Rules nittery is more reason to leave, not less.

lol no

Oh sure, let's just not follow the rules during PGA Tour events. Are you kidding me? Do you really think he wouldn't have been penalized upon discovery in any professional event?

It's a very basic rule and it's his own fault he didn't know the hazard line is part of the hazard and that if any part of the ball is touching that line then his ball is in the hazard.

Hell, I've probably known that since I was a teenager.

it's basic stuff. always amazes me when pros (and their caddies) get penalized for obv rule book stuff

rules
what are they good for?
absolutely nothing!
say it again!

The super rules nittery is born of the day when players kept their own scores and no one else knew. Jeez. That had to be super nit. But nowadays seems they could drop some of that because everything is so visible.

It's not a coincidence that DJ and Reed are already on LIV.

Actually the line for penalty area is not consistent with line for OOB. That is, a ball is considered in penalty area if ANY part of the ball touches the line. A ball is considered OOB if ALL of the ball is INSIDE the line, whether imaginary or not. "Inside" meaning the side that is OOB.

I don't know why the governing bodies still have this inconsistency in the rules. I know why the OOB rule is written that way, not sure about penalty areas though. Maybe because penalty areas historically were water hazards, and it was easier to see if a ball was simply touching water to deem it in the hazard (instead of the ball resting entirely in water). Easy enough to put that in the rules if necessary and make penalty/OOB lines consistent.

The rules for hazard and OB are a bit different, no argument there. But the hazard rule is so simple, if your ball touches the line you're in the hazard. And if a professional or even high level amateur doesn't know this then they deserve to get penalized.

Here's one for you regarding the OB line and why it can be tricky at times. Let's say the OB line is 3 inches wide and your ball (which is 1.68 inches wide) is resting directly in the middle of it. There is white paint on both sides of the ball. Does the ball lie in bounds or out of bounds?

Remember what a "line" is and it's not tricky. The line demarcating OOB is the line that separates in play from OOB. Since the ball is entirely INSIDE this line in your example, the ball is OOB. Again, "inside" meaning the side that is OOB.

A line has no width. The paint is on the OOB side of the line.

Bonus question. Your tee shot on your first hole results with the ball lying near an OOB fence, and the post nearest the ball has been dislodged from its mooring. If you determine the line using the dislodged post, your ball is in. If you use the post mooring, your ball is OOB. You overhear somebody say that they saw the property owner take out the fence post from its mooring yesterday while cutting the grass, and did not put it back in.

Is your ball OOB?

Yes, OB is defined as the inside edge of the line/stakes at ground level extending vertically. (note we using the words inside and outside differently is appears. Per the rules, inside is used to define the golf course side while outside is used to define OB.)

Regarding your example, without double checking the decisions book I have two thoughts. 1, if the post has obviously been moved in error, the line is defined by where the post is supposed to be. 2, if a ball lies off the golf course property (it seems to technically lie in a homeowner's yard) then it's OB regardless of where the stakes are.

Admittedly though, I am not 100% about the ruling.

There should be a time limit as well. If nothing has been brought forward by the end of the day or start of the 4th round. Telling a guy almost 24 hours later as he's getting ready to play his final round with huge money on the line doesn't seem right. I also understand a rules a rule but was there any advantage to him leaving the ball touch the line, he was still standing on rocks.

There is a time limit, once the last scorecard of the tournament is signed the event is over and no rulings can be altered no matter how egregious.

OOB is defined by the "boundary edge of the course." This is determined by committee. Since we can assume the committee has not changed the boundary of the course, and the homeowner's actions are deemed to not replace the committee, the ball should be ruled as though the fence was in its original position, thus ball is OOB.

Cam admitted that his ball was touching the paint.

If Cam disputed the ball was touching the paint, then I believe his word would hold as tournament organizers are no longer allowed to use high definition cameras to determine a rules infraction.

IIRC If this happened prior to the recent rules changes, he would be disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard.

Maybe there was an advantage. Maybe his ball was sitting up perfectly on the line and could've sat down if he dropped again. That's why there is no option, you have to re-drop. This is as simple as it gets.

LIV ain't gots no rulzzzz?

oh yeah, i forgot...nobody would have seen it because nobody would have been watching and certainly not re-watching a zero competition tele....errrr.....webcast.

doubt anyone would call it on themselves with the race for the bonesaw on the line...

Most pros (I assume) know how to drop a ball to get a preferred lie. It was likely confusion over the line issue noted above.

Yup, he was still standing on rocks and hardly a perfect lie. I highly doubt it was done for any sort of advantage. A simple mistake he had no problem recognizing and owning up to.

Almost feels like the PGA got Cam to WD from the FedEx Cup somehow. Like they threatened to bring legal action against him if he won or something, based on his prior agreement with Liv.

Maybe that's a little tinfoil hat, but Cam winning the Cup, taking all the money, and then immediately going to Liv, would be a terrible look for the Tour, that I'm sure they would like to avoid.

Patrick Reed suing Golf Channel + Brandel Chamblee $750M for defamation.

It seems Reed wants Chamblee off the air and I'm guessing he would settle for that + attorney costs.

I haven’t read the lawsuit but going to just go ahead and assume it’s LOL Fatrick.

you'd be fight. what a fkn snowflake Reed is:

fwiw winning libel and defamation lawsuits is nearly impossible to do

Especially when you're a public figure, which Fatrick very much is.

If it gets to trial it’s going to be great. Defendants will get to lay it all out as to the REAL reasons people hate him.