Poll: Should Phil be DQ'd?

[15th Club]

Let me get this straight. If a player stops a moving ball he is subject to rule 1-2 and DQ. However if nothing changes in the scenario except that the player swats at the ball ever so slightly, he is now exempt from 1-2.

 

This is the operative question to me. Succinctly stated.

 

This, along with the other earlier post observing that Phil never took a stance or addressed the ball before making the "stroke" in question.

[NorthTexasGlfr]

Phil was simply unwilling to accept the consequences of a putt that he obviously hit too hard.

 

He should be better than that.

 

I voted for DQ.

[15th Club]

Look at the closeness of this poll, just after 11 am ET, and as we get to 350 voters...

 

Phil should stay = 49.71%

 

Phil should be DQ, plus Phil should WD = 50.29%.

 

Less than 1 percent margin.

[Spongerob]

I think Phil should have been DQ'ed but I deeply admire what he did. Most of us have been in meetings where we have had to listen to 2 hours of complete BS from some idiot with far more attitude than ability. Phil is the guy who stands up and says what everyone is thinking...often to his own detriment. The USGA blew it. Pure and simple. The course played 6 shots harder in the afternoon and the weather was no excuse. They blew the golf course on the most ordinary of days in June in the Hamptons. Sunny with a mild breeze. It just doesn't get any easier than that. None of the other majors have this problem. The Open Championship has far more challenging weather conditions to allow for and they always seem to get it right. They er on the side of play-ability always and that is how it should be. The USGA really needs to blow up their bureaucracy and challenge all their course prep assumptions. But we all know they won't.

[ProphetLogic]

They should have played Erin Hills as a par 70, then they wouldn't have had to &%@$ up Shinnecock and Phil wouldn't have needed to put himself in that position.

[nsxguy]

Phil should withdraw. Because regardless of what the rules say, hitting a moving ball because you're frustrated and not willing to finish the hole properly, is not in the spirit of the game.

 

An organization not following it's OWN GUIDELINES isn't much in the spirit of the game either so I'm OK with Phil showing a little frustration.

 

USGA can't even follow it's OWN recommendations.

 

"An area two to three feet in radius around the hole should be as nearly level as possible and of uniform grade. In no case should holes be located in tricky places, or on sharp slopes where a ball can gather speed. A player above the hole should be able to stop the ball at the hole."

 

https://www.usga.org/RulesFAQ/rules_answer.asp?FAQidx=143&Rule=16

[15th Club]

I think Phil should have been DQ'ed but I deeply admire what he did. Most of us have been in meetings where we have had to listen to 2 hours of complete BS from some idiot with far more attitude than ability. Phil is the guy who stands up and says what everyone is thinking...often to his own detriment. The USGA blew it. Pure and simple. The course played 6 shots harder in the afternoon and the weather was no excuse. They blew the golf course on the most ordinary of days in June in the Hamptons. Sunny with a mild breeze. It just doesn't get any easier than that. None of the other majors have this problem. The Open Championship has far more challenging weather conditions to allow for and they always seem to get it right. They er on the side of play-ability always and that is how it should be. The USGA really needs to blow up their bureaucracy and challenge all their course prep assumptions. But we all know they won't.

 

I keep seeing posts to the effect of, I'm glad that Phil flipped off the USGA with that move, because he spoke for all of us...

 

But again; Phil himself said very specifically that he meant no disrespect. He called Mike Davis and by all accounts offered to WD. And Phil has now said publicly that it was not his best moment, which is an understatement by any account.

 

If that is all baloney from Phil, and he in fact meant to make a grand statement of disrespect, then he has even more to answer for with regard to his own response.

[NJpatbee]

I think it was an impulsive act of frustration by Phil and according to the rules the 2 stroke penalty seemed just without a DQ. If you look at where Phil's ball would have wound up I suspect Phil would get up and down in 4 or less. No real advantage to himself but more likely a reaction to the course getting out of control Now if he sunk the putt that he swatted (which was close) then I would agree that he gained an advantage and DQ would have been more of an option. But let's face it the USGA did not prepare the course properly on Saturday which was the root cause of the carnage we watched and Phil's act of frustration. (Full disclosure - I am a USGA member and believe they will rectify the situation for today).

[deadsolid...shank]

Mrs Ferguson must have taken Fergies computer away for the weekend.

[jdl]

Poor form from Phil and I lost a lot of respect for him. Then to top it off today with his silly celebration after holing out. Completely tone deaf.

[new2g0lf]

Why is it we can't apply the actual rule and go on? It works for a double hit. It works for a wrong drop. It works for a wrong score card. Works for the long putter. Why is this different ? Penalty assessed and life goes on.

If that's the case I'm going to use the rule during my money games and see if my playing partners are content to assess me a 2 stroke penalty and move on. I expect we'll be seeing a lot of guys on public courses doing it now since the USGA didn't DQ Phil for it.

[tssgj65]

Pat Perez would have been DQ’d.

[I'_rather_be_golfing]

Poor form from Phil and I lost a lot of respect for him. Then to top it off today with his silly celebration after holing out. Completely tone deaf.

Lost a lot of respect for him? Looks like Phil is trying to make the most out this horrendous tournament. I’m sure he isn’t losing any sleep

knowing he lost a snobby fan. Let it go and move on. I’m sure Phil has already.

[roxald]

No-

Phil did it intentionally and was assessed the 2 stroke as per the rule and admitted he did it intentionally as his strategy and owned it.

