Opinion & Analysis
Another USGA rules controversy at the U.S. Women’s Open
Anna Nordqvist was all class after penalty cost her the U.S. Open, posting the following on social media.
Thanks everyone for the support this week! ????????????tough break but still smiling -plenty more opportunities ahead of me!! pic.twitter.com/p2cnbdc1Su
— Anna Nordqvist (@ANordqvist) July 11, 2016
The fact that a delayed final-round penalty garnered a great deal of attention certainly isn’t what the USGA wanted on the heels of the Dustin Johnson fiasco at Oakmont.
Watch the sand move.
Anna Nordqvist will get a 2 stroke penalty.
Brittany Lang closing in US Women’s Open title. pic.twitter.com/kyreFCY1x0— Joe Trahan (@JoeTrahan) July 10, 2016
As you can see in the video above, on the second hole of a three-hole playoff between Brittany Lang and Anna Nordqvist, Nordqvist appeared to ground her club in a fairway bunker, not realizing that she had done so, and in violation of rule 13-4, the penalty for which is two strokes.
Fox, in a sort of “Well, we have to say something now that millions of people have seen this footage” moment, asked the USGA to review the footage after broadcast video made it pretty clear that Nordqvist had temporarily soled her iron in the bunker.
USGA official John Bodenhamer reviewed the replay showing the violation and made the immediate determination to tell the players of the penalty. However, the news didn’t make it to Nordvist and Lang until after the Swede had played her third shot, which would have obviously altered her approach.
“It certainly changed her game plan,” Nordqvist said. “But, you know, hopefully we can all learn from it and hopefully we can all get better.”
What can we learn? Nordqvist, certainly, will feel she should have been more careful. One can never determine a player’s intent, but it did not seems she was in any way checking the condition of the sand or attempting to gain advantage. Difficult situation, but a clear violation of the rules as they are written.
It’s the USGA that will be pressed to either work out a system of immediate video review for every shot (which is impossible), or make the case that they are determination infractions in the best manner possible in light of technological and manpower limitations.
Fans, players, the media (and likely the USGA itself) agree that the delayed-penalty look isn’t a good one for the USGA. But as long as they review video and allow input about potential infractions, it will continue to be an element of their major championships (as it is PGA Tour events and the Masters). In this case, the officials involved presented the penalty related information to the golfers as soon as soon as they could (according to a statement). In other words, things were carried out properly in relation to the rules as they are written.
This doesn’t change the fact that there’s something unsatisfying about the outcome. However, that was probably the case when Roberto De Vicenzo signed for the wrong score a the 1968 Masters and at any number of other famous tournament-deciding rules incidents.
The reality of the rules and the review process is that infractions will continue to become obvious only after the fact. And in such cases, players ought to be informed as quickly as possible if on course (as they were in this case). And as fans, we have to be prepared for scoring tent situations that alter tournament outcomes after the conclusion of play.
The Nordqvist penalty was unfortunate, but it doesn’t seem U.S. golf’s governing body will end up looking any worse for it. The same may not be able to said regarding the curious misspeach of USGA President Diana Murphy, who referred to tournament winner Brittany Lang as “Bethenny” multiple times during the trophy presentation.
For an organization that has faced steep criticism in recent weeks for an amateurish display at Oakmont, not knowing/forgetting the name of the winner of the tournament you’re conducting doesn’t exactly help.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Mat
Jul 22, 2016 at 8:35 pm
So maybe the rule is amended that if sand happens to be touched in a backswing, there is no penalty?
I like the idea that tournament golf requires players, caddies, or walking officials to call a penalty. If one is called, video evidence can potentially clear the penalty. But there is absolutely no need for mistakes to be called in. Simply put, a missed call is rub-of-the-green. The last thing anyone wants is for a player to be known as a cheat. As such, if they zoom in on this sand and say “she didn’t call it” – the commentators would be saying that there’s no way she could have known, so no big deal. Instead, we have this nonsense.
