« Donald Trump fires Carolyn for excessive self promotion: Not as hypocritical as you'd thinkSoulshine Bagel your breakfast or snack place in Lake Placid »

146 comments

Comment from: CK1 [Visitor]
This ought to get the Wie Warriors up in arms for sure Chris. Especially since that illegal drop should be dead and buried by now. Shouldn't we all just start focusing our energy someplace else now? There's so much good golf to be had who cares what Hollywood or anyone else thinks about her game, her character and her ability. Can't we just all agree we're seriously tired of all things Wie. You're a great writer Chris, cover something else now. Please.
2006-08-29 @ 13:52
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Chris
Your last three columns garnered a combined "1" comment. Bamberger has a new book to peddle, and has lost his credibility with millions of SI readers (his former mealticket).Shyamalan Has a new movie to hype after his last one tanked. Solution? Roll out another attack on Wie.

2006-08-29 @ 14:23
Comment from: Shanks [Member] Email
Also a big fan of Shyamalan. The Village was good, but not quite as good as Signs or Unbreakable - one of the most underrated movies of the last decade.
2006-08-29 @ 15:09
Comment from: Wie fan [Visitor]
These people have character flaws too. Absolute stupidity and greed.

Absolute stupidity in thinking that Wie and her caddie deilberately did something while the whole world watched, that would get her disqualified

Greed in trying to create headlines and peddling whatever it is they're peddling, just like Baldwin
2006-08-29 @ 17:30
Comment from: Ronnie [Visitor]
Baldwin,

Does anyone support you more than Ronnie?
Does anyone else like Creamer the way you do apart from Ronnie?

You are a very intelligent man and write some great articles, but why bring up the drop again?
It's old news.

Please bring some new material that your fans can admire.
Wie will be playing the Omega Masters soon. Perhaps there will be something there.

Or how about her new caddie, perhaps you could dig up some dirt there.

Harping back to the Samsung gives you a very low grade. Please do better in your next blog. Come on.
2006-08-29 @ 18:01
Comment from: Steph [Visitor]
It's reasonable to question, if not wonder about character development and its process as a young person is growing in a sport that demands personal integrity. It would be better to change or at least recognize the tendency to avoid personal responsibilities unless being caught.



2006-08-29 @ 18:51
Comment from: Ron Mon [Member] Email
Is Ronnie's real name Ronnie Monnnie?

You people are screwy? Look inward before looking outward. Should any of us really care about Michelle Wie's character? Are we going to point to her as a character role model? She is a model of athletic achievement, nothing more nor less. Any other attachment of virtues to her, or other athletes, is misguided.
2006-08-29 @ 19:42
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
More on The Sham Shaman's hoax - he claimed to be dead (drowned) as a child for a half-hour (never happened) which helped him "speak to the spirit world (sure). He then produced a fake "documentary" on the non-event. Excerpts from above link:

“2004, Shyamalan was involved in a media hoax with the Sci Fi Channel… Sci Fi claimed in its "documentary" special — The Buried Secret of M. Night Shyamalan, shot on the set of The Village [too good]— that Shyamalan was legally dead for nearly a half-hour while drowned in a frozen pond in a childhood accident, and that upon being rescued he had experiences of communicating with spirits, fueling an obsession with the supernatural…The hoax included a non-existent Sci Fi publicist, "David Westover", whose name appeared on press releases regarding the special. Sci Fi also fed false news stories to the Associated Press …

After an AP reporter confronted Sci Fi Channel president Bonnie Hammer at a press conference, Hammer admitted the hoax, saying it was part of a guerrilla marketing campaign to generate pre-release publicity for The Village. Despite his office's disclosure-agreement requirement and approvals of each marketing step, Shymalan told the AP, "I was, of course, involved in the production of the special but had nothing to do with the marketing of it. If the Sci Fi Channel erred in their marketing strategy, it was totally out of enthusiasm." “

More charges of plagerism!:
Simon & Schuster Inc's announcement it is reviewing its legal options against the company and Shyamalan. Last week, reports circulated that The Village's plot and surprise ending were parallel to Margaret Peterson Haddix's first book Running Out Of Time, published in 1995. Haddix says she heard about the similarities last week when fans - and then journalists - began calling and emailing her and her publisher to ask if she had sold the book to Shyamalan… Shyamalan has previously battled a copyright lawsuit brought by a Pennsylvania screenwriter who claimed the plot from his 2002 film Signs mirrored his unpublished script Lord Of The Barrens.

http://us.imdb.com/news/wenn/2004-08-11#celeb3

Note to Michelle:
When people like Bamberger, Baldwin and Shyamalan challenge your credibility, be happy, its some kind of a cosmic joke.

