Overhanging ball- Solheim cup match

[LICC]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.golfdigest.com/story/nelly-korda-rules-solheim-cup/amp
 

I am surprised no one has mentioned this? Thoughts? My view is the official was correct. When I saw it I immediately thought Sagstrom picked up the ball too soon. 

Edited September 5, 2021 by LICC

[Tom the Golf Nut]

Agreed. At first I didn't know what was going on. Looked like the players didn't either. But it was the right call.

[chisag]

... Yup, Sagstrom walked in quickly from off the green to pick the ball up. Stacy Lewis said they went over this rule with both teams and if the ball is near the edge of the hole DO NOT touch it.  

[Shankster]

Looked a mile away to me.  But it was a quick pick up.

[silver & black]

It was the right call.

[Headhammer]

Not sure why the Solheim Cup always seems to have some type of controversy that always away from the amazing golf the ladies are playing. Was the ball on the edge, hard for me to tell from the camera angle, was it picked-up too soon, yep. Have to agree with the ruling by the way the rules was written. 

[fixyurdivot]

Rules are what the rules are.  Give them back the point and we still lose big.  Team USA got steam rolled in the portion of the event they have historically been the strongest. 

[sixcat]

Two wrongs don’t make a right!!!

The ball had absolutely no chance of going in but the overzealous rules official decided to intervene anyway. But Sagstrom should never have picked the ball up either. 
 

Just another shining example of how golf tends to get in its own way sometimes. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

55 minutes ago, sixcat said:

Two wrongs don’t make a right!!!

The ball had absolutely no chance of going in but the overzealous rules official decided to intervene anyway. But Sagstrom should never have picked the ball up either. 
 

Just another shining example of how golf tends to get in its own way sometimes. 

The rules official got photo evidence from the main officials. Also it was a rule that was discussed with both teams before play. The only person at fault is Sagstrom. 

[sixcat]

34 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The rules official got photo evidence from the main officials. Also it was a rule that was discussed with both teams before play. The only person at fault is Sagstrom. 

I couldn’t care less what was agreed upon, common sense should always prevail. In this case, it didn’t. That ball had absolutely no chance of going in!

[cnosil]

43 minutes ago, sixcat said:

I couldn’t care less what was agreed upon, common sense should always prevail. In this case, it didn’t. That ball had absolutely no chance of going in!

Unfortunately the rule isn't about whether the ball has a chance to go in or not;  the rule states If "any" part of your ball overhangs the lip of the hole then the ball is overhanging the hole.  Unfortunately, this came down to looking at a camera angle and making a judgement.   Unless you have a top down view some angles will show overhang and others won't.   

The role of the referee is also important:  When Assigned to One Match for Entire Round. As the referee is with the match throughout the round, he or she is responsible for acting on any breach of the Rules that he or she sees or is told about (see Rule 20.1b(1) and the definition of “referee ”).

Based on this the referee can take action because she saw what she considered to be a rules infraction.    they referee then contacted and asked for confirmation which was provided.   

As a referee I probably wouldn't have said anything and would have waited for the players to initiate a review.    

Looking at all the things:  referee shouldn't have interjected, Sagstrom shouldn't have picked up the ball, and video review would not be conclusive to determine if "any" part of the ball was overhanging.     I don't agree with the decision,  but based on the scenario it was the only call that could have been made.    

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, sixcat said:

I couldn’t care less what was agreed upon, common sense should always prevail. In this case, it didn’t. That ball had absolutely no chance of going in!

Of course you don’t. You just wanted to complain and bring up a controversy that isn’t there.

Rules are rules. The refs have to act in that per the rules and she did. Also asked for confirmation. The players knew the rules and unfortunately sagstrom made a bad judgement call.

It’s pretty simple. Sagstrom broke a rule and got penalized for it

[sixcat]

26 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Of course you don’t. You just wanted to complain and bring up a controversy that isn’t there.

Rules are rules. The refs have to act in that per the rules and she did. Also asked for confirmation. The players knew the rules and unfortunately sagstrom made a bad judgement call.

It’s pretty simple. Sagstrom broke a rule and got penalized for it

It was a “rule” in search of a problem. And I’m not the only one complaining about it. Seems your doing your fair share, especially when anyone has an opinion that dares to differ from yours!

[DaveP043]

12 minutes ago, sixcat said:

It was a “rule” in search of a problem. And I’m not the only one complaining about it. Seems your doing your fair share, especially when anyone has an opinion that dares to differ from yours!

I disagree, the rule has a very specific purpose, and as @chisag says, it is the officials duty to act on a breach that he sees.  Perhaps the ball wouldn't have fallen, but the rule draws a very specific line for a ball overhanging the hole.  I don't know that there's a better way to write this rule and have it remain enforceable.

[sixcat]

5 hours ago, sixcat said:

Two wrongs don’t make a right!!!

