I knew you would be the happiest guy in the world when this happened. You are so preditable that you are pathetic.

Okay? Trust me, the majority here does not consider you a "sports writer," in spite of your "10 year" experience. You and Hamberger are the same in one. You need to stir up some controversy to get an audience. History proves that when you write something without mentioning WIE receive comparatively zero comments.

FYI... Hamberger never informed Wie nor any official, even knowing this during the third round. Leaving it until the last minute and creating a story that even overshadows Annika's tremendous win? Anyone with a common sense would know why he did it.

I think it's interesting how Hamberger wanted Wie to look bad in her debut backfired. Most credit goes to Team Wie for going to the conference and openly speaking about it. All of us knew it was an honest mistake. Instead of making Wie into a monster like you also did, the situation seemed as if Wie was cheated because of some scummy journalist.

A cardinal rule of journalism, even sports "journalism", is that a reporter should never make himself part of the story he's covering. By "investigating" and yet waiting until an honest mistake was uncorrectable, Michael Bamberger influenced the outcome of the event he was covering.

If Greg Johnson should look for a new job (I don't necessarily disagree), then the unethical Michael Bamberger should be, too.

"But I've been a sports reporter for more than 10 years.."

Maybe in your own mind Baldie but from what I've read, you give yourself too much credit.

In his next blog, Chris will say something nice about Michelle Wie and surprise us all.

Not.

Touche Wally and Ann on the digs on my professional qualifications. I just base it on 10 years of getting a paycheck for sports reporting. Even the worst plumber is still a plumber, if he's getting paid for plumbing.

Total misinformation from you Wie Warriors again on the actual facts of the story though.

Bamberger questioned Wie about the drop after her round Saturday. No one disputes that. He only went to the rules official on Sunday afternoon when no one from the Wie camp did.

From the Associated Press:

``I did it in crude way -- 'Let's see what she has to say.' I was hopeful she could convince me,'' in the Saturday interview, Bamberger said. ``I thought about it more and was just uncomfortable that I knew something. Integrity is at the heart of the game. I don't think she cheated. I think she was just hasty.''

Asked why he didn't bring it up before the third round ended, Bamberger said, ``That didn't occur to me. I was still in my reporter's mode. I wanted to talk to her first.''

Bamberger gave Wie a chance to be the one to come forward. Again, I'll give her a break on that and say she got bad advice in deciding to stay quiet on the issue. She surely didn't do that because she's been hype machine convinced that the world revolves around her whims.

She's not the one who thinks she can do no wrong. That's you Wie Warriors. Right?

Michelle Wie had from late Saturday afternoon till Sunday afternoon, almost a whole day, to step forward and do the right thing. Again, Camp Wie $10 million should be ashamed of how they're guiding this golfer.

Now back to puttering along at my job. It's too bad for all you Wie Warriors that I don't mind when people make fun of me. In fact, I often do it myself in print. Maybe if Michelle Wie's camp wasn't so self important, people could actually root for her without these conspiracy theory excuses.

The whole world's out to get poor $10 million Michelle Wie. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Michael Bamberger is a putz, crude I know, but entirely accurate. When questioned why he did not bring up his allegation on Saturday he claimed he was in "Reporter mode". Reporter mode my ass, it's been a while since his last book and this was the perfect opportunity for another fifteen minutes of fame. Mr. Bamberger has been writing about golf for the last 2 decades and he couldn't get out of reporter mode long enough to realize what sort of impact this would have??? The man was a caddy on the European Tour, he knew exactly what the end result would be when he brought up his "concern". His actions would lead one to believe that it was his intent, to have Miss Wie disqualified. Hmm... what were the odds on that bet in Vegas; "Michelle Wie disqualified for rules infraction in her first professional outing", 200:1, 500:1, Micheal could have made a pretty penny. Does anybody track the betting habits of reporters? As for the PGA, LPGA and USGA they need a new rule added to the book; All scoring issues must be resolved on the day of the round, allegations of misconducted must be brought forth by one of the following; Competitor, Competitor's Caddy, or Sanctioned Rules Official. Hack Reporters need not apply... FORE!!! When a reporter causes a story, something has gone seriously, seriously wrong.

Chris,

I hope you're kidding. Bamberger did NOT inform the Wies of his suspicions on Saturday. What Bamberger did on Saturday was to ask one question during the press conference. He asked how she knew the drop was correct. She said she used the "triangle" method, which she did. From that sole question, I don't think anyone, including the Wies, could conclude that she had made an error.

What you're implying may amount to libel. You're implying, are you not, that the Wies KNEW that she may have violated the rules on Saturday? Furthermore, you claim he went to the officials because the Wies didn't? Even Bamberger doesn't make that claim.

Your baseless speculation is as irresponsible as journalism gets. Shame on you!

I am forwarding your comments and my response to your publisher.

I never knew who this idiot bamberger was and I never want to know.
I think he should go look at himself in a mirror and be honest. He makes me puke.
chris baldwin, another one from the gang of despot sportwriters who cant stand seeing a non white doing well in a "white" sport. you are a writer and have the media at your disposal so you can write to justify your fellow writer's actions. It just means that both of you are bigots thats all. I am sorry I am not allowed to use the expressions which will really decribe the two of you.
Wake up buddy, those days are over.

First of all you just wrote the biggest lie in your life when you called yourself a "professional sports writer."

Second of all, everyone with at least an IQ of 50 knows it was an honest mistake.