RG
Jul 12, 2016 at 10:44 am
If the HD camera was there would she have even known that she touched the sand? Since there is no video of every bunker shot from every player in the field , how can the USGA selectively use it to call a penalty? Where’s the equity? How can you say that to monitor some players with cameras and not all players is equitable?. How do we KNOW FOR A FACT that Brittany Lang did not commit some similar infraction earlier in the tournament? The trail in the sand was caused by the ball entering the bunker and not the club. If there is ANY doubt about that, THE PLAYER GETS THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT! IT IS UP TO THE PLAYER TO CALL THE PENALTY, NOT THE TV ANNOUNCERS, THE AUDIENCE OR THE EVEN THE RULES OFFICIALS!!! If she says she didn’t touch the sand, or if in her back swing she inadvertently nicks a grain or two and she is not aware she has done so, SHE HAS NOT INTENTIONALLY TESTED THE SURFACE and THERE IS NO PENALTY!!!! USGA is way out of order AGAIN!
RG
Jul 12, 2016 at 10:49 am
First sentence should say “cameras were not there”
Ramrod Ray Reardon
Jul 12, 2016 at 7:47 am
Golf and its rules are embarassing. Truly cringeworthy, outdated unfair nonsense. This is a game that wants to grow, and yet such incredibly stupid episodes as this are being broadcast to the world.
As for this latest nonsense, if Lang had any class she would have refused the win and the title. She didn’t win it, she was handed it by stupid rules. Who could draw any satisfaction or pride from that?
I noticed that Juli Inkster was commentating for whichever feed we got through SKY in the UK. This is the same person who bullied the European Solheim cup team into bending the rules for the benefit of her team. I didn’t hear her suggesting that lang refused the title for the benefit of one of her peers, as she asked to Europeans to do.
Well done also to the american cameraman for stirring it up for the benefit of the yank player.
USGA Penalty Enforcer
Jul 20, 2016 at 12:35 pm
For this comment you will be assessed a 2 stroke penalty. 1 stroke for pointing out how stupid some of the rules are, and how over bearing and over the top they are. 1 stroke for the loss of distance the USGA is trying to gain in growing a younger eager fan base to fill in for the old guys as they retire.
KJ
Jul 11, 2016 at 9:19 pm
Not cool. Very poor attempt at humor.
Snoopy
Jul 11, 2016 at 8:47 pm
Once again they got this so wrong. I love the game of golf. I respect the rules. I respect the need for strict rules in this game, because there are so many players and no way to catch them if they all tried their hardest to cheat. I would never cheat the game. And that is why yet again, the USGA, in an attempt to show how “tough” they are, make a mockery of the game of golf.
I’m a software engineer. Effectively, I write the rules that computer systems are supposed to follow. So when my program makes an erroneous calculation, I don’t tell my client “sorry, rules are rules”, I THROW OUT THE BAD COMPUTATION, COMPUTE THE CORRECT ANSWER, AND THEN CHANGE THE GODDAM RULE. It’s clear that in this situation in particular, even more so than both DJ situations, the rules failed. In my opinion, the purpose of the rules of golf are to A) define the game and B) ensure fairness between players. The purpose is NOT to hand out as many penalties as possible. The USGA took the result of the tournament out of the players hands by trying their very hardest to enforce the rules to their fullest extent. *BUT THIS IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THE RULES*. The purpose is to ensure a fair competition between the players.
I could keep ranting but I want to move on. The rule says you can’t ground your club. The rule says you can’t touch the sand. She touched the sand. I get it. But the PURPOSE of this rule, is to prevent players from gaining and advantage or otherwise altering the shot they are about to face, and that is not what happened.
Last point: make it so that rules violations may only be called by players, caddies, and walking officials. Once a violation is called, video evidence may be used, and usga officials can rule. I don’t see how this would change the spirit of the game, players are still expected to call penalties on themselves. But if one of the active parties does not call a violation, then move on. If there is video evidence of a violation, but nobody called it, then too bad, watch more carefully. If a player routinely makes uncalled infractions, then don’t let them play in your tournament. They can go play on a different tour, for less money. The PGA, LPGA, US Open, and US Womens open, are supposed to be competitions among the best golfers, not exhibitions of the rules of golf.
Ana doesn’t deserve special credit for pretending she is not upset by the ruling. I would have taken my wedge and chipped the ball into the water, making sure to leave a crater in the green before walking off the course with a DQ. Life isn’t about money or class, it’s about standing up for what’s right, no matter how hard or painful that might be.