Nice research on Shyamalan, Baldwin!
2006-08-29 @ 20:03
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
We now know Bamberger's new best fiend Shyamalan is capable of fabricating a Media Hoax to promote a project. I'm now more convinced than ever that Bamberger's DQ of Wie was a book-promotion Media Hoax as well. "Birds of a feather fly together".
2006-08-29 @ 20:13
Comment from: Kyle [Visitor]

Let me see--
On one hand
a 16 year old female golfer who got disqualified and didn't complain about it afterward and took her lumps

On the other hand a fortyish balding man w/a 4th rate blog fresh from getting sued for defamation bitter and jealous over the success of a 16 year old golfer.

Man this sure is hard-- which one has more character ??
2006-08-29 @ 21:00
Comment from: arnold [Visitor]
Is Shyamamalalan Indian? What is it with these Indians and plagiarism. Wasn't that Harvard chick from India too.
2006-08-30 @ 02:35
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Shyamlan is of Indian decent but grew up in a Main Line Philly neighborhood - both parents were successful physicians. He attended all "the best" schools, and had every opportunity to make his own way.

Baldwin, Shyamalan, and Bamberger attacking a teenage girl... some manly "character". Still, the "boomeranging" of Baldwin's story is the best laugh I've had this week!

Bamberger's DQ of Wie should be investigated further. It is looking more and more like a book-promotion media-hoax!

2006-08-30 @ 03:45
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
The first 40-45 minutes or so of The Village was arguably the most suspenseful of any movie made in the last 30 years.

The Sixth Sense had the cinematic quality of a dream, in the best sense of the word. Lady in the Water was pretty weak, for Shyamalan, but still better than the majority of Hollywood drivel.

2006-08-30 @ 07:00
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
Signs was a great sci-fi thriller, so much different than most in that genre -- he manages to scare the hell out of you while using the pace of a Leave it to Beaver episode.

Don't know whether he's a plegiarist or not -- everyone borrows from others to varying degrees -- but he's definitely an original, and fiercely entertaining.
2006-08-30 @ 07:09
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Simon and Schuster was reported to be reviewing their legal options against Shyamalan for plagiarism. Also, federal suit has been filed by Trilenium Pictures against Disney & Shyamalan on another case of alleged plagiarism. There are further accusations of plagiarism.

The president of Sci-Fi was forced to admit that Shyamalan's "documentary" was a media-hoax. NBC apologized publicly for the debacle.

The point is not whether Shyamalan can write or pilfer entertaining yarns, but whether his opinion holds water in judging someone else's moral fibre.

Further, the close relationship between Shyamalan and Bamberger (and Bamberger's infatuation with Shyamalan) adds fuel to the notion that Bamberger's DQ of Wie was just another Media-Hoax to sell a book.
2006-08-30 @ 08:46
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
My point was geared purely toward the cinema, a refreshing break from golf conspiracy nuts like Ghet Real.

2006-08-30 @ 09:28
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Shyamalan is has fabricated a well documented Media-Hoax. He's been sued for plagiarism.

Baldwin's comments present Shyamalan as having some sort of lofty moral authority:
"But really everyone should read Shyamalan's words again. This isn't a traditional sports guy obsessed with whether Wie's winning or not. He's talking character."

Talking character? Absurd! - Doesn't pass the giggle-test.

2006-08-30 @ 10:14
Comment from: JRC [Visitor]
Well, with only just a week and a day away from MW teeing it up at the Omega European Masters, I'm surprised it took this long for her to pop onto the blogging screen again. I think I most agree with CK1 on this one. Let's expend energy elswhere for a while. If MW makes teh Euro-masters cut...well that'll be new news then.
2006-08-30 @ 12:13
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Signs, Tim??

Yikes. I mean, it's great if you are confused about the term "deus ex machina" and want to see it in action. Or if you think occasional close-ups of glasses of water are plot points.

And come on, water killed them? You're telling me they went to all the trouble of learning intergalactic travel, and then head to a planet that's primarily made of acid to them.

Surreal. It would be like planning to attack Iraq and not knowing there was a difference between Sunni and Shiite. Absurd.