Third of all, Bamberger knew that waiting until Sunday to inform Michelle would result in disqualification even though he says he was so "concerned" about it Saturday afternoon.

I don't think anyone with half a brain could imply that Michelle cheated on purpose.

EVERY camera in that place was focused on her- what a heck of a time to pick to "purposely" cheat.

It was a mistake-plain and simple any attempts to make it otherwise is just being malicious.

Even Bamberger the reporter who reported this said " I don't think she cheated, I think she was being hasty."
Even so- its a shame he would humiliate a young girl to make a name for himself.

Nice job everyone at LPGA and SI. You really showed us all what sports is all about. I'm just a casual sports fan browsing the news early Monday morning (what do I know!), but this is by far the most pathetic, hasty, thoughtless, idiotic reaction to a marginal "yesterday" rules issue I have ever seen.

Next time, please use some common sense and simply say that it happened yesterday and, if there was an issue, it should have been pursued at that time.

With great pleasure I am never going to buy an SI issue again and I hope millions of others speak with their pocketbooks, as well.

Anyone know how to petition CNN to take SI off their website?

In the case of the LPGA ... I'm not sure what we should do. I guess everyone makes mistakes. Time will tell how this all plays out.

Nike and Sony ... you just got an extra dose of respect and support from me.

Hang in Michelle!

Hey, Yyoo. When a reporter questions you about a drop, especially a Sports Illustrated reporter, you might want to go check it out yourself on tape. You might want to think, "Did I really do that correctly or did I just carelessly plunk it down there as my clueless caddy looked on?" You might want to raise the issue to the rules officials, just so everything's double checked and above board.

You're Michelle Wie after all.

Everyone and anyone in the Wie Camp should have been all over that Saturday evening. Instead they ignored or completely missed the issue.

Again, this is the kind of advice you'd expect someone who just signed for $10 million could get.

And if you're in the Wie Camp and worried about keeping that cushy gig, well I'd rethink that strategy of claiming that no one could have seen this coming. Just listen to the question in the press conference. You had almost a whole day to look into things.

You think a Sports Illustrated reporter is just intrigued by Michelle's grasp of geometry?

If a reporter asks Tiger Woods about a drop, you can be sure he's going back to look at that drop before someone else does. And if it was a young Tiger, you can be sure his dad would have been regoing over that drop with him, step by step.

No one's saying Michelle Wie knew she was breaking a rule. But everyone in Wie Camp $10 million should have been double and triple checking to make sure she didn't carelessly break one, thanks in large part to no good caddy advice, as soon as that question was asked Saturday.

What else are the hanger ons for? Wie Camp $10 Million needs some entourage 101.

".....then me." You should be disqualified from being a writer.

Are you up today, Chris? Do I have to share the same air with you? Could you do whole lot of favor to mankind and drop dead?

June, you're such a flirt! But enough. It's never going to work out.

A complete joke. Michael Bamberger got what he ws looking for an that is it. A cheap story, period. Sports writer, there wasn't anything sporting about his timing was there?

If a sportswriter writes and there is nobody around to read him, was there a column??

Funny thing is, Chris, these Wie-Warriors who are spewing like Mt. Vesuvius, CAN'T WAIT to read your next post. They should really be thanking you for giving them the opportunity to feel self-righteous. Bad old Chris, hurtin' dems widdle feewings ....

Wasn't it already too late when Bamberger asked her the question on Saturday AFTER the third round--which meant she already signed the card? The AP Article said, "Had Wie been notified Saturday before signing her card, she would not have been disqualified." Why can't you just take that for what it is--no one raised the issue BEFORE she signed her card. Stop trying to imply something that is not there logically Baldwin. By saying that a question asked by a reporter, especially in the way that Bamberger asked it (how she determined where to drop the ball), should have made Wie's team realize he was actually telling them Wie made a violation is a leap in logic. That sounded like a question to a newbie about her knowledge of the game. It's just like asking how did she know she could get a relief from the bees?

"Reporter mode" doesn't explain away the time from the seventh hole to when she signed her card. If he actually cared about the integrity of the game, he would have called it way sooner. There is absolutely no excuse for a journalist to change the course of the story that he is reporting; and even worse, there is no excuse for a "sportswriter" like you who sensationalize everything. You're worse than the paparazzi. There is absolutely no objectivity to your writing and even worse your logic is faulty. No wonder all you can write is a blog...no decent establishment would hire you to do news.

Michael Bamberger is an a**hole. He was aware of what he was doing and that his actions would generate a story with his byline. I don't buy his "integrity" story for a second. If anyone on the LPGA tours speaks to him for the rest of his career, then I'll be amazed.

I think Michelle handled the flap with aplomb. She impresses, whether or not she wins. She's fifteen, for Christ's sake. She behaves much older than her age would assume.

Michelle deserves better than the way many of her fans act. She made a 'careless' mistake. She will learn from this and will be better for having made this mistake. It will keep her from making a big mistake in a more important moment.

It is a little surprising that her caddie did not perform better but at least twice in the first three days she did not take his advise and got into trouble. nevertheless this is a mistake that he could have helped her avoid.

Mostly is is rather sad to see the rather disgraceful comments from many above people. IT is sad that these are the type of fans that are being attracted to golf by Michelle Wie's celebrity. She deserves better.

