Walking it in

[JungleJ]

Yesterday former champion Sandy Lyle, as well as Rich Beem, quit the Open after 10 and 9 holes respectively. Lyle in particular has been criticised for walking in, not least by Mark Brown, who was the first alternate.

Both Lyle and Beem have confirmed they are not injured, they were just finding it too difficult.

What do you think? Should pro golfers at least complete their rounds?

[HackBlack]

Pro golfers who quit due to non-injury should be fined.

Maybe at their next event they should have to carry a sign, "I'm a quitter".

[Bigvivec]

Fines and public humiliation...imagine if a soccer team left the pitch after going down 5-0 after 20 minutes...what an awful example for a worldwide audience...

[HackBlack]

Originally Posted by Bigvivec

Fines and public humiliation...imagine if a soccer team left the pitch after going down 5-0 after 20 minutes...what an awful example for a worldwide audience...

BigV,
I need a soccer explanation.

Say the games tied after 90 minutes. They continue play and no one is scoring. It seems at some random point in extra minutes that the referee says the match is over. So, the match ends in a tie. What's going on to cause the ref to make this decision at odd points in the overtime?

[deronsizemore]

Yes, if a pro golfer starts the round, they should be required to finish it or else have some sort of fine put on them. If they are injured, that's one thing, but to simply quit because you're a big baby and you're not playing well, that's absurd.

A lot of the pros today act like if they cannot go out and shoot a 65 every round then they just don't want to play. Always complaining about course difficulty or what not. Everyone plays the same course, and if the winning score ends up being +10 or -10 it really make no difference. I think it's just an ego thing, if they can't shoot way under par, their ego is damaged.

[JungleJ]

Originally Posted by HackBlack

BigV,
I need a soccer explanation.

Say the games tied after 90 minutes. They continue play and no one is scoring. It seems at some random point in extra minutes that the referee says the match is over. So, the match ends in a tie. What's going on to cause the ref to make this decision at odd points in the overtime?

Not sure what you're referring to but:

The match is 2 x 45 minute halves. The referee does not stop the match clock when the ball is out of play or there is an injury. What he does is keep track of unnecessary stoppages and adds that on at the end of each half. This stoppage time, or time added on, varies from match to match so it might seem random. In the EPL at least the minimum time to be added on is notified to the 4th official who indicates in to the fans and players on a board. This happens whatever the score is.

In "overtime" - referred to as extra time - unless they are playing "Golden goal" (= sudden death) they play 2 x 15 minutes halves. Again time may need to be added on at the end of each of these. Since extra time is only played in matches where a winner must be decided, if extra time concludes with the scores still level, a penalty shootout ensues.

Of course, this refers to football as played in places where football is big. The MLS in the USA may do some of these things slightly differently.

[Bigvivec]

Originally Posted by HackBlack

BigV,
I need a soccer explanation.

Say the games tied after 90 minutes. They continue play and no one is scoring. It seems at some random point in extra minutes that the referee says the match is over. So, the match ends in a tie. What's going on to cause the ref to make this decision at odd points in the overtime?

The amount of extra time is determined and posted on a handheld eletronic sign by the fourth official on the sidelines at midfield just before the end of the 90min of regular time...this is a rough estimation of the amount of time spent wasted by subs walking off the field, balls being put back into play, players rolling around on the ground after a tackle, actual injuries that cause the game to be momentarily stopped so the player may be escorted from the pitch...league games may end in ties...second legs of home and away play where the aggregate and other factors like away goals determine whether the game is "tied" in the second leg of the two game series, then after injury extra time two periods of 15 minutes are added, the second might include extra injury time again...games where there is a potential for extra time to be added are known in advance, and managers stratigize including that eventuality...

Now back to the regularly scheduled programming...

[Bigvivec]

Originally Posted by JungleJ

Of course, this refers to football as played in places where football is big. The MLS in the USA may do some of these things slightly differently.

The NASL in the US when I was a kid used to have the "shootout" instead of penalties, and the potential was there in every match...5 players from each side would each start out at the 35yard line (yes, they painted a big stripe on both ends of the pitch 35yards from the goal) and have a certain amount of seconds (I forget) to dribble down, shoot and score 1 on 1 with the keeper...some of the circus moves I used to see players try were just silly...imagine C. Ronaldo or the like with their head feints over penalty kicks having 35 yards to work with...sideshow...

[Bulls9999]

I like what they do in my son's tournies in the AJGA. If you have an unjustified withdrawal....you can't just feign illness, they even have medical staff to check you out.

But if you have an unjustified withdrawal, or walk off during a tourney, or don't even show up to something that you're listed of being in the field....then they boot you out of the next tourney...AFTER YOU MAKE THE FIELD (since you gain entry based on performance status, you don't always get into any tourney you want to get into, so they wait until you made the field in one and that's when they boot you from it, and even if you do have the 'fully-exempt' status that does allow you to get into anyone, you are only allowed to play 5 AJGA tournies/yr, so you'll get booted out of 1 of those 5 you make the field in).