--WKW
2006-08-30 @ 12:32
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Speaking of media hoaxes, that is quite a caper that BJ, Bo, and Bubbles' other handlers are pulling off. None of the Wie Warriors find anything wrong with that gang getting rich without producing something of substance. By the way, Ghet, how are you doing with your lawsuits and your Astroturf theory?
2006-08-30 @ 12:41
Comment from: Dan K [Visitor]
Oh my. Another of Baldwin's irrational rants against a 16 year old girl. Get a life. Or perhaps Baldwin should pour his vitriol against Anna Sorenstram, whom I believe was also assessed a two stroke penalty this year, courtesy of her playing partner, Karrie Webb.
2006-08-30 @ 13:22
Comment from: Jason [Visitor]

Alex,
If you don't think there's anything substantive about all of Michelle's Top 5 finishes in the majors, you must think 90% of the female golfers have no substance since they sure as heck don't have that record.
That's untouched territory for a player this young- you need to stop thinking in such an extremist manner. You must be downright miserable with your life.
2006-08-30 @ 13:56
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
Well, if you analyze a lot of his plots, they don't exactly connect all the dots. I just like his style, the way he's able to build suspense without hokey and hackneyed action scenes. When action does happen, it's more effective.

I thought Signs was one of the better sci-fi movies I've seen, and I'm a sci-fi fan, though not a fanatic.

It looked like a more realistic way that something like that would actually happen, out in the sticks. I'm a big fan of portent and Signs has a ton of them.

2006-08-30 @ 16:19
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
OK, show of hands. Who think Ghet Rheel and Chris Baldwin are the same person, clogging up the Internet with their schizophrenic arguing?

Seriously, a Hollywood director (as quoted by a hack sportswriter), known for playing media games, is questioning the character of a 16-year old golfing/marketing phenom because of a single incident? And this is news?

The only thing dumber than Baldwin blogging about it is Ghet Rheel's fanatical response of repeatedly trying to smear Shyamalan. Dude, if you don't like what Baldy says, IGNORE IT. If he doesn't get readers (and commenters), TravelGolf will dump his ass.

2006-08-30 @ 16:34
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
It is a beautiful sight to see. Wie bashers doing backflips trying anything and everything to change the subject away from Baldwin's ridiculous post.

Love it when the delusional TC pretends to actually BE a commissioner of something. TC, if you don't like the way thing are spinning in this blog, there are about 300 other strings running on this site alone - find one that, you know, pleases you.

No one is trying to smear Shyamalan - he did a fine job of it all by himself. The POSSIBLE big story here is the Bamberger Media-Hoax angle:

1. Bamberger is infatuated with Shyamalan (wrote a book about him).
2. Shyamalan fabricated a Media-Hoax to promote a film (NBC had to publicly apologize).
3. Bamberger creates a media storm via the "Wie DQ".
Question: Was Bamberger's "Wie DQ" a Media-Hoax to promote Bamberger's book that was released days later?

That is a good question. Great stories start with good questions.



2006-08-30 @ 17:21
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
Operation Astroturf, media hoax's, lawsuits, claims of child abuse...keep em' coming Ghet Rheel I feel like I'm watching a man lose his mind right in front of my eyes.

I do agree that this is pretty much a non-issue, the illegal drop(which did give her a huge advantage) is old news and who really cares what a one-tirck pony director like Shyamalan says, but your over the top responses are priceless--Anyone who dares criticize Michelle Wie must be a child abusing, slanderous, plagerizing hack with Pedophilic tendencies in your eyes--You need serious help.
2006-08-30 @ 17:37
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Ford

You are the most abusive "Walter Mitty" character I've ever encountered. To top it off, you repeatedly try to pose as the "injured voice of reason" when anyone slaps you back. What a phony!

The only thing I've ever accused you of, is being vebally abusive to a child. Michelle is a child and you have been verbally abusive toward her - do the math.

I'd be proud for my family, friends, and community to see anything I've written on this blog... how about you Ford? - May happen sooner than you think.

As to the DQ - Were you there? Did you see an illegal drop? The LPGA caved-in to the big Sports Illustrated writer's reenactment, while Johnston let his player twist in the wind.

2006-08-30 @ 17:57
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Ford - To bring the blog back on topic:

1. Bamberger is infatuated with Shyamalan (wrote a book about him).
2. Shyamalan fabricated a Media-Hoax to promote a film (NBC had to publicly apologize).
3. Bamberger creates a media storm via the "Wie DQ".

Question: Was Bamberger's "Wie DQ" a Media-Hoax to promote Bamberger's book that was released days later?
2006-08-30 @ 18:11
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel says: Question: Was Bamberger's "Wie DQ" a Media-Hoax to promote Bamberger's book that was released days later?

Answer: Ghet Rheel is a fricking raving nut job.