Do the people who respond to these blogs actually live in the real world?
Any confrontation or argument starts with you wanting to force your own opinion upon someone else. Fine.. there comes a time when you should set someone straight. When it comes to someone like Baldwin.....Think for yourself man. He a very sad little man who's opinion no one ever cared about. Why does anyone care what he says?

Here's the deal Chris.

Apparently, you have not learned a very important lesson in your ten years of journalism. The reporter should NEVER become the story.

The SI reporter should have reported the rules violation immediately, allowing Michelle Wie to take a penalty and continue the tournament. Instead, he chose to wait until after the tournament to announce his discovery. The only option left was for Wie to be DQ'd.

Regardless of the player involved, the reporter handled it in the most gutless way possible and is now at the center of the story.

Bob

Great comment from antoher blog:
Comment from: Ed [Visitor]
As a PGA member who has often officiated, I can understand fan disappointmnet, but this is pure "blame the nessenger" to me. I can tell you that Wie, Stadler, Watson, Nicklaus, Palmer and any tour professional would rather know if they unintentionally break a rule whether it's before or after playing the round. So get over the error made by Wie (and her caddy)and move on to the next event, just like they do!
10/17/05 @ 10:39

The correct figure of speech is "...reporters couldn't care less", not "...could care less"

From the perspective of a professional journalist, Chris, your claims of being one of the fold ring quite hollow.

** Comment from: June [Visitor]
Are you up today, Chris? Do I have to share the same air with you? Could you do whole lot of favor to mankind and drop dead? **

Very classy June. You're a credit to the Wie Warriors.

-George

I have been reading Chris Baldwin now for three or four months. Readers seem to miss the point. Chris is actually in a league with Garrison Keillor and Dave Barry. Once a reader realizes this he can sit back and enjoy the doses of down-home humor provided by Chris. We can all use a laugh from time to time...its good for you.

I think Mr. Bamberger did intend to get Michelle Wie DQd. In a recent PGA tournament a player made a drop, the ball rolled and while still in motion the player asked his caddie to stop the ball. Several holes after the incident, the player was informed that penalty strokes were added to his score. I don't know who called it to the attention of the rules officials, but the player had a chance to sign a correct scorecard. Michelle should have been allowed a chance to sign a correct scorecard.

So when is a golf tournament over? I would think that once the last put dropped two hours ago and the next program comes on TV, it's over. Could Bamberger have waited until Monday morning to voice his "concerns?" What if I discover a rules violation while reviewing an old tape of last weeks American Express Tournament?

While I agree that Wie's DQ was fundamentally correct, I think there should be a more clear and more stringent statute of limitations on when a complaint can be filed. What if Wie had left by the time the LPGA started looking into this. Nothing would have happened then. Also, a less than neutral spectator, or in this case a journalist, can wait till the scorecard is signed and then reveal his doubts thereby DQ'ing the concerned individual. Another problem is that if every player requests a tour official for every drop and divot fix, each round is going to take 6+ hours, a nightmare for spectators and for TV. It is unfortunate that Michael Bamberger waited over 25 hours after the drop to bring this to the attention of the tour. I don't think he was intentionally malicious, but at the same time, I don't think he's entirely blameless. What should have been a simple two stroke penalty turned into a DQ and a media hoopla. And who benefits? Not Wie or the tour, but the media.

You are not a sports reporter. You are a complete joke. You're just a nobody with a blog, like all the other bloggers out there. But part of the fun of blogs is the rabid arguing.

Actually, I've got a better conspiracy theory--an anti-Semetic one involving Bamberger and Morgan Pressel.

Miserable the way you "writers" fall in line to cover for your friends.
Bamberger made himself the story and in doing so hoped to raise his name to help sell his ridiculous book. He will be doing the rounds on TV soon and acting the victim. Well done Michael, you made yourself the story and took away the limelight from a kid's very first tournament.
What a dope!
btw-- I cancelled my S.I. subscription, never again will I read that trash.

Did Michelle's playing partner witness the drop?
If she did and was happy with it, should that not be the end of the matter?
How long can you wait before raising an objection?
It's like waiting til the end of a football game before calling a foul and disqualifying the offending team.
Bizarre is the only word to describe this incident.
Chris. Just to make you happy (not) this incident will probably enhance the Wie following.
Alan M

Next thing, you know, she'll have help from the gallery to move a "so-called movable object pebble". Hey- Tigger got away with it. Maybe Wie isn't ready to play on the big circuit,yet? Afterall, an improper drop does appear to be a move you would expect from an amateur.

A more measured article..

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051017/APS/510170584

Bamberger's point of view..

http://starbulletin.com/2005/10/17/news/story01.html

Why on earth would anyone possibly care WHAT your opinion is? You & the self-promoting hack, Bamberger certainly lend credence to the old adage, "Empty tubs thump the loudest!".

I am very surprised at the vehemence of the defense of Michele Wie I have just read. She was wrong. She opened the door to speculation that she might do something else. That is her fault. Her caddy should be banned from any tour for accosting the person who rightfully brought the infraction to everyone's attention. No one has the right to challenge the rule or the procedures used in this matter. Michele is responsible. Period. Everyone who plays golf knows this. Whoever pointed out her infraction did her and golf a favor and should not be questioned. The fans that defend her do golf a serious injustice. I can tell you that just the hint of suspicion is something any true golfer avoids like the plague. It never goes away. We do not fudge or stretch the rules or seek to get away from something. And if something is wrong, we shut up, take our medicine and try like hell to make sure we are worthy of the game. Anyone who does not know this does not deserve an audience. That is one major reason not to let children play an adult game.

