Women's US Open - will you watch?

[revkev]

Back at Kor I do agree with everything that you wrote until a small aspect of your final statement. So I believe the USGA had to acess a penalty based on its rules and past precedent on replay use. I do believe that it told the players as soon as it was able to (the rest of the civilized world could have done it prior to the players hitting their putts on the 17th green shots because it has things like IPads and cell phones and reviews of shots take place in real time).

 

Breaks good and bad are a part of golf. Being called for a penalty that could only be observed by the most technologically sophisticated equipment available is not golf as it has been known for the overwhelmimg majority of the sport's 800 years of existence is another matter.

 

In the end these two USGA debacles should force it into the modern world. A clear technology rule should be put in place for all tournaments including a time limit on when such penalties might be called and perhaps even a replay official in a command center with the authority to make fi penal decisions and the ability to communicate them to the official walking with each group or in earlier rounds on sight.

 

The shot took place in a bunker 170 yards away. It took at least 5 minutes for Anna to get to her ball and another three or four more minutes before she actually played her next shot and then more time still before she putted out.

 

In other major sports we go bonkers if a review takes two minutes but we're willing to accept twenty plus minutes over what was so straight forward and obvious that a decision could be made in ten seconds and the replay was available immediately. I'd like to think there's a much simpler and fairer way to do this.

[chemclub]

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

I can only imagine how much worse Golf would be if Roger Goodell was running things.

 

You have to admit though, when something like an odd ruling comes down in the NFL, they are very quick to look at it and even change it (over a few seasons). Fans of Dallas and Detroit probably disagree with me and feel not enough was done after the "not a catch" plays.

 

I like that in the NFL there is at least an attitude that nothing is sacred, but that might also be because American football is one of the most complex games we have. There are so many unforeseeable that the game might not function if it weren't adaptable.

[chemclub]

The shot took place in a bunker 170 yards away. It took at least 5 minutes for Anna to get to her ball and another three or four more minutes before she actually played her next shot and then more time still before she putted out.

 

In other major sports we go bonkers if a review takes two minutes but we're willing to accept twenty plus minutes over what was so straight forward and obvious that a decision could be made in ten seconds and the replay was available immediately. I'd like to think there's a much simpler and fairer way to do this.

 

A lot of other sports pause the game while a play is under review. I don't see why golf couldn't do this as well. 

 

And it shouldn't take more than a few minutes. If you can't make the ruling after watching the video 5 times then you give the benefit of the doubt to the player... "insufficient evidence to overturn"

 

You don't need to have a review booth down on the field. The fat cats in the booth can just radio down. The lag time to assigning the penalty is pretty ridiculous in 2016. 

[revkev]

There really is a built in delay in golf anyway between shots. Other than a question about a matter on the green it should be resolved before the tee ball is hit on the next hole. If it happens on the green then before completion of the following hole.

 

Sent from my VS986 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[silver & black]

You have to admit though, when something like an odd ruling comes down in the NFL, they are very quick to look at it and even change it (over a few seasons). Fans of Dallas and Detroit probably disagree with me and feel not enough was done after the "not a catch" plays.

 

I like that in the NFL there is at least an attitude that nothing is sacred, but that might also be because American football is one of the most complex games we have. There are so many unforeseeable that the game might not function if it weren't adaptable.

I agree, for the most part but..... you'll have to excuse my sour grapes attitude toward the NFL and it's blatant use of rules changes and calls to further line the pockets of the owners and Goodell.

 

It's always about player safety with Goodell.... except it's clearly evident that neither he, nor the owners give a damn about the players. Every rule change is about higher scoring. The defenses aren't even allowed to play anymore. 

 

I'm a die hard Raiders fan for 49 years. I lived through the "Immaculate Deception" and the "Tuck Rule." It might sound childish.... and it probably is but, the NFL and 95% of it's owners hate the Raiders. Hence.... all the BS calls over the years to steal games from them. 

 

Now that I've completely hijacked this thread   ......................

[Undershooter]

A lot of other sports pause the game while a play is under review. I don't see why golf couldn't do this as well. 