Originally Posted by JungleJ

Yesterday former champion Sandy Lyle, as well as Rich Beem, quit the Open after 10 and 9 holes respectively. Lyle in particular has been criticised for walking in, not least by Mark Brown, who was the first alternate.

Both Lyle and Beem have confirmed they are not injured, they were just finding it too difficult.

What do you think? Should pro golfers at least complete their rounds?

[straightshooter]

Originally Posted by JungleJ

Both Lyle and Beem have confirmed they are not injured, they were just finding it too difficult.

Is that how they put it? It seems hard to believe! Did the course conditions damage them mentally so badly that it was unreasonable for them to be expected to continue?

[Diane]

Originally Posted by JungleJ

What do you think? Should pro golfers at least complete their rounds?

No - it's up to them if they want to be quitters.

[CristieKerr]

Originally Posted by JungleJ

What do you think? Should pro golfers at least complete their rounds?

I do not like this one bit. Suck it up and keep playing if you aren't hurt. Having said that, many people will argue they are personal contractors so they can do what they feel and leave possible money on the table. If they ain't gettin' paid I guess they should be able to walk away and be a quitter.

Personally, I think they should fined if they leave without being injured and/or just because they are playing badly. Just like I think the PGA should bring in an LPGA-esque rule of having all PGA players play each event once in a span of four or five or even six years.

[Darth Fader]

I dont think its unreasonable to expect them to complete at least 1 round,all they have done is cost two stand by players the chance to play in the open.

[Wazmankg]

They should finish the round of course. But if they start fining them the guys will just come up with bogus injuries. Not much they can do really. Reminds me of our state championships in HS. Only 4 from each team could play. I was #5, so I caddied for our #2 guy. He got the shanks and picked up after 5 holes. It did not sit well with me or our coach to put it mildly.

[droogy33]

It would seem to me that any player who walks off the course, without injury, is/was not mentally prepared for competition, and shouldn't have accepted a place in the field.

This is a slap in the face to the alternates who are standing by, ready to play.

But I suppose there is really nothing to be done about it. After all, we talk so much about "independent contractors," who set their own course.

How about denying sponsors' exemptions, if it applies?

[Bigvivec]

At least Rory had an excuse... People went nuts when he pulled out of Tiger's tournament...this seems much worse to me, giving it a try then balling up the whole tournament and throwing it in the garbage...slap in the face to alternates, slap in the face to fans (if they have any anymore), and lack of respect for the event itself...you ought to complete a round...pull out before the second if that's what you want to do, but walking off the course is a big no no...kids wouldn't get away with that for sure...

[Diane]

Originally Posted by Bigvivec

At least Rory had an excuse... People went nuts when he pulled out of Tiger's tournament...this seems much worse to me, giving it a try then balling up the whole tournament and throwing it in the garbage...slap in the face to alternates, slap in the face to fans (if they have any anymore), and lack of respect for the event itself...you ought to complete a round...pull out before the second if that's what you want to do, but walking off the course is a big no no...kids wouldn't get away with that for sure...

Why? Don't get me wrong - I think it's a cop out, but I also think anyone has the right to quit if they want to.

[stlcard_25]

I would recommend a solid fine ($5K? $10K) and the loss of sponsor's exemptions if applicable. I think it's ridiculous that a professional would even think of packing it in for a reason as lame as not enjoying the course.

[JimSomebody]

I think it's unprofessional for a pro to walk off the course for no other reason that he (or she) is in a snit over poor play. Thinking back, I've never walked off a course (or a ball field or a tennis court) because of poor play, and I've had LOTS of lousy days, believe me. Can't imagine doing that. You have to hang in there, keep fighting, maybe work it out or at least learn something later.

[Bigvivec]

Originally Posted by Diane

Why? Don't get me wrong - I think it's a cop out, but I also think anyone has the right to quit if they want to.

Tell it to my Jr. High wrestling coach...I'd be running laps for a year...


It's something that little boys get drilled into them as soon as they enter organized sports...you don't quit...ever...if a little part of you exists that says it's alright to quit IN COMPETITION, it will always be there if not extinguished and sit on your shoulder like a little cartoon Devil's advocate whispering that if the going gets tough, the hot toddys are waiting and the hotel room is already paid for...gutless and exposure of weakness...detest both as a fan of professional sports and there ought to be repercussions for those who exhibit such behaviors AS A PROFESSIONAL (serious amateur competition as well...this kind of thing should be strongly discouraged)...people always wax on about the lessons learned on playing fields that go beyond the game...self belief, determination in the face of hardship, grit, heart...call it what you will but these guys apparently missed the day that they taught these attributes...

[Bigvivec]

Originally Posted by