Jeff Gibson-

You're going by the mind set that Michelle Wie did this on purpose, which most people do not believe including Bamberger.
With the entire media contingent, and gallerie's eyes on her-I don't think she would cheat on purpose.

I have a problem with this fella Bamberger waiting until the only recourse was disqualification. He had so many opportunities to inform everyone involved of what he knew yet did nothing. Because of this the only conclusion you can make is that he did it for some self-serving purpose.

From the article Victor posted--it sounds like Michelle made a joke when answering one of Bambergers questions and maybe he didn't take too kindly to it and wanted to teach the kid a lesson.

Either way- he should have acted sooner-and this whole mess would have been avoided. I feel bad her pro debut was ruined.

This is all everyone is talking about and its wrong after how great Annika did. No one is even talking about her or Paula Creamer who finished 2nd.

I'll never buy another SI until Hamberger is fired.

Just some examples of disqualifiactions for people to know about:

Recently Paula Creamer realised she had changed a club in her bag the morning after a rain delay caused the round to be finished the following day. After the Tournament was over she called Officials and disqualified herself.

1996 Bay Hill Invitational

After the second round Jeff Sluman was only two back of the leaders, but he became concerned the night after the round when he thought he may have taken an incorrect drop after hitting into a water hazard. The next morning Sluman returned to the scene and confirmed that the drop area which he used was closer to the hole and that his drop was incorrect. He then disqualified himself from the tournament.

1996 Nike Shreveport Open

While P.H. Horgan III was waiting for the final group to finish before the start of the playoff between himself and Tim Loustalot, he was talking with a Nike Tour tournament director and related an incident that happened during the third round. It seemed that Horgan accidentally moved his ball marker by dropping his ball on it. In talking with his playing partner they agreed there was no infraction and proceeded to play. However, it was a violation of Rule 20-1/5.5 and Horgan should have assessed himself a one-stroke penalty. Since he signed an incorrect scorecard he was disqualified from the tournament, and Loustalot won without having to have a playoff.

1996 Canon Greater Hartford Open

Defending champion Greg Norman, who shared the first-round lead, was disqualified before the third round when it was found that the ball he was using was improperly stamped and not certified by the USGA.

1996 Jamie Farr Kroger Classic

Meg Mallon took the first-round lead with a 6-under-par 65, but then the next day was disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard. She had stroked a putt that ended next to the hole and slowly moved for another 18 to 20 seconds until it fell in. At the time, she thought she made a birdie and signed her card for the birdie. But later on LPGA officials caught wind that it could have been a Rules infraction. After investigating the situation, the officials found out that Mallon did violate a Rule by waiting to long for the putt to drop and had no choice but to disqualify her because she signed an incorrect scorecard.

1997 Players Championship

In the final round on the 17th hole, Davis Love III accidentally hit his ball on the putting green with a practice stroke. He did not replace the ball, two-putted from there, and scored himself as having made a bogey 4. However, he should have replaced his ball to the original spot before continuing to putt. Not doing so is a one-stroke penalty, and thus his score for the hole was actually a double-bogey 5. Officials found out about the mistake, but unfortunately for Love it was after he signed his scorecard. So instead of finishing T7th, he was disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard. The mistake cost Love $105,000 as well as valuable Ryder Cup qualifying points. However, he did go on to make the 1997 U.S. Ryder Cup team.

1998 NEC World Series of Golf

In the first round, Lee Janzen was another in violation of Rule 16-2, waiting too long for his putt to drop in the hole. On the 17th hole his birdie putt hung on the lip. Janzen walked up to the hole, then past it, bent down to survey the ball, and stared at it. He looked at his fellow competitor Vijay Singh, who also walked up and bent down to see the ball creeping toward the hole. About 20 seconds after Janzen arrived at the ball, he went to tap the ball in but it dropped into the hole. After the round he signed for a birdie 3 instead of a par 4. When the incident was later shown on television, viewers contacted PGA Tour officials, who in screening the tape realized that Janzen violated the Rules and disqualified him. At the time, it wasn¹t a big deal, but at the end of the year the disqualifaction did cost him a spot on the Presidents Cup team. He luckily got to play on the squad only because Hal Sutton's father-in-law died, forcing Sutton to withdraw and give his spot to Janzen.

These are very experienced, prominent players. There is no embarassment to a disqualification things happen to the best of players. It is a good lesson learned at a young age.

The enforcement of the Rules of Golf by Neutral Rules Officials is the hallmark to the integrity of golf even when these rules seem unfair.

What is unfortunate is that Mr. Bamberger did not chose to bring the problem up at the time it occurred. He noticed it, but didn't speak of it until she had finished the tournament. To say that it had a greater impact by being announced at the end of the tournament rather than at the time it occurred is very apparent. I am proud of Michelle and the manner in which she handled her first pro tournament and her first disqualification.

Michelle Wie, it is more of a condemnation of Michael Bamberger. People do not particularly care for tattletales ... especially those with agendas. It is obvious that Bamberger got his panties all in a bunch over Wie's wisecrack response to his follow-up question at the press conference ... and acted accordingly! Reporters altruistically acting for the integrity of the game? You have got to be kidding ... Right?

"professional sports writer." lol. You actually make money writing this stuff? Come on, you have a second job right?

