Jim Furyk was disqualified from The Barclays, this week’s tour stop, because he missed his tee time for the pro-am. It’s interesting to see all of the pros and cons on The Golf Channel Blog. Surely Jim just flat out screwed up. His cell phone, which he used for an alarm clock, was out of power and did not work. This seems like the kind of mistake that could happen to many of us.
The tour had to pass the rule about missing the pro-am, because it has to be a nightmare for a pro trying to make a living, to have to play golf for 6 hours with dreadful hackers.
On the other hand, the most sensible comments I ever heard from a pro about pro-ams came from Greg Norman. Norman talked about how he appreciated the money the amateurs paid (much of which ends up with a charity). But Greg tried to establish a rapport with the business savvy golfers, and, over the years, established many great business connections in the process. This seems like a real win win for Greg AND the players. How much fun would it be to talk to your local country club friends about your business relationship with Greg Norman?
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tiger in the news again.
Well there are 2 big news stories about the world of golf floating around cyberspace.
The first is about Elin Nordegrin, Tiger Woods’ now ex-wife, who gave an interview to the esteemed “People” magazine. I’m not really interested in Tiger’s private life, and I doubt if many golf fans are. I am kind of interested in the divorce from a divorce lawyer point of view. None of my cases involve a husband who is one of the most famous people in the world, and who has made a billion dollars in his 33 year life. It is interesting to see that no matter how charmed one’s life is, as Tiger’s appeared to be, he is not immune from the mistakes, heartache, trouble, and stress that ordinary Joes out there suffer.
I’m still rooting for Tiger to return to top form next year, win a Major or two, and gain a little ground on the greatest golfer in history, Jack Nicklaus.
The first is about Elin Nordegrin, Tiger Woods’ now ex-wife, who gave an interview to the esteemed “People” magazine. I’m not really interested in Tiger’s private life, and I doubt if many golf fans are. I am kind of interested in the divorce from a divorce lawyer point of view. None of my cases involve a husband who is one of the most famous people in the world, and who has made a billion dollars in his 33 year life. It is interesting to see that no matter how charmed one’s life is, as Tiger’s appeared to be, he is not immune from the mistakes, heartache, trouble, and stress that ordinary Joes out there suffer.
I’m still rooting for Tiger to return to top form next year, win a Major or two, and gain a little ground on the greatest golfer in history, Jack Nicklaus.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Dustin Johnson was robbed by erroneous decision.
I have been away in Cape May on vacation, and away from the keyboard, so I haven’t had a chance to blog on the PGA. But I’m home now, and I just had to weigh in on the developments in the PGA. After all, I’m probably the only golf writer in the country who is also an experienced lawyer and a sitting judge. I do interpret rules and laws for a living, so maybe I’m the right guy to speak on this.
In my opinion, Dustin Johnson was robbed. He was robbed by an incorrect decision by the PGA rules officials, who incorrectly assessed him a 2 stroke penalty on the 72nd hole of the tournament. The penalty raised his score, which meant that he was no longer ties for the lead, and therefore was not in the playoff.
Before I explain why I think they erred, I’d like to point out a couple of things. First, Johnson hit a terrible tee shot, way off line, for one of the most critical shots of his young career. If he had hit the ball in the fairway, none of this would have happened.
Secondly, the rules official who was widely interviewed about the decision explained his decision well and competently. He appears to be a well informed, well spoken gentleman who no doubt would have preferred the whole mess had never happened.
There was no question that Dustin grounded his club before he hit his second shot. That meant that the only question was whether he was in a bunker when he grounded the club. The official based his decision that the ball indeed was in a bunker on the rules sheet which was handed out to players, and posted in the locker room read, in pertinent part:
Notice to Competitors - Bunkers
1. All areas of the course that were designed and built as sand bunkers will be played as bunkers (hazards), whether or not they have been raked.
Johnson knew, as does every golfer with a decent amount of experience, that you cannot ground your club in a hazard. If he had known it was a hazard, he would not have grounded his club. My question is: How was he supposed to know he was in a sand bunker? It did not look like a bunker. It was not marked like a bunker. It did not appear to be designed and built as a sand bunker. There were thousands of fans standing and walking around in the area.
There was no reason whatsoever to think that this was a bunker. I see no reason whatsoever to conclude that the area where his ball lay was “designed and built” as a bunker, which is the key language here.
This fantastic young player was unfairly deprived of a chance to win in the playoff by an incorrect ruling. It is a damn shame.
In my opinion, Dustin Johnson was robbed. He was robbed by an incorrect decision by the PGA rules officials, who incorrectly assessed him a 2 stroke penalty on the 72nd hole of the tournament. The penalty raised his score, which meant that he was no longer ties for the lead, and therefore was not in the playoff.
Before I explain why I think they erred, I’d like to point out a couple of things. First, Johnson hit a terrible tee shot, way off line, for one of the most critical shots of his young career. If he had hit the ball in the fairway, none of this would have happened.
Secondly, the rules official who was widely interviewed about the decision explained his decision well and competently. He appears to be a well informed, well spoken gentleman who no doubt would have preferred the whole mess had never happened.
There was no question that Dustin grounded his club before he hit his second shot. That meant that the only question was whether he was in a bunker when he grounded the club. The official based his decision that the ball indeed was in a bunker on the rules sheet which was handed out to players, and posted in the locker room read, in pertinent part:
Notice to Competitors - Bunkers
1. All areas of the course that were designed and built as sand bunkers will be played as bunkers (hazards), whether or not they have been raked.
Johnson knew, as does every golfer with a decent amount of experience, that you cannot ground your club in a hazard. If he had known it was a hazard, he would not have grounded his club. My question is: How was he supposed to know he was in a sand bunker? It did not look like a bunker. It was not marked like a bunker. It did not appear to be designed and built as a sand bunker. There were thousands of fans standing and walking around in the area.
There was no reason whatsoever to think that this was a bunker. I see no reason whatsoever to conclude that the area where his ball lay was “designed and built” as a bunker, which is the key language here.
This fantastic young player was unfairly deprived of a chance to win in the playoff by an incorrect ruling. It is a damn shame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)