We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Did Kenny Perry Cheat?

RocketSauce

RocketSauce

ManBearPig
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
2,531
Reaction score
24
Location
St Petersburg
Looks like he cheated to me. I don't think your allowed to push down a clump of grass behind the ball...correct me if I'm wrong.
 
he ended up winning that tournament too in the playoff against Hoffman
 
Hard to tell how far behind the ball he is setting the club down.

Is he tapping down grass directly behind the ball or a few inches back that gives you a better view of the ball? That would be the real question.
 
Definitely looked to me like he tamped the grass down directly behind his ball.
 
I was under the impression that as long as he doesn't move the ball that is legal.
 
Puttin4Bird said:
I was under the impression that as long as he doesn't move the ball that is legal.
Click to expand...

In which case you could just mash down the grass all around the ball, making it almost like you're in the fairway...
 
Floppy said:
In which case you could just mash down the grass all around the ball, making it almost like you're in the fairway...
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think you can quite do that, but I've seen guys step behind their ball before....I could be wrong too so don't quote me.
 
It is permissible to measure/get a feel for the depth of the rough by grounding the club some distance behind the ball, isn't it? If so, and if the clubhead wasn't right at the the ball so that doing so didn't alter the lie, it would be permissible. It looked to me like the club was a few inches back. That could change the amount of the ball visible to the camera without actually changing the lie. Seems inconclusive.
 
13-2. Improving Lie, Area of Intended Stance or Swing, or Line of Play
A player must not improve or allow to be improved:

• the position or lie of his ball,
• the area of his intended stance or swing,
• his line of play or a reasonable extension of that line beyond the hole, or
• the area in which he is to drop or place a ball,

by any of the following actions:

• pressing a club on the ground,
• moving, bending or breaking anything growing or fixed (including immovable obstructions and objects defining out of bounds),
• creating or eliminating irregularities of surface,
• removing or pressing down sand, loose soil, replaced divots or other cut turf placed in position, or
• removing dew, frost or water.

However, the player incurs no penalty if the action occurs:

• in grounding the club lightly when addressing the ball,
• in fairly taking his stance,
• in making a stroke or the backward movement of his club for a stroke and the stroke is made,
• in creating or eliminating irregularities of surface within the teeing ground (Rule 11-1) or in removing dew, frost or water from the teeing ground, or
• on the putting green in removing sand and loose soil or in repairing damage. (Rule 16-1).
Click to expand...

Unless im reading it wrong, I dont think you can do it.
 
Not enough there to call him out as a cheater imo.
 
If only there were some sort of written guidance on what actions are proper or improper. And if only someone had taken that written guidance and bound it together into some sort of book-like form. And if only that book-like form was freely available on the internet for anyone to view, copy, and paste . . .

13-2. Improving Lie, Area of Intended Stance or Swing, or Line of Play

A player must not improve or allow to be improved:

· the position or lie of his ball,

· the area of his intended stance or swing,

· his line of play or a reasonable extension of that line beyond the hole, or

· the area in which he is to drop or place a ball,

by any of the following actions:

· pressing a club on the ground,

· moving, bending or breaking anything growing or fixed (including immovable obstructions and objects defining out of bounds),

· creating or eliminating irregularities of surface,

· removing or pressing down sand, loose soil, replaced divots or other cut turf placed in position, or

· removing dew, frost or water.

However, the player incurs no penalty if the action occurs:

· in grounding the club lightly when addressing the ball,

· in fairly taking his stance,

· in making a stroke or the backward movement of his club for a stroke and the stroke is made,

· in creating or eliminating irregularities of surface within the teeing ground (Rule 11-1) or in removing dew, frost or water from the teeing ground, or

· on the putting green in removing sand and loose soil or in repairing damage (Rule 16-1).

Exception: Ball in hazard - see Rule 13-4.
Click to expand...
And if only there were reviews of the rules from real world situations that had also been written down as interpretations of the rules and given some sort of official designation as a decision on the applicability of a particular rule or rules . . .

13-2/13 Bending Grass in Removal of Loose Impediments

Q. A player whose ball was in long grass rolled a stone away from the ball, pressing down some of the long grass in the process. Was he in breach of Rule 13-2?

A. Yes, if the pressing down of the grass improved the position or lie of his ball, the area of his intended swing or his line of play.
Click to expand...

EDIT:

Spoiler
And if only Harry could type, and copy & paste faster . . .
 
Harry was slow again!



***but did add more info
 
Interesting. Wish the clip were longer. Wonder what KP's explanation was?
 
Well, what do you know. Guess what showed up on GC's "Shag Bag Blog" today:

Did Kenny Perry cheat during his playoff victory at this year's FBR Open? The controversy is gaining steam on both sides of the Atlantic.