True indeed that Bumbuger works at SI....but you are not any closer to getting there yourself, so you can remove your lips from their behinds now Baldwin.

lol

She didn't cheat on purpose and the reporter did what is right to protect the field.

Yes it seems like its unfair...but it isn't. Michelle will go on..a little bruised but wiser.


The timing certainly allows for a bigger story..but the timng is irrelevant, if he saw it she (or her caddie) should have as well.

Even if you accept that he was out to get her (a big stretch)..out for a story (less of a stretch).. it CHANGES NOTHING. This is the game she chose and the rules are the rules.

I am a Michelle backer but this is an easy call (she did play swell though)

regarding Wie's DQ:

After 3rd round, Michelle was asked about drop by same CNN reporter Bamberger in interview session and they had exchange of words and Michelle made the mistake by saying "seems link I am giving Geometry lesson" and eveybody laughed off except "him".

Do your homework, my friends!

Upon further review MR. Baldwin it seems like you mention Michelle Wie in almost 70% of your articles.....wow! My advice is to quit sitting in your underwear in the trailer (professional sports writers in the minor league don't make much) with one hand on your mouse, and the other...........and quit think of Michelle Wie.

Its embarassing

After reading the Saturday press conference transcript-it seems like Bamberger didn't appreciate Michelle's joke. That probably played into his decision to wait until she signed her card---ahhh the male ego so fragile.

Baldwin, McDonald (and Mario), know what they are doing. Michelle is what we want to read and comment about right now.. it brings people to the blogs and blows out comments.

The guys will tend to be a little negative, it brings folks back).. but who would be here if they weren'y writing about Michelle???

They're right to do it

If Michelle had asked a rules official to look at the drop and it had been declared OK , then measuring later with a string would not have made any difference, even if the ball were closer. To me, unless someone had an objection, or video evidence conclusively can determine a mistake was made, Michelle should be able to rely on her judgment and the judgment of her playing partner. Where the LPGA made a mistake was trying to measure based on a "remembered" spot of the original ball and location of the drop. They should have simply reviewed the video, declared it inconclusive, and moved on. If you could not declare it closer by video or reviewing it from the hole, that should have been it. The string measurement should be banned.

Marc

The reason they had to measure is that in the video you do not see the Pin. Yu see the spot where the ball came to rest and then where she set the tees for the drop area. I think it is clear the angle used for the drop was slanted more toward the pin but only by viewing it in person can they make the correct determination.

Asking for a Rules Official would have avoided this entirely and now she knows that.

I was quite puzzled as to why this reporter slept on it and decided to bring it up next day when he knew exactly what's going to happen. I now realise why he did what he did - it's apparent that the remark from Michelle about Geometry lesson badly damaged his ego. So he decided to get back at 16 years old girl. He needs to get a life... It's so sad that a man had to go that low...

Nevertheless, it was a good lesson for Michelle as many of you pointed out. It's a part of the learning and maturing process we go through. But she did not have to learn this way had this reporter been less greedy for a brief moment of fame.

the LPGA needs to change or further define the rule regarding who and when a non-official can raise a rule violation during a tournament play.

The "when" should be within a few minutes of the suspected violation. There are probably countless unintended violations done by veteran and rookie players all the time, and it is impossible to catch every occurrence. But if someone were to physically witness one (even if that person was unsure that a violation occured), they should notify a tour official right away.

This is a response from Robert O Smith, LPGA Tournament Official and Manager of Rules, from the LPGA website:

---Q. Was the spectator here yesterday or did he see it on TV and did either of you know the spectator?
ROBERT O. SMITH: I don't know who it was. They were here yesterday and they told us about it today. Unfortunately, what we like to do, if a spectator sees something like, they need to tell us because if they can tell us right away, if she could have played that, and we could have caught her in the tent at 18, it would have been a two-stroke penalty. Play golf today. But once that scorecard is signed, it's history. That's the unfortunate part of it. That's the sad part of this whole thing.----

Notice that he says "once the scorecard is signed it's history". That is very interesting to me, because if it is indeed history then its done with, you can't change it anymore. If I were a professional I would be afraid to sign my scorecard...

Just my $0.02
Brian

Joe,

I've read the list of DQs in two different articles today (so far). Being a golfer, what appals me is not the DQ or Wie's sentiments, but the fact that this guy had several opportunities to bring this up officially to the tour, but didn't until the *very last moment*. I'm trying hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it seems like he was just fishing for a story as some people have said. Being a golfer and golf writer (as opposed to a novice golf spectator who does not appreciate golf rules), had he immediately found an official (surely one must have been in that hole or the next) and mentioned this, we would not be talking about this now. 'I waited to ask her for an explanation after the round' (when she had already signed for the 3rd round) and 'as I was not convinced, I reported this the next day after she finished her final round because my conscience bothered me' comes across as a lame excuse. He may be a senior writer, but he acted like a bonehead, thus opening himself to criticism.

Brian

I gave some examples of more experienced players who had similar problems. The LPGA uses USGA rules as do every other Tour or Tournament in the US. They cannot adopt their own rules. Everybody plays with the same Rules and should know what they are otherwise there wold be more confusion. Here is just one example.

1996 Bay Hill Invitational

After the second round Jeff Sluman was only two back of the leaders, but he became concerned the night after the round when he thought he may have taken an incorrect drop after hitting into a water hazard. The next morning Sluman returned to the scene and confirmed that the drop area which he used was closer to the hole and that his drop was incorrect. He then disqualified himself from the tournament.