The ball had absolutely no chance of going in but the overzealous rules official decided to intervene anyway. But Sagstrom should never have picked the ball up either. 
 

Just another shining example of how golf tends to get in its own way sometimes. 

Reading comprehension must be an issue today. Sagstrom was wrong for picking the ball up, as I stated in my original post (linked). That doesn’t change my opinion that common sense should outweigh a rule that was probably enforced where nobody needed it to be. 
 

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter. The better team won regardless. 
 

Im done! Probably for a good long while. 

[chisag]

7 minutes ago, sixcat said:

Sagstrom was wrong for picking the ball up, as I stated in my original post (linked). That doesn’t change my opinion that common sense should outweigh a rule that was probably enforced where nobody needed it to be. 

 

... To be fair, they instituted a rule specifically for the Solheim Cup that stated clearly if any part of the ball is over the hole do not pick it up or the stroke will count as holed.   So you can be upset with the rule, but not the officials as they had no choice but to enforce it. The irony is I imagine it was instituted to avoid any controversy.

[Alf. S]

As per the rules Nelly Korda had 10 seconds once she got to the hole but unless there was a seismic event that ball was never going to fall in the hole,  so she wasn't claiming the hole.

The rules official either was outside prompted or of her own accord got involved to give Korda a 3 to win the hole. 

If anyone on here says they wouldn't be furious if they conceded a putt in similar circumstances and your opponent then claimed the hole is lying.

Hagstrom to her credit and the credit of her Captain seem to handle it well, admitted it was a rule breech parked it and moved on. It seemed to fester more with Nelly Korda because she was stinking in the foursomes on Sunday morning. So bad that she was dropped for the fourballs in the afternoon.

If we were sitting here on Monday and the US had won 14.5 to 13.5 then I'm pretty sure there would be more outrage from Europe supporters about the incident and a real sour taste in my mouth.

 

 

[EEZurg]

I agree with the ruling....but also...what was the big rush to pick it up?  Concede the putt, but there really is no need to pick up anyone else's ball or marker.  That kinda bugs me.

[RickyBobby_PR]

42 minutes ago, EEZurg said:

I agree with the ruling....but also...what was the big rush to pick it up?  Concede the putt, but there really is no need to pick up anyone else's ball or marker.  That kinda bugs me.

That was her way of conceding the putt and being nice by giving it to Korda so she didn’t have to come to the hole. 

[Shankster]

Well it’s over now, and had no bearing in the outcome.  
 

Congrats to team Europe!

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, Alf. S said:

The rules official either was outside prompted or of her own accord got involved to give Korda a 3 to win the hole. 

This is an important thing to understand, and @chisag quoted this same section from the Committee Procedures:

Quote

When Assigned to One Match for Entire Round. As the referee is with the match throughout the round, he or she is responsible for acting on any breach of the Rules that he or she sees or is told about (see Rule 20.1b(1) and the definition of “referee ”).

The Rules Official had no choice but to act on the Rules Breach.  It doesn't matter whether she saw it in real time, or whether someone told her about the potential breach, it is her job to get it right.  

[Alf. S]

20 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

This is an important thing to understand, and @chisag quoted this same section from the Committee Procedures:

The Rules Official had no choice but to act on the Rules Breach.  It doesn't matter whether she saw it in real time, or whether someone told her about the potential breach, it is her job to get it right.  

Rules is rules but in this case IMO the wrong decision was made. Ball overhanging definition, well if you zoom in and draw a tangent to the ball you might be just be able to see a little bit of the ball over the hole. That ball would have never fallen into the hole, Nelly Korda knew this, Ally Ewing knew this, Pat Hurst knew this and if Missy Jones was watching knew this. Sagstom has not tried to gain an advantage has seen the ball is not going to fall and picked the ball up.

Pat Hurst stood up at the opening ceremony and stated that the contest will be played with "universal sportsmanship" this flies in the face of her comment. Once Missy Jones had called it, both Teams had to accept the ruling.   It is hard in the heat of a match sometimes to think rationally but in retrospect maybe Team USA conceding the last to tie the match would have been the correct decision. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Alf. S said:

Rules is rules but in this case IMO the wrong decision was made. Ball overhanging definition, well if you zoom in and draw a tangent to the ball you might be just be able to see a little bit of the ball over the hole. That ball would have never fallen into the hole, Nelly Korda knew this, Ally Ewing knew this, Pat Hurst knew this and if Missy Jones was watching knew this. Sagstom has not tried to gain an advantage has seen the ball is not going to fall and picked the ball up.

Pat Hurst stood up at the opening ceremony and stated that the contest will be played with "universal sportsmanship" this flies in the face of her comment. Once Missy Jones had called it, both Teams had to accept the ruling.   It is hard in the heat of a match sometimes to think rationally but in retrospect maybe Team USA conceding the last to tie the match would have been the correct decision. 