According to story from The Observer, PGA Tour officials met with Perry at The Players and cleared him of any wrong doing. John Paramor, chief referee of the European Tour, also says Perry is innocent, after having reviewed the video in question more than 100 times.

It is apparent, when looking at the clip, that Perry's lie did improve. But was there intent? That's the key.

It's hard to imagine any player doing this – on national TV, during a playoff. It's especially difficult to imagine someone of Perry's character intentionally doing this.

Here is video of the incident:

[omitted 'cause we already posted it yesterday.]
​
– Mercer Baggs
Posted May 18, 12:53 p.m. ET
Click to expand...
 
i know its hard to tell, but dang it, it looked like he improved the area of his intended swing to me.

A player must not improve or allow to be improved:

· the position or lie of his ball,

· the area of his intended stance or swing,

if u stop the video RIGHT AT 14 seconds at the very end, you can see the grass that he mashed down right behind his ball
 
Looks that way to me too RS.
 
and i know you are allowed to ground your club around the area of the ball so you can get a feel of what the grass feels like. but you dont do it DIRECTLY behind the ball. you do it off to the side, not a few inches (if it was even that far) BEHIND it... i think the officials said it was allowable just to save face since the tournament was already over with when this came up. i say he cheated
 
Didn't someone say that 'the only way to win is cheat' or 'if you're not cheatin you're not tryin?':stickbeat:
 
RocketSauce said:
and i know you are allowed to ground your club around the area of the ball so you can get a feel of what the grass feels like.
Click to expand...

Unless it's in a hazard of course.
 
It looks like he patted down the grass right behind the ball, and then moved the club back a couple of inches and did it again... You can see this at Seconds 7,8, & 9...
I would say there was no intent if he did it just behind the ball and then stopped.
Thing is, he went back and forth twice from right behind the ball to a few inches away...

Sorry Kenny....I think your busted...
 
Well, one, this isn't persuasive at all:

It's hard to imagine any player doing this – on national TV, during a playoff. It's especially difficult to imagine someone of Perry's character intentionally doing this.
Click to expand...

That's no argument at all; it is just circular reasoning. Makes the lawyer side of me shudder.

But, two, as written, I'm not sure the rule turns so clearly on whether the player subjectively intended to improve the lie or not. Rather, it appears that, if by your actions you in fact improve the lie and it is not by one of the ennumerated allowable acts, you are in violation. The one with some wiggle room is the exception for "fairly taking your stance," but "fairly" suggests an objective standard as well. That is, would an objectively reasonable golfer press down on the grass immediately behind the ball that many times in taking his stance? If the A = no, then it doesn't matter if Perry intended by those presses to take his stance. (Just as it didn't matter that Balesteros wanted to fairly take his stance at the British Open a dozen years ago in a way that the cart path interfered. The rules official called BS on that claim, because it wasn't objectively reasonable, regardless of Balesteros's claimed subjective intent to take such a stance. Similar thing came up with Sergio at the Ryder Cup, when AK famously remarked "that's your stance?" or something like it.) At least that's how I read it.
 
worst_shot_ever said:
Similar thing came up with Sergio at the Ryder Cup, when AK famously remarked "that's your stance?" or something like it.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, when AK said "That's your normal stance?" I was thinking the same thing. Of course, then he said "Okay, man. You gotta do what you gotta do." and then promptly pummeled Garcia.

(I also agree with the rest of what you said w_s_e.)
 
worst_shot_ever said:
Well, one, this isn't persuasive at all:



That's no argument at all; it is just circular reasoning. Makes the lawyer side of me shudder.

But, two, as written, I'm not sure the rule turns so clearly on whether the player subjectively intended to improve the lie or not. Rather, it appears that, if by your actions you in fact improve the lie and it is not by one of the ennumerated allowable acts, you are in violation. The one with some wiggle room is the exception for "fairly taking your stance," but "fairly" suggests an objective standard as well. That is, would an objectively reasonable golfer press down on the grass immediately behind the ball that many times in taking his stance? If the A = no, then it doesn't matter if Perry intended by those presses to take his stance. (Just as it didn't matter that Balesteros wanted to fairly take his stance at the British Open a dozen years ago in a way that the cart path interfered. The rules official called BS on that claim, because it wasn't objectively reasonable, regardless of Balesteros's claimed subjective intent to take such a stance. Similar thing came up with Sergio at the Ryder Cup, when AK famously remarked "that's your stance?" or something like it.) At least that's how I read it.
Click to expand...

Once again, WSE nails it. It sounds as if the officials let Perry off because his actions weren't intentional. The rule doesn't have an out for intent. It's not "did you intend to improve your lie," it's "did you improve your lie"? Perry's motives are irrelevant. He did or did not improve his lie. Q.E.D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top