The Official who said "But once that scorecard is signed, it's history" means the score on the card cannot be changed. If it is later learned for whatever reason that the player signed a incorrect scorecard then they are disqualified.

Victor

I have no idea of the motives of the writer who reported this. I guess I am more trusting and feel he wanted to do the 'right' thing. Perhaps like Sluman he felt compelled after a nights sleep to raise the issue. I realise he was not a player like Sluman.

I am not going to shoot the messenger because I think Michelle has learned a good lesson with little cost. She will benefit from this far more in the future than the loss of 4th place money. Maybe a lot of her fans new to golf have also learned something about the Rules of Golf in spite of some of the nasty things being said above.

A few weeks ago Paula Creamer DQ herself after realising she made a very dumb or silly mistake. I doubt anyone would have know she had made a club change overnight in the midst of a rain delay. It was a careless mistake but she did the right thing by speaking up. It is unfortunate, same as Michelle, but she has learned a lesson and moved on.

BOth of these players will be better for the lessons learned early on in their careers.

This has little to do with Wie and less to do with you or me. It's about Bamberger's role and how the ruling bodies used that information in their decision.

The decision does nothing but advance the perception that Golf is a game of quirky rules governed by stodgy old fuddy-duddy’s.

Rules official Robert O. Smith, the man who made the final call to disqualify Wie, defended his decision, ``The Rules of Golf are based on facts,'' Smith said. ``They had to tell us where it was. The fact was, the ball was closer to the hole by 12 to 15 inches.''

FACT?! There were no facts uncovered in the “investigation”, which culminated in a ridiculous re-enactment.

The FACT is that a review of the video tape was inconclusive.
The FACT is that pacing the distances proved inconclusive.
The FACT is that even after measuring with a length of silly string, they still could not pinpoint a distance – “12 to 15 inches”. Well, which was it?

The FACT is that the exact location of the ball and the exact location of the point of relief could not be determined expos facto.

The FACT is that there are NO FACTS supporting the disqualification.

Smith also said that he was "hand-cuffed by the rules" and that he was required to "administer the rules as written".

Well, as written, you’ve got to go all over The Book to find all the relevant rules.
•6-1: Player’s responsibility
•6-6: Scoring in Stroke Play
•20-2: Dropping and Re-Dropping
•20-7: Playing from Wrong Place
•28: Ball Unplayable

Wie clearly exhibited knowledge of the rules (6-1) as evidenced by her adherence to rules 20-2, 20-7 and 28.

Interestingly, Mr. Smith made no mention of the following rules as written:

•Spirit of the Game
•1-4: Points not Covered by the Rules
If any point in dispute is not covered by the Rules, the decision should be made in accordance with equity.

Note: The Rules of Golf offer no definition for “Equity”, however Merriam-Webster does:
1a: justice according to natural law or right; specifically: freedom from bias or favoritism
1b: something that is equitable
Equitable
1: having or exhibiting equity: dealing fairly and equally with all concerned

It seems to me that the Spirit of the Game should not and does not only apply to players, but also to the other Agencies of the game:

A “referee’’ is one who is appointed by the Committee to accompany players to decide questions of fact and apply the Rules. He must act on any breach of a Rule that he observes or is reported to him.

An “outside agency’’ is any agency not part of the match or, in stroke play, not part of the competitor’s side, and includes a referee, a marker, an observer and a forecaddie.

An “observer’’ is one who is appointed by the Committee to assist a referee to decide questions of fact and to report to him any breach of a Rule.

Which definition defines Mr. Bamberger’s role in this? Was he appointed by the committee to report a breach of a Rule? As written, it is difficult to determine how Mr. Smith administered the rules in their entirety.

Furthermore, given the inexcusable delay on Mr. Bamberger’s behalf in reporting the possible rules violation; the lack of a ‘statue of limitations’ for reporting such violations; the omission of guidelines for determing if rule 20-7 had been violated (video, silly string, etc.); and the lack of clear evidence that the rule had actually been violated -- Rule 1-4 could have and SHOULD have been invoked:

Rule 1-4 is vital to the Wie scenario and cannot be ignored. Had a Referee, Outside Agency or Observer raised the concern prior to the signing of the card, the Rules, as written, clearly provide Wie an opportunity to avoid disqualification.

However, perhaps the most important exclusion of Mr. Smith’s administering of the rules is the Spirit of the Game clause, conspicuously located at the top of the Rules of Golf. Mr. Bamberger’s golfing experience and knowledge of the game and its rules are beyond question – this could not be clearer than it is today.
His knowledge of the rules makes the FACT that he waited until after Wie had signed her scorecard suspicious at best. It is clearly not in the Spirit of the Game, nor was the dog-and-pony show that took place at the 7th hole on Sunday evening.

There is but one rule left to be administered. For the spirit of the game. For the good of the game. For the fairness and equity of all concerned.

33-7. Disqualification Penalty; Committee Discretion
A penalty of disqualification may in exceptional individual cases be waived, modified or imposed if the Committee considers such action warranted.
Any penalty less than disqualification must not be waived or modified.
If a Committee considers that a player is guilty of a serious breach of etiquette, it may impose a penalty of disqualification under this Rule.

Unfortunately, this seems to be taking an ethnic/racial tone..

http://www.hyphenmagazine.com/blog/archives/2005/10/reporter_ruins_1.html

Chill people. She did concede she made a mistake.