1. Bamberger is infatuated with Shymalan [possibly true, see Mario, Jennifer for similar fawning]
2. Shyamalan fabricated a media-hoax [Unsubstantiated. He participated, there is no evidence he is the mastermind. More likely, it's a studio idea.]
3. Bamberger creates a media storm via the "Wie DQ" [Perhaps, but if she makes a legal drop, none of us would have ever heard of Bamberger]

So, you take a media-whore sportswriter who idolizes a creepy, media-whore filmmaker. You add in a media-whore golfer who doesn't know the rules of her sport. Now, have the filmmaker tell the sportswriter he thinks the golfer has low character. What does that make?

Nothing, except a blown synapse in Ghet Rheel's already misfiring brain.
2006-08-30 @ 18:58
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Tim,

I think Shymalalalalan (I didn't feel like cut-and-pasting) is a good director and is probably at a crossroads of whether he'll become something really special or eventually become the center square, with Tarantino next to him ("I'll take McNight Shymallalalan for the win")

I did like The Village, but not as much as Chris. Of course, I doubt anyone liked it that much, except for maybe Shymallalalalaalaa himself. It was good despite the presence of Joaquin Phoenix, who's likable, but always plays that slightly stoned, Joaquin Phoenix character. I especially liked him in the film "Joaquin Phoenix and June"

Dude, if you don't like what Baldy says, IGNORE IT. If he doesn't get readers (and commenters), TravelGolf will dump his ass.

Cripes. We need comments?? I'm doomed.

--WKW
2006-08-30 @ 19:30
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Toddy boy - the Pleasanton Pontif...

Do you ever research ANYTHING before you blather on?

Shyamalan's role in fabricating the media-hoax is well documented:

"Despite his [Shyamalan's] office's disclosure-agreement requirement, and approvals of each marketing step, Shymalan told the AP, "I was, of course, involved in the production of the special but had nothing to do with the marketing of it. If the Sci Fi Channel erred in their marketing strategy, it was totally out of enthusiasm." (Yeah right, Shy... well, Toddy buys your BS)

Apparently, Toddy also buys Bookie Bamberger's BS about the drop. Wie's playing partner had no problem with it. Toddy - Can't make a connection between Bamberger's DQ gambit and his book launching only days later? Are ANY of your synapses working?

And Todd... Commissioner? Please... Head jock-sniffer is more like it.

2006-08-30 @ 20:11
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jason, This may come as a surprise to a mental lightweight such as yourself, but my life is quite fulfilled and happy. Remarks made on blogs like these don't mean a thing to me except as entertainment. You have swallowed the Wie koolaid as has your mentor, Ghet Rheel. That's fine. I haven't gone off the deep end in Wie adulation like you. That should be fine also. Is it?
2006-08-30 @ 20:20
Comment from: Kyle [Visitor]
Don't worry too much about Alex, Jason.

Bellevue lets him have access to the internet as reward for not soiling his pants for the day -so just let him have his fun. Its a big deal for him.
2006-08-30 @ 23:01
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Bamberger - driven by journalistic ethics?
Bamberger was on the set of the Village while Shyamalan was filming the FAKE "documentary". Phony press releases were showing up daily on AP and in other national outlets. Where was Bamberger's ethical compass? Why didn't he bust the Media-Hoax wide open - right there and right then? He knew the whole story.

He got Wie DQ'd primarily on the strength of his alleged journalistic integrity. He was the big-time Sports Illustrated authority. The LPGA caved-in to him on the strength of his reputation. It was his word against a teenaged rookie's. Bamberger and his pals should shut up about this mess while they still can.

Major media hoax and no story exposing it from Book Bamberger - Its gettin' curiouser and curiouser.
2006-08-31 @ 00:06
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Kyle, By mentioning your home of Bellevue, you have outed yourself as a denizen of that liberal hell hole New York City.
2006-08-31 @ 07:36
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
Gheet Rheel--You are a joke! You are easily the most mocked person on this site and probably on all the other sites you troll as well. You're cries of verbal abuse and media hoaxes are the stuff of comic gold, but sadly you aren't in on the joke.

[Editor's Note: The rest of this was unnecessary and over the line. It has been deleted]
2006-08-31 @ 09:13
Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
According to a new pole Michelle is rated as the 4th most popular female athelete in the US. Looks like all the Wie bashing on this site isn't working. Maybe you guys need to make up some more phoney scandels. Try mob connections or something. Be more creative.