 

So Phil admits he did what he did and stands behind his decision, but Davis admits he made the wrong decisions.... No doubt, we would admit there were aspects of this setup that went too far..... “Davis told Fox€™â€™s Joe Buck And Paul Azinger at the end of Saturday’s broadcast. “Well-executed shots were not only not rewarded, they were penalizedâ€

 

Phil has my respect, he owned his decision and stands by it, Mike Davis did not.

I respect Phil’€™s decision, even though I would not do the same, but Mike Davis has admitted to failing at his tasks. Your fired Mike!

Rox

[tw_focus]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

[NorthTexasGlfr]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

[I'_rather_be_golfing]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

So essentially Phil was in the grey area of the rule book.

[NorthTexasGlfr]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

So essentially Phil was in the grey area of the rule book.

 

I've provided the quotes from Phil where he says he did it to take advantage of the rules either in this thread or another one. So I do see a stronger case for DQ based on rule 1-2.

[Darth Putter]

Look at the closeness of this poll, just after 11 am ET, and as we get to 350 voters...

 

Phil should stay = 49.71%

 

Phil should be DQ, plus Phil should WD = 50.29%.

 

Less than 1 percent margin.

 

Who's ahead in the electoral college?

[Darth Putter]

Mrs Ferguson must have taken Fergies computer away for the weekend.

 

I was at least expecting a "Phil should be banned from golf for life" thread.

[deadsolid...shank]

Mrs Ferguson must have taken Fergies computer away for the weekend.

 

I was at least expecting a "Phil should be banned from golf for life" thread.

 

Somebody needs to send out the Fergie signal.

[NorthTexasGlfr]

Poor form from Phil and I lost a lot of respect for him. Then to top it off today with his silly celebration after holing out. Completely tone deaf.

Lost a lot of respect for him? Looks like Phil is trying to make the most out this horrendous tournament. I'm sure he isn't losing any sleep

knowing he lost a snobby fan. Let it go and move on. I'm sure Phil has already.

 

Man, he should be losing sleep over it if for no other reason that he put himself in the same category as John Daly. Jeez, Phil, you gotta be better than that.

[bladehunter]

Why is it we can't apply the actual rule and go on? It works for a double hit. It works for a wrong drop. It works for a wrong score card. Works for the long putter. Why is this different ? Penalty assessed and life goes on.

If that's the case I'm going to use the rule during my money games and see if my playing partners are content to assess me a 2 stroke penalty and move on. I expect we'll be seeing a lot of guys on public courses doing it now since the USGA didn't DQ Phil for it.

 

You can also try anchoring your putter and claiming not to intend to and get away with that. The issue you have is the rule. Not anyone who either took advanatage of it. Or was not penalized enough from it.

[bladehunter]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

 

It’s really doesn’t unless you want to get crazy. And if you want to get crazy the committe could literally DQ you for any reason they dream up. So you may be technically correct, I practice it has and will never happen under the current rule. There’s even precident for the decision. Nobody has been DQ for this.

[8602081]

.... distasteful ...

[bladehunter]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

So essentially Phil was in the grey area of the rule book.

 

I've provided the quotes from Phil where he says he did it to take advantage of the rules either in this thread or another one. So I do see a stronger case for DQ based on rule 1-2.

 

No. He didn’t deflect. He made a stroke. 1-2 isn’t going to help either. Let’s stop trying to make this something it isn’t. Phil didn’t pick theball up. He didn’t kick it. He squared up and hit a moving ball with his putter. That was covered by the rules and 2 shot penalty.

 

We all just don’t like that this is allowed. Yes allowed under the rules. What needs to happen is a re write of this rule. Don’t blame phil for taking advanatage of the rule as written. Same when he caught crap for using a square groove ping wedge. The usga lost the lawsuit to ping and those grooves are grandfathered in. Totally legal , Yet he was labeled a cheater. Hmmm who’s fault is it ? Phil’s or the usga for trying to strong arm someone into something and allowing the loophole to exist? I say on both cases it’s the usga at fault.

[I'_rather_be_golfing]

Poor form from Phil and I lost a lot of respect for him. Then to top it off today with his silly celebration after holing out. Completely tone deaf.

Lost a lot of respect for him? Looks like Phil is trying to make the most out this horrendous tournament. I'm sure he isn't losing any sleep

knowing he lost a snobby fan. Let it go and move on. I'm sure Phil has already.

 

Man, he should be losing sleep over it if for no other reason that he put himself in the same category as John Daly. Jeez, Phil, you gotta be better than that.

He’ll be fine. I’m sure his wife will take care and make sure of that. Let’s not try to use this moment to define everything he’s done now.

[csiachos]

Yes

[handicap122003]

It doesn’t matter. He was not a factor. He should donate his nominal winnings to the First Tee or something positive.

[NorthTexasGlfr]

How can anyone answer "Yes" to the poll, I don't understand. The penalty for hitting a moving ball is not disqualification, that is spelled out unambiguously in the rulebook. Are people reading a different copy of the rulebook?

 

 

A case can be made for DQ and not DQ. The rulebook leaves room for both in this case.

 

You don't have to be a brain scientist or rocket surgeon to see that.

 

It's really doesn't unless you want to get crazy. And if you want to get crazy the committe could literally DQ you for any reason they dream up. So you may be technically correct, I practice it has and will never happen under the current rule. There's even precident for the decision. Nobody has been DQ for this.

 

No, you don't have to want to get crazy. You just have to willing to read all the rules that pertain to this with an open mind. Not a closed one.