Bamberger has written several golf books (one with DL3, I think) and was a caddie. He was correct to report the violation. Just because it wasn't timely doesn't mean you crucify him. Forget, forgive and move on, as Mr. Wie has chose to do.

Chris do you watch American idol? If you do at some stage you might have laughed at someone who thinks they can sing but actually suck really bad. In the end they are just entertaining us by how unbelievably deluded they are. That’s what everyone thinks about your 'sports writing'.

Barry J

You are making this more confusing than necessary. It is Rule 20-7 that came into play as she played the ball from the wrong place. IF she had realised this and taken a 2 stoke penalty prior to signing her scorecard it would have been over.

She played from the wrong place because the line she used to measure two club lengths was the wrong angle and put the drop area closer to the pin than the angle she should have used. This is where the caddie is at fault because he should have seen this himself.

Therefore Rule 6 came into play because she signed an incorrect scorecard. It is really quite clear and simple. There is no need for a Websters Dictionary although I am sure you have impressed many people with your long comment most of which is not applicable. Particularly impressive is the use of expost facto. I guess you are a lawyer or pretending to be one.

With the comment that "golf is a game of quirky rules governed by stodgy old fuddy-duddy’s" I guess you are not a member of the USGA.

Joe,

I agree that all tours should follow the USGA rules. So what I meant is that the LPGA, PGA, etc need to change or further define this rule. I am not saying one tour should have different rules from the other.

Did you watch the President's Cup this year? Davis Love picked up his ball on the green because he thought that he heard Mike Weir say it was good. It was in good intentions and to the best of Love's knowledge that he heard Mike Weir say it was good. It was decided to replace the ball with no penalty, since it wasn't a careless or intentional mistake by Davis Love. This is just like Michelle's case. She thought she made a legal drop. And if someone else thought otherwise they should have said something.

Above you said:
"If it is later learned for whatever reason that the player signed a incorrect scorecard then they are disqualified."
How much is later? A day, two days, a year? When is it? What if the reporter spoke out today? Would that be ok?

Attn: Chris Balding

Your colums are predictable and pathetic. I truly believe that you continue to write about Michelle Wie because that's the only way you will ever get any attention from the high school lever trash you call writing. Everything else you write simply goes by unnoticed. You are the biggest "Wie Warrior" of them all you hypocrite. Ride Wie's coattails while you can...you "wanna be journalist."

Let me try again: :)

Like Michelle said whether it is 3" or 100 yard, it is a violation. In this case she said 3" and official said 12", 15" and 18". let us settele 15". OK.

And how Mr. Bamberger thought Drop was closer to the hole. Man, how many in a million can see it is 15" closer.
Even if it was 2 or 3 feet closer, it is hard to know that.

I truely believe that he has an agenda.

I had this exchange with a very helpful Britney over at Tim McDonald's blog. This should end the conspiracy theories aspect of the Wie DQ:

** Comment from: Britney [Visitor]
George,
If her mistake has been discovered right after her shot, she would have been given a 2 stroke penality. However, as soon as she signed her score card at the end of that day, there was nothing left to do but disqualify her (disqualifation is the automatic penality for submitting an incorrect score for the round). **

George:

Hi, Britney, thanks for your response.

I thought that was the case, but I wasn't sure. So being as it was a round-by-round sich, there is no conspiracy.

To rescue Wie & her caddy from their blunder, Bamberger actually would have had to become part of the story, by speaking up at the moment the drops occurred.

Two scenarios:

"Hey, Michelle, the way you're doing that drop is wrong. You've advanced the ball toward the hole."

Or...

"Hey, Michelle, you had better not sign that round-3 scorecard, you might get disqualified. You took an illegal drop and didn't take a 2-stroke penalty."

In both of these hypothetical scenarios, that would be a case of the reporter actually interjecting himself into the events, and no longer being an observer.

The events happened and the reporter was honest and reported the infraction to the officials.

In reality, so long as Wie conducted the drop, didn't take the 2-stroke penalty, and then signed the scorecard, she was over with and done after round 3, as soon as she signed that card.

It matters not when it was brought to the officials' attention, she was eligible for DQ, as long as the officials found out about it.

-George

** Comment from: Jen [Visitor]
After reading the Saturday press conference transcript-it seems like Bamberger didn't appreciate Michelle's joke. That probably played into his decision to wait until she signed her card---ahhh the male ego so fragile **

Umm, Jen. Michelle would have signed her card right after her R3 was finished. That would have been before the press conference, probably.

Michelle was already a DQ'd golfer before Bamberger or anyone asked a question.

-George

Joe -

First, a couple of minor things:

1 - I am a member of the USGA.
2 - I didn't say that golf is ruled by a bunch of fuddy duddy's, I said that the decision advanced the PERCEPTION that it is.

The big things that you missed:

I understand the ruling (20-7 and 6-6), but the point is that it IS more complicated than that because of the "process" used to determine that the rules were violated.

The processes are undefined. Bamberger's role is undefined.
In this particular case, it wreaks of treachery.
Therefore, the additional rules that are in place that offer some "leeway" when "facts" are not readily available(1-4 and 33-7) should have been taken into account.

The entire scenario was beyond ridiculous.

The integrity of the game indeed was undermined. But it wasn't done by the player. Unfortunately, The Game (and the Officials entrusted with it)did it to itself.