RedX
Jul 12, 2016 at 1:16 am
Give us peace Snoopy – life is about class (or it should be)
And here’s the rub – class is not incompatible to “standing up for what’s right…”
Anna will be upset (with herself) she’s just not bleeting to the world about injustice as she doesn’t think there is any. She’s a golfer and gets it.
Move on Snoopy (without making the crater in the green please – selfishness is never the answer)
ffs
Jul 11, 2016 at 8:45 pm
I love Anna even more. What a classy gal.
ffs
Jul 11, 2016 at 8:44 pm
signed by a fake Smizzle, I reckon
Mississauga Jim
Jul 11, 2016 at 5:39 pm
I wrote an email to the USGA saying that, yes she inadvertently caused a couple of grains of sand to move, only visible to an HD camera not, the human eye. So, why not equitably review the entire tournament from start to finish? This is clearly selective punishment. Plus, the cameraman was American. If the cameraman never said anything , would this had happened?
A very hollow victory unfortunately. Maybe Lang would have won. But not this way.
RedX
Jul 11, 2016 at 6:13 pm
Bank robbery (Bobby Jones’ analogy not mine) caught on CCTV…..
Judge says “evidence ineligible in court because all banks in town don’t have CCTV and we may have missed a robbery elsewhere” What a laughing stock that would be!
I hear the “no advantage gained argument” but allowing that level of subjectivity would just make the position more difficult. Doubt Jones gained advantage from his infringement in the ’25 Open. Going on to lose in a playoff. But he calls it and accepts it all the same. That’s golf!
In this case Anna has showed her class. Not at the time as she was unaware but in the way she accepted it like a champion. She doesn’t present like she’s the main story. She knows golf is the story. Clearly Anna would be mortified to have someone say – just let it pass.
That is not what a true golfer would do or think.
Some people here need to step back and reflect.
If you want to take advantage of the next guy (your fellow competitor) or complain that’s its too tough. Play a different game.
Snoopy
Jul 11, 2016 at 8:56 pm
Yes but Anna didn’t call the penalty. There is no humanly possible way she, or anyone standing around the bunker, could have seen the violation. Some bozo in the Fox truck called the USGA. Remember, golf is a game played by humans. I don’t think it’s right for evidence captured beyond human perception to be used. And in a court of law, certain evidence cannot be introduced without a warrant, like wiretap recordings for example. It doesn’t matter if you have Al Capone admitting a crime on tape if you didn’t properly receive a warrant for the wiretap. Not saying this is right or wrong, but that’s just how it is. And an HD camera zoomed in on Anna’s ball is totally unwarranted. My solution? Assign a trained walking observer to each player. The player is still expected to call their own penalties, but if neither the player or observers sees one, then move on. If there is a dispute, go to the video evidence.
Gordy
Jul 12, 2016 at 8:49 am
That is such a terrible example and has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on here. Imagine you have a football game, where one team has the cameras for replay on them the entire game and the other team does not. A call is overturned on them losing causing them to lose the game, but the other team does not. The entire sports world would be up in arms. I do concur with the level of subjectivity argument you present. The rules are the rules either you abide by them or you don’t. However, how they determine you abide by those rules should be the same for everyone. Not just the select few.
Dave
Jul 11, 2016 at 4:35 pm
It’s a rule it was broken penalty given and taken in great stride. Let it be
stephenf
Jul 11, 2016 at 3:09 pm
Yeah, sorry. The Men’s Open shouldn’t have been considered a “controversy,” and this incident in the Women’s Open even less so. And it was certainly _not_ an “amateurish display at Oakmont,” although people who don’t know any better continue to yap on about it.
The question at Oakmont was whether there was a violation, and secondly, whether the USGA was reasonable to investigate whether there had been one. It is a sign of the further decline of the game into the standards and expectations of other pro sports that so many people, including (very disappointingly) many pros, are still screaming about the fact that poor DJ didn’t “know where he stood” because the USGA “took so long to decide.”