2006-08-31 @ 09:38
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Paul W, I'm glad to see that Bubbles is the 4th most popular female athlete in the US according to a "new pole." Tell me, was this a light pole, a telegraph pole, a pole for vaulting, or a Pole from Warsaw?:-) Mr. Editor, I hope this doesn't get deleted. Ghet Rheel has accused several on this board, myself included, of conspiracy, many actionable civil offenses, and other high crimes, misdemeanors and treason without being deleted. Are you being selective in your censorship?
2006-08-31 @ 10:12
Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
Alex, haha, okey poll. Speeling waz never my tallent.
2006-08-31 @ 10:17
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
Bill, I'd agree with that. His movies, in my opinion, always seem to be on the verge of excellent. Most of them anyway. But, they always seem to be missing something. They don't have the full weight of what I believe this guy is capable of.

He's still young, and has a lot of growing to do. But, whenever i see one of his films coming out, I get interested. You know you're going to get something out of it. I still think he's better than 90 percent of Hollywood directors working now.

2006-08-31 @ 10:56
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
By the way Todd Commish, Baldwin has a "no-fire" clause in his contract with TravelGolf, whether people respond to his blogs or not.

Whether or not you know it, he is one of the most powerful golf writers in the business today. You should see his house, it's more like a mansion. He has his own driving range and the few times I was allowed on the grounds, there were at least three knock-out blondes practicing their long-irons.
2006-08-31 @ 11:01
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
"Walter Mitty" Ford:
I hope you aren't laboring under the moronic delusion that I, or any Wie supporter, give a tinker's damn what you and your little playmates think.

And mocked? Big deal. Anyone who stands up for themselves gets flak from the haters. I truly feel sorry for you. You are one sick puppy - Oh, and the first I've seen have a comment deleted on this blog - Using those Big Manly swear words again are ya, Walter?

Paul W - Fouth most popular popular athlete in the US? Impressive. From reading this blog, you'd think she be dead last - right below Tonya Harding! I wonder if the Bashers will ever figure out how far out of touch with humanity they really are - kinda doubt they ever will. Oh well, at least its entertaining to watch them attempt to spin, obfuscate and dissemble.



2006-08-31 @ 11:25
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
BTW, nice to see all these Shyamalan aficionados come out of the woodwork or the closet or wherever they've been hiding. That tribe sure hasn't been showing up at the box office lately.
2006-08-31 @ 11:39
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet, Old pal, isn't it time for you to trot out the Great Astroturf Conspiracy? How about the pending legal actions against the "child abusers?" Nobody cares about these movie producers or authors. The Wie Warriors are interested in fantasy. Paul W was right there with Bubbles being number four in popularity among female athletes. Ghet, you can do it! Put on your tinfoil hat and give out with some of your well known science fiction.
2006-08-31 @ 11:43
Comment from: Johnny N. [Visitor]
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Speaking of media hoaxes, that is quite a caper that BJ, Bo, and Bubbles' other handlers are pulling off. None of the Wie Warriors find anything wrong with that gang getting rich without producing something of substance.
__________________________

Do you watch golf Alex?
Michelle Wie
- youngest to ever win an adult usga event.
- youngest to qualify for an lpga event.
- youngest to make the cut at the US Womens Open.
- only female to get past local US Open qualifying.
- only female to make the cut on the Asian Tour.
- first female in 61 years to make a cut on one of the 6 pga tours.
- first female to qualify for the US Publinx, and got to quarter final stage giving her automatic qualification for the next years event, had she not turned pro.
- top amateur in several lpga majors.
- 6 top 5 places in majors while still 16 years old. Impressive.
2006-08-31 @ 11:53
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Have been meaning to call the Hawaii Child Protection Services Division to see if verbal abuse of a child by an adult on a blog is actionable. If it is, I'm sure you'll be getting a jingle. Still oblivious to Public Relations astroturf? Why does that not surprise me.

Let's get back to the topic, since no one seems to want to let go of this string:

1. Bamberger is infatuated with Shyamalan (wrote a book about him).
2. Shyamalan fabricated a Media-Hoax to promote a film (NBC had to publicly apologize).
3. Bamberger creates a media storm via the "Wie DQ".