George,

Why took Mr Bamberger so long to report the violation. It was on 7th and 11 hole to play, he has plenty of time to do it. He gave multiple excuses.

Even Doug Ferguson raised the timing of report in his article.

Not just AP writer Doug Ferguson--there have been numerous articles by various sportswriters bringing up the timing issue as well. The most recent ones are on ESPN actually.

I guess those real journalists are conspiracy theorists and Wie apologists as well right Chris ....

***************************
Chris Baldwin said:
Michelle Wie had from late Saturday afternoon till Sunday afternoon, almost a whole day, to step forward and do the right thing.
***************************

Let's see after Saturday's play, she did press interviews, maybe some practice and had some sleep.
Sunday morning, she would have got up had some practice, and went out to play her round of golf. The way you are saying "she had a full day", you would think she had been locked in a room for a day and told to think about her unfortunate drop and nothing else.
She had her next round to think of.

When all of the major sports that are televised begin to allow fans or outside influences to report infractions, fouls, out of bounds, drops, etc. that effect the outcome of an event (then it will make sense to allow a TV viewer or reporter to play the part of a rules monitor.
The inequity of having a player subject to greater scrutiny because a camera is on them is an injustice that the USGA should address. If everyone in the field had the same monitoring then it might make sense. I am sure there are numerous unintentional rules infractions that go unnoticed.

No -Chris

It was MICHAEL BAMBERGER who had until late Saturday afternoon till Sunday afternoon, almost a whole day, to step forward and do the right thing.

Michelle was not aware of her mistake so why would she step forward if she was unaware of it. Bamberger should have stepped forward as soon as he saw it.

From listening to numerous sports journalists this morning-the majority of them have taken issue with Bamberger's bad timing.

who cares what this guy says. Chris I'd care if you make a bet. yeah why dont you be responsible for what you say if you consider yourself a professinal writer? Why dont you predict how bad Michelle will do next year and if you are wrong, then you'll run naked at Times Square or something? If you are man enough, that is.

** Comment from: Mr. Small Rain [Visitor]
George,

Why took Mr Bamberger so long to report the violation. It was on 7th and 11 hole to play, he has plenty of time to do it. **

But at that point, Bamberger would have injected himself into the story. It's not his job to fix the screw ups of Michelle and/or her caddy.

She was a DQ'd dead duck as soon as she signed that scorecard and failed to record a two-stroke penalty.

-George

What a mean-spirited post. Maybe Bamberger wasn't doing something unseemly to make a name for himself, but I can't say the same for you.

Barry J

I am glad to know you are a USGA Member. Sorry if I misinterpreted your fuddy duddy comment.

I think I can only agree to disagree on your opinion. This has happened to many other prominent players so I do not see why this guy would be devious about it. I do agree there should be some guideline for on who can point out a violation and also some time limit would be approriate. At lkeast the guy was there. In other situations some one called from home watching on TV and the officials have reacted to this. This I think is ridiculous and should not be permitted.

I still beleive Michelle will be much better for this because I think the way she went about marking the ball was rather hasty and careless. I doubt this will ever happen to her again.

Anyway enjoy the good golf we will see from the LPGA "kids" in the future

Here is an old adage, reporters don't make the news. There is no excuse for
Michael Bamberger (I want to be famous forever) to do this except his own fame and glory.

I will never buy another SI anything. I think we should all protest and not buy SI this month.

See how long Michael has a job. What he did as a reporter was to use his access to make the story. Not to report it.

SI did a miss justice by reporting the breach of the rule at such a late date. It is an attempt at glorification and I will never buy another SI issue again.
Even in football, once the ball is snapped again you can't go back to replay.
Golf rules suck and need a very urgent overhall

This string is so funny. Here's the conclusions I've drawn:

1 - Bamberger is an idiot. For waiting. For those of you who claim he would have had to "interject himself into the story", uh...duh. Seems like he did that now, didn't he.

2 - Michelle's an idiot. For not calling in a rules official. Who cares if the rounds take 6 hours - more ad time to sell.

3 - Michelle's caddy is an idiot. Dude, your job is to prevent this from happening.

4 - The Rules Of Golf are idiotic. For not adequately adapting to things like video. Some tweaking to prevent this type of after-the-fact baloney is in order.

5 - Rules of Golf lovers are idiots. Strict adherence to the Rules, then go try and sleep with your business partner's wife. Nice.

6 - Chris Baldwin is an idiot. For calling himself a writer. I can pass gas all day but not call myself a chemist. But this has been a mighty entertaining string!

George-- He inserted himself anyway. Bamberger should have told officals timely (on Saturday) Michelle would have been penalized...as she should have been. She was dead when she signed the scorecard.. but had he done on saturday what he did on sunday..(tell officals what he saw).. the proper penalty for her infraction would have been meted out.

She "earned" the two shot penalty with the illegal drop.. but Bamberger should have protected the field and given Michelle the opportunity for redress.

His conscience, integrity compelled him to become part of the story ( I have no problem with that) that conscience should simply have kicked in faster. He had the right to tell officals on sunday.. but it would have been correct if he did it on sunday.

And quit saying he didn't want to insert himself into the story... he did and he had to know he did. What he didn't do is give Michele a chace to make up for her penalty with her clubs.

If you made a mistake that would cause you to have your pay docked if it was reported today or lose your job if it was reported tomorrow.. Wouldn't you expect that it was reported today????