Aside from that continued slide of this game into whiny pro-sports-ism, this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the rules and the game. In a situation like that, the ruling takes however long it takes. What matters is whether the USGA was reasonable in determining that there was reason to look into it, and secondly, whether they did it as quickly as they could under the circumstances. The question is _not_ whether any specific competitor “knows where he stands.” There is nothing in the rules that guarantees a player perfect knowledge at all times regarding his place in the field. The player is expected to play on and shoot the best score he can, regardless. You can’t hold up the field, or even the guy he’s paired with, for a ruling that might take some serious time.
(Incidentally, the _real_ “controversy” at Oakmont should’ve been over the line-of-sight drop Johnson got out of an absolutely horrific lie in the rough, into a perfect lie — from which he hit a shot directly _over_ the tower and near the pin. That’s in addition to the fact that the actual nature of his shot from the original lie almost certainly would’ve put his line of play back into the fairway short of the green anyway. Some people can sleep just fine after something like that may have been a big factor in a tournament win. Others can’t. After that, I’m pretty much through with hearing any more about how poor Dustin is always a victim of the rules. Remember all the whining at Whistling Straits, where all players had been informed of similar bunkers around the course? Yeah. Really don’t want to hear any more from people who seem not to understand what the game is about, _especially_ those who think this is a game where penalties should “get called on” players by outside officials, like it’s MLB or the NBA.)
At the Women’s Open, the argument for holding up play until the ruling was made is a little better, since asking the two players to wait a minute or two wouldn’t have held up other players (as it would’ve at Oakmont). But then, if the USGA had done so, people would be out here b!tching about how they interrupted play. Meanwhile, the ruling was made in only a couple of minutes. Getting it wrong either way would’ve been grossly unfair to one player or the other, and it would’ve altered the history of the record books forever, wrongly and irrevocably.
Also, getting it wrong either way would’ve led to yet another series of tirades against the USGA by hindsighters who looked at the video endlessly. They had a couple of minutes; you had forever. See how that goes? If your three-minute decision isn’t as perfect as anybody else’s three-day decision, you’ll be reviled forever. The clock’s ticking, genius. Have you made the call yet? Are you sure? _How_ sure?
And what if the ruling had been in Nordqvist’s favor instead, and if this had been determined after both players had been stopped and told a ruling was in progress? Then play would’ve been stopped for nothing. What then? Yet more unlimited b!tching by hindsighters out here. So there’s still _more_ pressure for getting it right.
What people need to do is to stop being ignorant, stop imposing the expectations of other pro sports onto golf, and just chill. The USGA is good at what it does, and nobody in either of these situations was cheated out of anything. Dustin Johnson and his supporters apparently don’t know this. Anna Nordqvist clearly does.
Abolish the USGA
Jul 11, 2016 at 3:56 pm
That reply is longer than the article……
Tom
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:54 pm
don’t ask him what time it is.
Brian
Jul 11, 2016 at 5:48 pm
“Also, getting it wrong either way would’ve led to yet another series of tirades against the USGA by hindsighters who looked at the video endlessly. They had a couple of minutes; you had forever.”
Honestly, how long should it have taken? It took Azinger, Faxon, Inkster, and most of us watching the replay on t.v about 10 seconds to see the violation and know it was a penalty. It should’ve only taken another 30 seconds (at most) to radio the ruling down to the official walking with the group. There was enough time to notify these women well before their 2nd shots, much less 10 minutes later. It was just another “black eye” to the USGA.
Any brilliant insight on the awards ceremony debacle? How does the USGA not know the woman’s name? It is actually engraved on the trophy that is being presented.
Snoopy
Jul 11, 2016 at 9:10 pm
You lost all credit when you said the controversy was the LOS drop. That was a routine drop that nobody questioned, and another proper use of the rules by DJ. Lexi Thompson did a similar thing in this tournament, by choosing to drop onto a cartpath, then choosing to drop on a slope that would not hold the ball so that she could place her ball in the rough. Golf is supposed to be a competition between two golfers, not an exercise in self flagellation.
Jason
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:56 pm
The problem with using video evidence to enforce rules violations is that it is not equitably used across the entire field. A qualifier playing first thing in the morning on Thursday in front of zero spectators and with no cameras on him/her will not have the same scrutiny as the leader playing in the final round on Sunday. The rules are the same for everyone but their enforcement is not and thats against the spirit of the rules.
stephenf
Jul 11, 2016 at 3:11 pm
Understand the point, but it’s still true that no player who understand the nature of this game would want to win a tournament while having factually committed an unpenalized violation, no matter how that violation comes to light.