Question: Was Bamberger's "Wie DQ" a Media-Hoax to promote Bamberger's book that was released days later?
2006-08-31 @ 11:58
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
The above is meant for Alex -

BTW, particularly enjoy the insights on Shyamalan from the aficionados who can't spell his name.
2006-08-31 @ 12:05
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, That is very weak. I'm afraid you're losing your touch. There are several newbie Wie Warriors on this site who are not familiar with Astroturf. It's up to you to give them the skinny on this nefarious plot. Even the Wie skeptics can use an update. They've got to know what can and cannot be said on these blogs in order to avoid that call from the Oahu Child Protective Services and Kook Bloggers Bureau. Got to be PC or one might get that rap on the door at 3:00AM. Come on, Ghet, keep 'em coming!
2006-08-31 @ 12:14
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Sure -
1. Go to Google
2. Type in "astroturf" and "blog"
3. Read

Now, back to the subject you so deserately want to changs:

1. Bamberger is infatuated with Shyamalan (wrote a book about him).
2. Shyamalan fabricated a Media-Hoax to promote a film (NBC had to publicly apologize).
3. Bamberger creates a media storm via the "Wie DQ".

Question: Was Bamberger's "Wie DQ" a Media-Hoax to promote Bamberger's book that was released days later?
2006-08-31 @ 12:29
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, Weren't you the one who criticized someone else's spelling? Ghet, fie on google! You are the resident Astroturf expert here and we Wie skeptics want it right from the horse's mouth, not from the other end!
2006-08-31 @ 12:59
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
Get Real - it doesn't surprise me that you're one of those people who judges movies by their box office results.
2006-08-31 @ 13:09
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
To the Editor: Edit this..

You guys are on very dangerous ground here. Censoring comments arbitrarily is a slippery slope. So let me get this straight you guys are ok with racist comments, homophobic comments, ethnic slurs, threats of unactionable lawsuits, slanderous claims of child abuse, and delsusional rants regarding covert operations and smear campaigns, yet my rebuttle to a man(and I use the term loosely) who has accused me of child abuse and brought my family into the discussion is out of bounds. I have no doubt that the cowards who run this site will edit this as well, but the point of my offending post was simply that a particular poster on this blog believes me to be a child abuser based on the evidence of one comment while I believe this same poster to be a pedophile based on the strength of his entire body of work on this site; said poster fits the physcological profile of molesters to a tee from his overly aggressive defense of a child supposedly in danger to his delsional rantings and his positioning himself as an authority figure and protector.

2006-08-31 @ 13:25
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Ford so in your twisted little spinal cord ending, you see standing up for a child who is being slandered by adults as being perverse? You are a demented little bully. I'd suggest you get off my case and soon.

2006-08-31 @ 15:22
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
The plot to bring down Bubbles was probably hatched about one year ago. It truly bred some strange bedfellows. M. Night Shyamalan, a furtive Hindu right out of central casting, and Michael Bamberger, a reformed Zionist Jew were the initial conspirators. Each had an axe to grind, but the question was how to put the machinery in gear without arousing the suspicions of the Wie thought police. One dark night, they met on Level 3 in the sub basement of Astroturf Central with the third and perhaps the most insidious member of the cabal, Herb Krickstein. At first M.N. Shy and Bam wanted to pull the illegal drop hoax on Annika, but Mister Herb, as he is reverently called by the serfs on his Florida plantation, was adamant. The victim of the hoax should be none other than Bubbles who had stolen the headlines as well as the bulk of the endorsement money an all the sponsors' exemptions from his granddaughter, Morgan Pressel. At first Bam was reluctant, but when Mr. Herb appealed to him as a fellow Zionist, Bam relented. M.Night, have no dog in the fight , shrugged and said okay. They signed the deal in their own blood and for all intents and purposes seemed to have pulled it off without a hitch. One thing they didn't take into account , though, was the investigative abilities of several bloggers on Travelgolf.com. Ghet Rheel, a sleuth if there ever was one saw through it for what is was almost immediately. The amateurish plot had bungled Astroturf written all over it. Mr. Herb has retreated to the safety of his compound, M. Night is looking for a new studio to scam, and Bam is now a copy boy for Popular Mechanics. Bubbles, in contrast is setting the poles (polls) on fire, she's now number four. And Ghet Rheel is back at his keyboard, raring to go and loaded for bear. That'll teach 'em! Go Michelle!
2006-08-31 @ 15:26
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
2006-08-31 @ 15:30
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Tim,
Box office judgments are not all bad. Second and third week numbers are telling. Big drop-off usually means big bomb (despite all attempts at hype). Some critics are “on the money”, some not. Have always found David Edelstein’s reviews to be reliable. Below are excerpts – oh, he mentions Bamberger’s book… calls it “unintentionally hilarious”:

[title]:
“M. Narcissus Shyamalan
[subtitle]:
Lady in the Water drowns in the pool of its director’s self-regard
By David Edelstein – New York Magazine

Born Manoj Nelliyattu Shyamalan in 1970, the director of Signs and Lady in the Water invented his middle name, “Night,” while studying film at NYU. He’s “playfully embellished” his biography ever since, including filming a hoax-documentary special, The Buried Secret of M. Night Shyamalan, for the Sci Fi Channel to promote The Village. The hoax, picked up by the AP, the New York Post, and others, claimed that the director had been legally dead for a half-hour after drowning in a frozen pond—and thereafter communicated with supernatural spirits.