 

And it shouldn't take more than a few minutes. If you can't make the ruling after watching the video 5 times then you give the benefit of the doubt to the player... "insufficient evidence to overturn"

 

You don't need to have a review booth down on the field. The fat cats in the booth can just radio down. The lag time to assigning the penalty is pretty ridiculous in 2016.

 

A pause in play wouldn't really be fair to the field. Especially those behind any delay taking place. Good Lord Spieth and JDay take long enough as it is.

[silver & black]

There is plenty of time to make a call in a reasonable amount of time. I'm sure that all rules officials are equipped with communication of some sort. Just make the damn call, inform the player and get on with it!

[revkev]

To be clear there is no need for a pause in play - It takes time to walk from shot to shot and then time to hit the shot itself.  If there is a clear statue of limitations (prior to start of play on the next hole) it would be easy enough to implement a fair and discernible rule for the entire field to live by and that fans would understand.

 

Then the rest of us can get back to playing real golf in our competitions where we self impose our penalties. 

[Kenny B]

A pause in play wouldn't really be fair to the field. Especially those behind any delay taking place. Good Lord Spieth and JDay take long enough as it is.

The last group with Ko, Ji, and Park were "on the clock" most of the round!!!

[Undershooter]

The last group with Ko, Ji, and Park were "on the clock" most of the round!!!

While we're young!

 

lol

[Kor.A.Door]

All of us viewers can sit here and say they did it wrong or whatever, after the men's us open y'all said that should have just made the decision and then told him, so with this one that is exactly what they did, and then everyone says they should have waited, it is unfortunate the timing of the announcement, but if Brittany hit it into the water, Everyone would be saying, since they knew they should have said something before her shot. It was a lose lose situation and they failed either way.

[Kor.A.Door]

The last group with Ko, Ji, and Park were "on the clock" most of the round!!!

They should have never been taken off the clock, they were teeing off on 16 while the group in front of them were on the 17th green, they were a full hole and then some behind, it's funny how they talk about putting a group on the clock but I reality they've only assessed penalties to very few, and none of the have ever been contenders or top ranked players, this putting on the clock is a joke, so something.

[Undershooter]

All of us viewers can sit here and say they did it wrong or whatever, after the men's us open y'all said that should have just made the decision and then told him, so with this one that is exactly what they did, and then everyone says they should have waited, it is unfortunate the timing of the announcement, but if Brittany hit it into the water, Everyone would be saying, since they knew they should have said something before her shot. It was a lose lose situation and they failed either way.

Yes but at least then they would've given both players the same opportunity. I agree they are screwed either way but I feel like they are much less screwed if they find out at the same time during the hole. Not while one player had the advantage. 

 

The big thing in this, is that something concrete needs to be changed about the rules so that they are less "interpret-able" by the USGA on a case to case basis. And of course a decision needs to be made about replay and how to make things MUCH more streamlined there. 

[revkev]

Yes but at least then they would've given both players the same opportunity. I agree they are screwed either way but I feel like they are much less screwed if they find out at the same time during the hole. Not while one player had the advantage. 

 

The big thing in this, is that something concrete needs to be changed about the rules so that they are less "interpret-able" by the USGA on a case to case basis. And of course a decision needs to be made about replay and how to make things MUCH more streamlined there.

 

Exactly!

 

And I continue to find the USGAs while we are young campaign to be the most offensive ad I've ever seen. I just played 18 on a fairly full muni with guys and gals playing by the rules of golf somewhat competitively. It took all of 3:40 to complete the round and my group shot 73, 88, 95 not 71,68,74. DQ them if they take more than 330 and pace of play will be just fine in the Opens.

[Kor.A.Door]

I think we are all basically saying the same thing, just different ways of saying it, I I agree something should be changed, it just that in some situations the get caught in no win, it should be fixed but there is much money involved so it won't be quick either way.

[silver & black]

The big thing in this, is that something concrete needs to be changed about the rules so that they are less "interpret-able" by the USGA on a case to case basis. 

 

Personally, I think there needs to be a revamp of some of the rules...period.