Paul
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:56 pm
She touched a grain of Sand, it is a penalty, clearly written. What about a grassed hazard, you can brush the top of the grass, why isn’t that a penalty? Probably because the grass does not get dislodged. I think it has to be black or white in the sand. Not an advantage rule. Too hard to police in Golf. Can you imagine the delays if they had to determine what was an advantage and what was not?
Putting is easy to fix. If you touch the ball with your putter it is one stroke and play it where it lies. If the ball moves while addressing it, replace and no penalty. They want 13 -15 stimped greens they have to expect the ball to move around sometimes.
RedX
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:56 pm
Great attitude Anna. All class.
Congratulations for showing the way.
No controversy here.
Disappointing beat up in the slant of the article which is just fueling the “we know better” crowd. If the USGA took some of the proposed changes in here on board we would be in a bigger mess. No doubt.
It’s not broken (or certainly not enough to make changes to further detriment). Get over it and play on!
stephenf
Jul 11, 2016 at 3:11 pm
Finally, somebody who actually gets it.
RedX
Jul 11, 2016 at 8:07 pm
I’m with you stephenf.
Being in a minority of views certainly doesn’t make you less correct.
Bring on the fun at Royal Troon this week.
Can’t wait.
Christopher
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:49 pm
It was terribly unfortunate timing, if it had happened during the first round no-one would have batted an eye. But the rule is the same for everyone. The rule is defined to avoid any grey areas of definition, you touch the ground and you’re penalized.
gunmetal
Jul 11, 2016 at 7:01 pm
But that there is the problem. The rule isn’t the same for everyone. Technically it is, but in reality it’s not. If you don’t have an HD zoom lens on you and you don’t feel or see a grain of sand move (like Anna didn’t see), then nothing happens. Either we have outside agencies policing every shot of every player or we don’t have any. That is if we want a level playing field of course.
Christopher
Jul 13, 2016 at 3:50 pm
I agree. From a observing stand-point every player isn’t treated equally. But I’m sure a player can make 100% sure that they don’t ground their clubs. It would also benefit the players and fans that when there are only two players on a course that they revert to an “on-course officials’ eyes are final” state of affairs. If they didn’t spot the infraction, then they should leave it at that. The same with Dustin Johnson, if the on-course official said it was fine his word should have been final. I’ve seen a player asking if a ruling can be overturned if the drop he was about to be given was incorrect and the official said “No, my word is final.” So I’m not sure why that rule was changed?
gunmetal
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:44 pm
Penalty? Yes.
Level Playing field? NO.
Unless golf is willing to give every shot by every competitor this type of HD zoom coverage, then this is entirely BS. It gives an unfair advantage to the average player who catches fire during the 3rd round or an early 4th round tee time while there are no cameras around.
This First Tee crap about honesty and integrity is growing tired. They claim golf is a sport about integrity and honesty but then they police the sport to this degree (but only if you’re in contention)?!?!? Nordqvist obviously didn’t feel the grain of sand move. She probably didn’t see it. AND IT ABSOLUTELY DIDN’T GIVE HER AN ADVANTAGE. Time to rethink things USGA
talljohn777
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:28 pm
Sounds like the USGA once again did not have a rules official in the booth sitting next to a TV, which once again delayed the ruling and then they did not immediately notify the walking officials. This could have been done much, much quicker in both cases. Completely insane….
es
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:01 pm
I think Rule 18-2 specifically 18.4 needs to be expanded to include this.
Remember this from 2013?
“The Decision ensures that a player is not penalized under Rule 18-2 in circumstances where the fact that the ball had changed location could not reasonably have been seen without the use of enhanced technology,” said the joint statement from the USGA and R&A.
The new rule, 18.4, clearly states what it does. “Where enhanced technological evidence shows that a ball has left its position and come to rest in another locations, the ball will not be deemed to have moved if that movements was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time.”
Grizz01
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:00 pm
I think there should be a few rule changes… always have, going on 40 years now.
1. You may tap down spike marks. How silly is this rule? The guy in front of you can ‘accidently’ drag his foot in hoping that it will interfere with your play.