In the absence of a neurological disorder, a filmmaker who boasts about hearing voices is either scamming the congregation or has come to believe that the universe revolves around him.” …

David, maybe both?

Tim:
Does anyone still think Baldwin trotted out a reliable witness in “Character Boy” Shyamalan?

2006-08-31 @ 20:38
Comment from: Kyle [Visitor]
Michelle Wie got voted the 4th most favorite female athlete ?

Baldwin's not even the 4th most favorite blogger on this website.

Good for you Alex- are you learning about toilet paper this week?
2006-08-31 @ 20:56
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Kyle, That's some brilliant repartee you've come up with. When does school start for you? Ghet, isn't it nice to have Kyle on your side?
2006-08-31 @ 22:32
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
The US female athletes who were first and second in that poll were Venus and Serena Williams. Enough said.
2006-08-31 @ 22:36
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Harris Poll top-ten most popular Female athletes in US:

1. Venus Williams
2. Serena Williams
3. Mia Hamm
4. Michelle Wie
5. Danica Patrick
6. Michelle Kwan
7 Annika Sorenstam
8. Maria Sharapova
9 Anna Kournikova
10. Sasha Cohen.

Wonder what the numbers look like in Asia. Think Nike and SONY were way ahead of the curve in signing Wie? Wie Bashers are looking more and more like the “Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight”. Think they ever heard of “backlash”?

Can't wait to hear how Harris is wrong and they're right. Or, maybe we'll get another round of esoteric film reviews (how pithy) from the golf-gossip-columnists.
2006-08-31 @ 22:39
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Kyle - Alex shows no respect for the Williams sisters... how predictable.
2006-08-31 @ 22:47
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
The validity of the poll is put into question by the fact that neither of the Williams sisters is ranked or seeded in the current US Open. But at least they have a lot of wins between them. Bubbles and Danica still wear the horse collar. The fact that Bubbles is ranked in popularity way ahead of Annika says much for her publicity machine and little for the knowledge of those polled.
2006-08-31 @ 22:55
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Alex knows how to poll and whom to poll - Harris doesn't. Again, how predictable.
2006-08-31 @ 23:28
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Correction:

In an earlier comment I wrote the following:
"Bamberger was on the set of the Village while Shyamalan was filming the FAKE "documentary"."
I am now reasonably certain that the source for that comment was not reliable. Thus, I have no reliable source that Bamberger was present when Shyamalan shot the bogus "documentary". It of course follows that if Bamberger was not present at the shoot, it would be unlikely that he could have reported the fake documentary. Sorry for the error.

That said, well before the time Bamberger's book went to press, he was fully aware of the media-hoax-fake-documentary, and of the numerous serious plagiarism charges against Shyamalan. Bamberger knew full well that Shy was in no position to pass judgment on anyone elses character; and particularly not in the Wie-Bamberger matter.

Unless, of course... after Shy's "near death" drowning experience he acquired the mysterious ability to see rules violations when no where near the event. No more foot wedges for me.

"I see ball drops!" Ooooooo spooooky!

2006-09-01 @ 02:18
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Sentence in second parargraph above should read:

That said, well before the time Bamberger's book went to press, he was fully aware of the media-hoax-fake-documentary, and of the numerous serious ALLEGED plagiarism charges against Shyamalan.





2006-09-01 @ 02:41
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, Let's cut to the chase. Do you or don't you believe that Bubbles took an illegal drop at last year's Samsung? Do you actually believe that Michael Bamberger fabricated the illegal drop and convinced the tournament officials that it really occurred? And that he did these things to promote himself and his soon-to-be-released book? And that nobody on the course, including Bubbles or her caddie, had any evidence to dispute such an obvious hoax? Please try to give a direct answer, none of the old "anything is possible" or "they're all insanely jealous of Michelle" baloney. Such a well thought out plot and it's successful execution would far exceed anything that the alleged Astroturf conspirators have been able to pull off to this point. Ghet, if you can give a straight yes or no reply to these questions with some logical explanation, you might make me a convert and a true believer.
2006-09-01 @ 07:45
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Member] Email
Get Real, you're a closet liberal. Edelstein is the same guy who gave a generally good review to Fahrenheit 9-11.
2006-09-01 @ 14:17
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
For those who don’t care for Edelman’s film reviews;
John Patterson of The Guardian writes:

“It is time for M Night Shyamalan to shut up, sod off, grow up, get over himself, wait five years for his personality to catch up with his talent and then, these things all having been achieved to a legally certifiable degree, come back and impress us all over again.”

