, things could get slower than they already are, which is hard to believe. Amateurs used to watching pros believe a 4 hour round is acceptable, which it isn't. People think 4:30 isn't bad, when anything longer than 3:30 is hardly golf.

pokerdirty · #6 10-17-2005, 12:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
And Michelle would hear about it if there happen to be any bitchy little backstabbers on the LPGA tour. Think there are any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, the LPGA are a bunch of trust fund, "daddy's little girl", JAP bitches. That being said, I'm sure there will be some whispers in the clubhouse about this, but lifelong cheater? I think this blows over really fast.

Aces McGee · #7 10-17-2005, 01:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think this blows over really fast

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he was suggesting that, had she not been disqualified for it, she'd have been labeled a cheater. Since she didn't "get away with it," everyone is able to see it as an honest mistake, maybe feel a bit bad for her, (rightfully) villify Michael Bamberger, and move on, with no harm done to Wie's image.

-McGee

WLVRYN · #8 10-17-2005, 01:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If the LPGA goes with the awful USGA decision allowing rangefinders, things will get slower.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you argue that rangefinders will slow down play? How much time do the pros spend trying to figure out the right yardage looking at their yardage books and finding sprinklers. I cant imagine knowing the right distance immediately will slow down play at all. In fact, I have to believe it will have the opposite effect. Our club has allowed them for the last two years and I believe it has really sped up the pace of play.

I played in the Las Vegas/Michelin pro-am tourney last year with Ben Crane and it was excruciating as he and his caddy discussed distances, often discussion of differences of 2 yards (and I wont even go into his preshot routine, like watching paint dry).

andyfox · #9 10-17-2005, 01:09 PM

Towards the end of his career on the regular tour, when he was in his 60s, Sam Snead signed an incorrect scorecard at the L.A. Open. He had shot a great round the first day and a pretty good one the second day. But he made some kind of mistake on the card and the officials allowed him to rectify the mistake. There was no question they made an exception for him and some of the players, anonymously, complained that he was given a break because of who he was. It was evident the officials didn't want Snead disqualified because he was an attraction and they wanted him around for the last two days.

Anyway, the whole to-do was front page news, which took the spotlight away from whoever won the tournament. This situation is sort of similar in that it's taken the spotlight away from Aneka's remarkable achievements: winning the same tournament five times, winning player of the year eight times, her eighth win of the year, her 64th overall win.

HDPM · #10 10-17-2005, 03:00 PM

How can I argue it? You are the unfortunate one who played with Ben Crane. How is adding a rangefinder to his preshot routine going to speed him up? The pros will still need pin sheets and yardages over the bunkers, mounds, etc... Instead of using a yardage book for the total yardage, they might use the rangefinder, although they might use both. So they will shoot a yardage to the pin then still go through the drill of saying 'It is 13 on, 142 over the bunker, etc...' At best it will be a marginal improvement. At worst the game will be slowed down. No real surprise as the USGA has abdicated all responsibility and has contributed to allowing the game to be ruined.

As to Ben Crane, it is a shame the PGA Tour doesn't enforce am adequate slow play penalty. Fines don't cut it. Only 2 strokes or DQ's will get it done.