2. Declare all sand traps and bunkers, … wast bunkers. Which mean you can ground your club. But you still have to rake it.
3. (pet peeve) You get a stroke penalty for not fixing your ball mark on the green. Yea, I know most everyone on tour does this. But the average player seems inept of bending over and fixing it.
Chuck
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:39 pm
Don’t you think that the USGA and the R&A have thought about all of that? Of course they have. And the answers are glaringly obvious.
1. Once you start allowing spike marks to be tamped down, players of all abilities will start to tamp down everything in the path of 20-foot putts. And everything within a foot of what they think that line is. Tour players will do it all the time, everywhere, on tv and recreational players will learn and play on the greens will grind to a near-standstill.
2. Once you start allowing the grounding of clubs in bunkers, you will see players doing just that, and improving lies ways that are obvious and less obvious. Bunker play will become a bad joke of a hazard.
3. Give me a break. Besides the basic unseriousness of this proposal, it raises another question I have for you. How big a deal is it for you to comply with the Rules as currently written? No problem, I presume. And if you don’t like the Rules, and aren’t playing in any club or state am competitions, how hard is it for you, at your choice and leisure, to ignore the Rules? ZERO problem, suspect.
So all of these football and baseball fans griping about how golf is officiated; just sit your couch and keep watching those games. Golf — and particularly the Rules of Golf — don’t need your input.
FredTheBishop
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:49 pm
You CAN tap down a spike mark made by a playing companion if that spike mark was created AFTER your ball came to rest at its present position. You’re always entitled to the lie and conditions you had when you ball came to rest (except natural conditions like rain, etc.) for your next shot. If someone takes a divot that interferes with your play, you get relief or can repair the damage. If they make a ball mark or a spike mark (or even a heel print) that changed your line to the hole, you can repair them. If they dusted your ball with sand or dirt or mud, you can restore the ball and your lie to its previous condition.
Jim Dandy
Jul 11, 2016 at 2:22 pm
A pet peeve of mine is people getting all upset about someone stepping in their putting line. People are trampling all over the green and around the hole all day, so that last step in your line is probably the least consequential.
Rich
Jul 12, 2016 at 6:50 am
Stepping on someone else’s line has more to do with etiquette than anything else. While in most cases it may not effect the line or result of the putt, it’s just down right rude and it’s not that hard to pay attention to and avoid. It’s like being polite. It doesn’t cost a cent and it’s not hard to do.
BMG
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:49 pm
To me, the ruling itself isn’t the issue at all. She touched the sand, broke the rule (albeit unwittingly) There is no ambiguity, and intent has nothing to do with it. All golfers would accept that it’s a penalty. It might be unfair / outdated, but that’s really a different issue.
There are however two real issues.
The first, which has been mentioned by Bruce and others, is the use of replay. It is a big disadvantage to those players who are on camera (normally the leaders). There could have been plenty of other similar incidents over the 4 days that were not caught on camera (and that even the players were unaware of). Nordqvist was clearly oblivious to it, so she couldn’t have called it on herself.
The second (and main) issue is how the USGA handled it. In a word, terribly.
The fact that Nordqvist hit her approach without being told about the penalty, but Lang was told BEFORE her approach is ridiculously bad IMO. As Azinger said on the broadcast – either tell them both (before they play their approach) or tell neither of them.
Norqvist was safely on the green. Had Lang not known about the penalty, she might have decided to go more aggressively at the pin and brought the water into play. She could easily have dunked it in the water and made double bogey. Had that been the case, they are most probably tied.
Lots of ifs and buts (in all probability, Lang would still have avoided the water and won). But the point is that it’s a playoff in a major, she had a shot over the water with her opponent on the green. The pressure would have been massive, and a lot could have still happened. Once they told her, she has almost no pressure because she knew she could win with a bogey. That is a total game changer.
All they really needed to do was use a bit of common sense. Why did they have to tell her right then? Just because they had to do it “as soon as possible”? Once they realised that they couldn’t get to Anna before she played, they should have waited until Brittany had played too.
Very poor show indeed.
Jim Dandy
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:40 pm
Isn’t the backswing part of the swing?
Dave
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:55 pm
No only the act of striking( or attempting to) the ball is a stroke.
