Fact or fiction: Michelle Wie got a raw deal
Fact or fiction: Michelle Wie got a raw deal in being DQ'd.
1. Point 1: the DQ was based on a simulation or recreation of events from yesterday, not on actual events or the video of the 3rd round.
As discussed in the posts below, Michelle Wie was DQ'd after she was forced by LPGA rules officials today to recreate a ball drop from yesterday on the 7th hole. The LPGA admitted that NBC tapes were inconclusive if the drop was closer to the hole, but the rules officials must have thought that a "recreation" of events from yesterday based on Michelle's and her caddie's memories could precisely determine (i) where they found the ball in the bush and (ii) where Michelle dropped her ball. UPDATE: Also, I wonder if the LPGA Rules Official measured off the distance from Saturday's pin placement, instead of Sunday's -- the pin placement establishes the apex for the triangle, so it's possible the ball position could be closer to the hole on Sunday, but further away on Saturday. Just draw a little diagram with 2 points in the rough and then move the pin placement to the left and then the right. This recreation, fraught with guesswork and possible inaccuracies, raises question about the entire process in the first place.
2. Point 2: LPGA did not rely on Michelle's word or integrity, as the PGA did on Tiger's integrity.
The LPGA rules official apparently had to rely on a string measure tape in order to determine the putative drop from yesterday, as recreated today, was 12-15 inches closer to the hole. When is a string tape ever used to measure off any golfer's drop??? If the video tape of the actual 3d round was inconclusive, shouldn't you rely on the golfer's integrity to admit or not whether the ball was closer to the hole? Michelle said she thought she did what was right, and would do it again. In a similar situation at this year's Masters, where the videotape was deemed inconclusive, the PGA rules officials allowed Tiger Woods to make the decision whether he had violated the putting rule against the straddle stance (see here).
3. Point 3: for the LPGA to issue the DQ more than 2 hours after the end of today's round violates the spirit of USGA Rule 34-1.
It states: "In stroke play, a penalty must not be ... imposed after the competition has closed. A competition is closed when the result has been officially announced." I did see Michelle Wie's name posted 4th on the scoreboard after the tournament was over -- presumably, the DQ occurred after Annika had been declared the winner and handed the winner's check and trophy.
12 Comments:
The most unfortunate thing about the DQ, is that it now becomes the lead story and once again Annika is getting ignored. Who cares that the 4th place finisher (who lost by 10 strokes) was disqualified. Annika was amazing this week, and should be getting all the attention.
fact!
I think it was definately a raw deal.
As far as the prior comment about Michelle crowding out the attention to Annika, i completely disagree. I've seen a lot of headlines about Annika beating the new kids. I guarentee she got a lot more press than she would have if Michelle hadn't been in the tournament. How much press did she typically get for her last 63 wins.
Great point about Tiger Woods. I wasn't aware of that. I think it would have been more honorable to let Michelle decide after calling it to her attention, if the videotape was inconclusive.
I think that it is sad that the DQ came so late in the event. The drop should have been questioned right away. The player should not have been penalized for the faliure of the officals to be on top of what was going on. What would happen if all sports took such a STIFF NECKED approach to reviewing calls in games that happened A DAY EARLIER. I think that She has proven to be more mature about this than others involved.
Fiction.
The rules are the rules and Michelle Wie violated them and as a result paid the price. We may not all agree on how fair it was, especially the way it happened but according to the ROG, it was handled appropriately, she signed an incorrect scorecard and it was reported before the results were considered official. Now clearly the infraction was only caught because of the massive publicity surrounding her but that is part of the price of fame and it may not be fair but then life is not fair. Ask Tiger about getting fined for swearing when others who do not have a mic in front of them at all times do not. I am sure there are at least a few LPGA players who have multiple tourney wins that do not think its fair that someone who has yet to be in the hunt to win a tourney on Sunday afternoon gets a 10 million dollar endorsement deal. Welcome to the media spotlight Michelle Wie.
Michael Bamberger of Sports Illustrated is the Southern most portion of a north-bound horse. He clearly recognized the increased value of a Wie DQ'd over a Wie forced to take a two stroke penalty, thus deciding to report what he supposedly observed 24 hours after the fact. Once again proof positive of what bottom-feeders sport journalists are. As to the intelligence of LPGA officialdom; the minute the tape showed anything less than the two club-length distance (approx 6 feet) that the relief rule allows, given the unexact nature of the replay on Sunday, the issue should have been dropped. While no fan of Wie, clearly someone in the LPGA doesn't like a 16 year old upstart.
I agree with most of the last commenter's comment. I'm not sure, though, it's justified to attack the SI sportwriter or necessarily impute a bad motive to him. Bamberger didn't make the call to DQ Wie. That was the LPGA Rules Official Robert Smith.
Wie got a raw deal aided by 2 old and jealous grumpy old men in Michael Bamberger of Sports Illustrated and the gutless LPGA Rules Official Robert Smith.
As for one of the earlier comments on Annika's loss of attention? Please! Read the headlines in European presses. This is America, Wie is American, do the math.
LPGA official R.O.Smith is a senile idiot and Michael Bamberger is a real jerk. The DQ was without merit. The whole thing stinks.
Amen to that!! I discontinued my subscription to SI. I've had enough of their journalistic BS behavior over the years. This won't be the last. As for Robert Smith, "Jerk" is the perfect description for him.
Whatever Bamberger's motivation, it's a violation of journalistic principles for a reporter to have be a determining factor of the outcome of what he's covering. It's why the New York Times stopped participating in the AP football coaches' poll: because the BCS was using it to determine bowl positions.
Post a Comment
<< Home