It’s already been said the players and coaches had no say in the ruling. Sagstrom picked up a ball overhanging the hole before Korda could make an effort to get there and then wait the 10 seconds. The referee had no choice but to make the ruling and she received photo evidence from the main official crew who agreed with her.

Its not about sportsmanship, gaining an advantage or any other scenario.

[Alf. S]

14 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It’s already been said the players and coaches had no say in the ruling. Sagstrom picked up a ball overhanging the hole before Korda could make an effort to get there and then wait the 10 seconds. The referee had no choice but to make the ruling and she received photo evidence from the main official crew who agreed with her.

Its not about sportsmanship, gaining an advantage or any other scenario.

I suppose I'm entitled to my own opinion because that all it is, because rules is rules and there is no real definition of sportsmanship. One woman's sportsmanship is to their competitors advantage and the game is all about winning.

 

 

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, Alf. S said:

IMO the wrong decision was made

The Rules Official and the rest of the Committee made a decision to follow the Rules, I don't know what other decision would have been appropriate.  Its definitely NOT appropriate to choose to allow a violation to slide past in one instance, and then enforce the same rule later, when it matters more.  

As for sportsmanship, and artificially conceding a hole to "right a wrong", I don't see that as being appropriate in this case.  Sagstrom DID violate the rule, a rule they were specifically cautioned about before play.  This isn't like a bad line call in tennis, where a linesman just gets it wrong, this WAS a violation.

[cnosil]

2 hours ago, Alf. S said:

Rules is rules but in this case IMO the wrong decision was made. Ball overhanging definition, well if you zoom in and draw a tangent to the ball you might be just be able to see a little bit of the ball over the hole. That ball would have never fallen into the hole, Nelly Korda knew this, Ally Ewing knew this, Pat Hurst knew this and if Missy Jones was watching knew this. Sagstom has not tried to gain an advantage has seen the ball is not going to fall and picked the ball up.

Pat Hurst stood up at the opening ceremony and stated that the contest will be played with "universal sportsmanship" this flies in the face of her comment. Once Missy Jones had called it, both Teams had to accept the ruling.   It is hard in the heat of a match sometimes to think rationally but in retrospect maybe Team USA conceding the last to tie the match would have been the correct decision. 

Let me ask you this:   How can you be so sure that the ball wasn’t overhanging the hole; what camera angles did you have to definitively show no part of the ball was overhanging?  Mark crossfield setup a ball and posted some photos that show a variety of angles that make the ball appear to overhang when it doesn’t and not overhang that does.   How can you be so certain that the ball wouldn’t have fallen? Did you see how the green sloped, if there was a breeze?  Should the US team not get the benefit of getting as close a look as Sagstrom had to determine the balls state?    As I stated earlier I don’t agree with how this went down, but the scenario played out according to how the rules are written.  Sagstrom did nothing malicious but unfortunately made the wrong decision in the heat of competition.  

[RickyBobby_PR]

38 minutes ago, Alf. S said:

I suppose I'm entitled to my own opinion because that all it is, because rules is rules and there is no real definition of sportsmanship. One woman's sportsmanship is to their competitors advantage and the game is all about winning.

 

 

Sportsmanship doesn’t come in to play when a rules official makes the decision because they have to and there’s is nothing the players can do about it. Korda or any of the US coaches couldn’t say it wasn’t going to fall or it wasn’t overhanging. The Euro players in the match or the coaches had no way to take it back or say anything to change the ruling.

This was 100% a rules breach that the ref had to make. She also called it in to the main official crew for confirmation and they agreed and sent the photo evidence of the ball overhanging. The players and coaches were briefed on the rule. 
 

 

 

[benb1989]

Personally I think its a poor decision by the official. We see it in all sports, officials wanting to get involved when its not required. For any one who watches the premier league will know what I mean when I say it was a bit of a Mike Dean moment. 

My other issue with this is I have only seen one camera angle, and its not very clear, imo its not over hanging so I do not believe the official could be 100% certain. Another camera angle would have possibly cleared up any confusion, surely a big sporting event like this has more than 1 camera angle.  

 

[russtopherb]

This feels like a lot of complaining just for the sake of complaining. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

31 minutes ago, benb1989 said:

Personally I think its a poor decision by the official. We see it in all sports, officials wanting to get involved when its not required. For any one who watches the premier league will know what I mean when I say it was a bit of a Mike Dean moment. 

My other issue with this is I have only seen one camera angle, and its not very clear, imo its not over hanging so I do not believe the official could be 100% certain. Another camera angle would have possibly cleared up any confusion, surely a big sporting event like this has more than 1 camera angle.  

 

It’s been stated in matches where the rules official is with the group for the entire match they have to step in when there’s a rules breach. It’s not about wanting to be at the center of attention in events like baseball, football, basketball where we see the referee/ump and they try to make it a ou then it’s not that way in golf.

They had several angles to look at and they took a photo of it and sent it the official who was called it in. So multiple officials all agreed it was a rules breach.