Chris
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:30 pm
Golf, the only sport in the world where spectators can call in penalties. What a joke.
Smokin'Gun
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:27 pm
Television is the new USGA
Smokin'Gun
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:25 pm
When you’re leading or close to the lead, or a top player, television scrutiny follows you like a referee. IMO it’s a bit unfair, because the players that aren’t in the mix get a pass… Perfect examples… DJ and Anna…
Colin M
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:25 pm
I agree with most people on here who feel the rule needs to be reviewed and changed to deal with the TV/Video and intent issues. Of course the USGA will always want to look at a potential infringement and have a simple yes or no answer to whether it is a penalty or not, so I can’t see them agreeing to a rule change that requires a decision on intent or not. But I don’t see any problem with saying that touching a few grains of sand on the back swing is not considered a penalty. However, if we do want the USGA to apply some element of common sense, then I think they should take a good hard look at themselves in terms of this business of informing the player(s) as soon as the penalty has been confirmed. From a fairness perspective I would have liked to see them hold off telling Lang until after she had played her 3rd shot as well. But then that would have gone against the USGA’s No 1 rule…..thou shalt not use common sense.
satch_boogie
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:13 pm
I really like the idea of allowing rules officials to apply some discretion. In basketball the definition of a foul isn’t written in concrete for the officials to apply – they decide on a situational basis what is a foul. I would hope that in golf it doesn’t go that far but allowing rules officials to apply the rules with discretion while protecting the integrity of the game and of the competition seems to make a whole lot of sense.
Rwj
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:22 pm
I don’t understand why they told the playing partner of the incurred penalty strokes. It seems it should have been only told to the player that broke the rule
dr bloor
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:43 pm
No, her competitors clearly should also be apprised of the situation, or they’re playing at an unfair disadvantage as to how to play their shots.
Smokin'Gun
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:21 pm
Ouch!!!
SB
Jul 11, 2016 at 11:54 am
These rulings make golf look like an elitist sport ruled by a bunch of people obsessed with penalizing people for breaking rules that are not visible to the naked eye.
If neither the player, nor her competitor, nor the rules official with the group could physically see the penalty, it should not be called. Could you imagine what would happen if baseball fans could call in missed ball and strike calls that they can see in super slo-mo HD? It would be a disaster. Nordquist didn’t know of the violation (and could not have known with human senses). Same with DJ. There was no advantage gained. The rule should be changed so there is no penalty. Would also speed up the game.
Grizz01
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:55 pm
What is the point of zooming in that close in the first place? For the network to gin up contraversy… that simple.
john
Jul 11, 2016 at 11:47 am
Chip, you indicate “there’s a clear sweep mark where the club goes back”…I believe what you see is the ball trail where it rolled to its rest location in the sand not a sweep mark.
One can only agree with the ruling as it is written however the intent was not there. Killing golf these rules. Something need to be written regarding intent and advantage gained.
B. Parsons
Jul 11, 2016 at 11:45 am
Chip Royce: that “sweep” mark you see is from the ball rolling to where it ended up. Her club did not make that.
Milo
Jul 11, 2016 at 11:44 am
What a bunch of dumb.
Kevin Michaels
Jul 11, 2016 at 11:39 am
Not supposed to drag the club back while in the sand. Penalty
farmer
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:57 am
The salient point here is that if AN had not driven her ball into the bunker, there would have been no chance for a penalty.
desmond
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:32 am
Maybe we need to define “grounding the club” in the rules (maybe it is). One part of the heel touched several grains while starting the backswing. This is not testing the sand. If I were the USGA, I would check out the intent of the rule, instead of using strict liability, as was yesterday’s interpretation.
Gordy
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:28 am
The replay thing just needs to stop. Unless every shot on every hole has replay it seems the rules are skewed a bit against the leaders of the tourney. Essentially, making it harder for them to win giving the advantage to someone who is coming from behind and the camera’s aren’t on them 24/7. So, in my opinion the final scores are not accurate unless everyone has the same scrutiny such as this. So, USGA remember that commercial where you said everyone plays by the rules? The Pro’s and the pions like me? I guess the pro’s don’t even play by the same rules. EPIC fail once again. Although, I do agree with the ruling.
