The Open Championship 2026: Crowning the champion golfer of the year

[Michael_ Gee]

Early on Gannon asked their rules guy if it was spotted on the course and he said no, someone called it in afterward.

That should not be allowed. Official blows a call, part of the game, part of any game,

 

[Cosmo]

It's one of those rules where intent doesn't come into play. If you improve your conditions affecting the stroke, even unintentionally, you get dinged.

I also assume by "called in" it was called in by the Rules official in a truck on site that is tasked with keeping an eye on the entire course. They legislated "Seamus calling in, six pints of Guinness deep from the pub" from the latest Rules iteration. The Lexi Thompson addendum, basically.

 

[SixToe]

VAR from the pub?

 

[Michael_ Gee]

There are reasons not to care for DeChambeau, but this isn't one of them. IMO the only way to avoid violating one or more of the rules of golf is to never play golf. They are complicated and strict. A routine part of any top pro tournament is players asking about the rules, because no one can know them all. So **** happens. Tough on Bryson, but it shouldn't affect anyone's opinion of him whatever that was before.

 

[UPChip]

There are reasons not to care for DeChambeau, but this isn't one of them. IMO the only way to avoid violating one or more of the rules of golf is to never play golf. They are complicated and strict. A routine part of any top pro tournament is players asking about the rules, because no one can know them all. So **** happens. Tough on Bryson, but it shouldn't affect anyone's opinion of him whatever that was before.

I mean, he could have hit it in the fairway.

 

[DanielSimpsonDay]

he doesn't even associate with anyone who would cheat at golf

 

[MileHigh]

I think Spieth is cooked for good. He may never win another tournament, let alone a major.

Yup. Sad to see. That back nine was a disgrace. He is so far gone, as you say, there likely is no coming back.

 

[MileHigh]

DeDouche clearly improved the lie and as Cosmo said, someone we trust on here when it comes to the Rules of Golf, intent doesn't matter.

He needs to grow up. His act has long worn thin. And if he doesn't show up tomorrow morning as is the threat, fine by me.

 

[Pickleballgolds]

There are reasons not to care for DeChambeau, but this isn't one of them. IMO the only way to avoid violating one or more of the rules of golf is to never play golf. They are complicated and strict. A routine part of any top pro tournament is players asking about the rules, because no one can know them all. So **** happens. Tough on Bryson, but it shouldn't affect anyone's opinion of him whatever that was before.

There are players who’ve been on tour for 15 years and they don’t have the first clue as to how to take relief from casual water or any number of situations that most 30 handicappers can handle. That’s inexcusable.

 

[qtlaw]

With Bryson, admittedly I've only see the video afterwards. However, look at that area he trampled down, what other reason does he have to walk three feet all around the ball? They've already found his ball. Plus he knows you cannot improve your backswing (or lie).

What typically happens with the rules official is the player says "can I _______ (walk around and stomp a 3 foot circle around my ball)? Even if you don't know the rule, you ask.

 

[rtse11]

There are players who’ve been on tour for 15 years and they don’t have the first clue as to how to take relief from casual water or any number of situations that most 30 handicappers can handle. That’s inexcusable.

30 handicappers don't even know enough to let faster players through, or to not shout "HERE'S YOUR BALL" from across the fairway

 

[MileHigh]

He knew exactly what he was doing and his theatrics were for his YouTube followers and to get the "Woe, is me" reaction. Just come back in the morning, say you F'd up, take the medicine and go play -- and hopefully shoot an 80 with your 3-D clubs.

 

[MileHigh]

And I'm just now catching up with Live From and, of course, Brandel.

"He did everything but lay down behind it and take a weed whacker to the tall grass. Multiple infractions. Absolutely condemning. Absolutely clear. I don't really know what he was arguing about."

 

[qtlaw]

Check out this juxtaposition of what he actually did and what he appears to say he did:



No he did not simply walk behind the ball to take a look then take your stance.

 

[qtlaw]

Here's the official explanation:

according to the R&A's chief referee Grant Moir, who met with the media.
"An improvement needs to alter one or more of the conditions affecting the stroke," Moir said. "So that the player gains a potential advantage for the stroke. I would stress that this applies even when the action is accidental, as it was in Bryson's case. The area of intended swing includes the entire area that might reasonably affect any part of the backswing, the downswing or the completion of the swing for the intended stroke. Importantly, the prohibitive action here was that the player mustn't move, bend or break any growing or attached natural object. A player is allowed to fairly take their stance by taking reasonable actions to get to the ball and take a stance if in some situations that improves the conditions affecting the stroke, but when doing so, the player must take the least intrusive action to deal with the particular situation and is not entitled to a normal stance or swing. I would reiterate this rule applies even when there's no intention to improve the area, as was the case with Bryson."

 

[Michael_ Gee]

On the purely cynical career move as an influencer (his true destiny) DeChambeau's best move would be to show up and play as if nothing happened, and then, don't win it, but lose by one. Persecution complexes and conspiracies always sell on the Internet.
PS: I do not regard Chamblee as a reliable golf analyst. He has bias (we all do, no sin there), but his inability to avoid dogmatic overstatement makes him less than an impartial observer.

 

[playthrough]

There are players who’ve been on tour for 15 years and they don’t have the first clue as to how to take relief from casual water or any number of situations that most 30 handicappers can handle. That’s inexcusable.

I don't completely believe that. They're just not going to risk being wrong with all the $$ they're playing for.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

I don't completely believe that. They're just not going to risk being wrong with all the $$ they're playing for.

I agree. Asking for an explanation is simple self-protection. If you do what the official says, it's no longer your fault if for some reason said official gets overruled. Also, there are situations 30-handicappers and the rest of non-competing amateurs face where strict rules would be a farce. Case in point: My Cape Cod local is on an Atlantic flyway a mile from a national wildlife refuge. Every spring and every fall, it is assaulted by Canada geese. Animal control, in the form of the greenskeeper's two golden retrievers, is only sporadically effective. Therefore, it is a local rule that a free drop from goose ****, be it where the ball is, the swing, or the stance, to the nearest point of non-goose **** relief, is permitted. Only violates the first rule of golf, play it where it lies. But it's a good rule.

 

[rtse11]

And I'm just now catching up with Live From and, of course, Brandel.

"He did everything but lay down behind it and take a weed whacker to the tall grass. Multiple infractions. Absolutely condemning. Absolutely clear. I don't really know what he was arguing about."

Even Smylie Kaufman, who never criticizes, stumbled through his answer when asked if the penalty was appropriate

 

[MileHigh]

On the purely cynical career move as an influencer (his true destiny) DeChambeau's best move would be to show up and play as if nothing happened, and then, don't win it, but lose by one. Persecution complexes and conspiracies always sell on the Internet.
PS: I do not regard Chamblee as a reliable golf analyst. He has bias (we all do, no sin there), but his inability to avoid dogmatic overstatement makes him less than an impartial observer.

Brandel is an analyst. Of COURSE he has bias. But he's not the only one sounding off on this -- that DeDouche was wrong. And he was. And he's acting like a little child. Is Paul McGinley not "reliable" in saying the officials got it right? Eamon Lynch?