Gordy
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:47 am
For the Record I used to really love the USGA and everything they have stood for. But lately, they have been blowing it with the refusal to do the right thing and just get rid of replay. It just turns me off because they call it a game of integrity but use it to check everything these players do. Golf is a game of imperfection and that’s what makes it beautiful. Yet the use of replay tries to make it perfect. Pretty bummed out because they are killing the game.
Bert
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:01 pm
The USGA does not have a HD replay system set-up to monitor play. However when an infraction of a Rule is reported to them they have no choice to evaluate the facts concerning the infraction by either consultation with the player, or a witness, and even reviewing a video of the infraction. The USGA has no desire to monitor shots by video cameras, but when an infraction is reported they have no choice but to evaluate and apply a penalty of required under the Rules.
DrRob1963
Jul 12, 2016 at 5:29 am
These last two US Open controversies mean that the USGA now need to monitor the videos and TV, if they are going to do their job properly.
Gordy
Jul 12, 2016 at 8:44 am
My point behind the fact they are using replay to monitor these shots is pretty plain and simple. Golf is a game of integrity and the rules are the same for everyone. Unlike other sports literally the rules are the same for everyone, regardless of junior tournament to the Pros. This is a big selling point by the USGA. So, within their own tournament they do not enforce the rules the same, the guys or gals that aren’t being followed shot for shot could theoretically get away with the same situation and nobody would know the difference. Yet, the final group gets scrutinized like this. In my mind, that is essentially creating an unfair playing field. So, if the USGA got smart for once, they would get rid of replay period. I do not disagree with the call, she broke the rule period. DJ, although I disagree with the call by the definition of the USGA he broke the rule. What I have a problem with is how they got their. Golf is a game of factions. It separates good shots from bad shots, penalties from non penalties. If they truly want a fair outcome to a tournament then either HD cameras are on every player for every shot, or they aren’t.
Bert
Jul 12, 2016 at 9:19 pm
I tend to agree! HD cameras for all or not at all. But for now the USGA must use all information available to determine if a reported infraction occurred.
Jack
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:27 am
I hope before there is another awards presentation, the USGA will stage an intervention and get Ms. Murphy the help that she so desperately needs.
Ben A.
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:09 am
You wrote about how she soled her club in the bunker then take the USGA side. Voted shank. Congrats Bethany on the win
Abolish the USGA
Jul 11, 2016 at 9:36 am
Shameful organization. I guess their goal is to shatter hopes and dreams of the worlds greatest golfers. Maybe the new rules should state anyone who shoots over par is dq’d. Anyone who can’t hit the ball perfectly out of the harmonic center of a golf club is deemed unfit to play. That’ll show those pros!
She touched one granule of sand on her takeaway for the swing. That is not testing the sand’s conditions prior to playing. A complete misinterpretation of the rules.
Christen_the_sloop
Jul 11, 2016 at 9:51 am
You are wasting your talent writing here. Brilliant Piece. Bravo.
Rule needs changing
Jul 11, 2016 at 10:53 am
If the USGA are going to be this strict the rule needs changing. By no means was she testing the conditions? If you penalized for this infraction you should give out infractions if you touch a blade of grass. That would be the equivalent.
Bert
Jul 11, 2016 at 1:05 pm
No it’s not, a blade of grass is not the ground or sand within a hazard. Touching a live blade of grass within a hazard isn’t a penalty. Remember we are talking about playing from within a hazard, not through-the-green.
Chris
Jul 11, 2016 at 12:37 pm
And the reasoning behind the rule is a complete joke. Does anyone really believe that you get a better idea of the sand’s condition by grounding the club than you do by walking in the bunker. As soon as I walk into a bunker I am completely aware of its condition.
stephenf
Jul 11, 2016 at 3:08 pm
Then either get the rule changed or play another game. Simple as that.
Chris
Jul 12, 2016 at 8:31 am
Way to jump off the deep end there Stephen. Just because I don’t agree with a rule doesn’t stop me from playing this wonderful game. I will still play happily and will still happily abide by the dumb rule.
JOEL GOODMAN
Jul 11, 2016 at 6:36 pm
CORRECT. THERE WAS NO, ZERO, NONE INTENT.