He mentions Bamberger’s book on Sham, calls it “toecurlingly reverent”.

Patterson goes on to say:
“All this, combined with toxic box office for Lady, suggests that Nighty-Night needs some naptime in which to recharge his creative batteries. If only he'd let someone else write a script for him. And then let them direct it.”

Oh, and yeah, after reading about Sham and Bam, I think there’s a good chance Bam followed Wie around the course hoping to find some infraction (real or concocted) he could use to goad the LPGA into DQing her with. Would I call this possible scenario “well thought out”? No… the words “clumsy” and “inept” come to mind – Bam’s “valiant gesture in defense of the sanctity of the Rules of Golf” stunk from day one, and the national press took him to task for it.

Bam’s “toecurling reverence” for Sham speaks volumes about Bam’s character. If it is OK for Sham to fafricate a widely-reported Media-Hoax to promote a new film, then maybe it’s OK for Bam to try one to promote his new book too. Bam's complete embrace of his hero Shyamalan, indicates to me that Bam lacks the ethical and moral compass that would preclude him from wrongly DQing Wie to make a buck on his book.
2006-09-02 @ 04:03
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Wie was wise to move on; Bambam should consider doing the same.
2006-09-02 @ 04:12
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, I didn't think you'd give a straight answer. Your reply is a definite maybe, then? Your theory that Bamberger may have followed her around the course hoping to notice a real or imagined infracton that would cause the LPGA to DQ Bubbles after his goading is without doubt the most convoluted conspiracy theory ever to be proposed on a golf blog. It would make some of the kook conspiracy theorists envious. But since it comes from a guy who is an avid believer in the power of the Astroturf, I suppose it's to be expected. I do agree with you Ghet that the illegal drop and the subsequent DQ should be tossed in the dust bin of history.
2006-09-02 @ 07:48
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Prior to Baldwin's reopening the issue, I'd given BamBam the benefit of the doubt, i.e. chickensh*t?... yes; fabricated?... probably not.

After digging into accounts of Shyamalan's dubious background, and BamBam's sycophantic devotion to him; and learning of Sham's cavalier attitude media-hoaxes... Well, the missing element appeared - like an elephant in the living room, with BamBam perched atop.

The missing element? Lack of character. All other elements were in place. Means, motive, presence at incident, conflicting eyewitness accounts, etc. But who thought anyone could stoop so low? Enter Sham, BamBam's hero. He stooped that low, and he's dreamy!

It is hard for me to ignore a sycophant on an elephant.

2006-09-02 @ 09:52
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
With corrections:

Prior to Baldwin's reopening the issue, I'd given BamBam the benefit of the doubt, i.e. chickensh*t?... yes; fabricated?... probably not.

After digging into accounts of Shyamalan's dubious background, and BamBam's sycophantic devotion to him; and learning of Sham's cavalier attitude toward media-hoaxes... Well, the missing element appeared - like an elephant in the living room, with BamBam perched atop.

The missing element? Lack of character. All other elements were in place. Means, motive, presence at incident, conflicting eyewitness accounts, etc. But who thought anyone could stoop so low? Enter Sham, BamBam's hero. He has stooped that low, and he's dreamy!

It is hard for me to ignore a sycophant on an elephant.
2006-09-02 @ 10:20
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, There is a delicious bit of irony in your blogs which you possibly are unable to see. You've made it a crusade to excoriate any person or persons who dare to question the judgment or motives of BJ Wie, the quintessential stage father and money grubber par excellence. No matter how egregious and/or boorish his mercenary grasping, you will defend him and his protege, Bubbles. Yet,in the next breath, you have created a fantasy of a scurrilous plot invoving Bamberger and Shyamalan to get Bubbles DQ'ed on a non-existent and illegal technicality. This is the kind of supposed tripe that is actionable in your mind if tendered against BJ and Bubbles. Ghet, if you ever pursue a career in law, don't ever go into court with that kind of "evidence."
2006-09-02 @ 10:59
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Sham had nothing to do with BamBam's possible hoax, with the exception of being BamBam's hero, and having shown a PROVEN track-record of taking an active role in scam to promote a movie.

The missing link in questioning whether the DQ was a hoax, was always - "who would stoop so low as to create a media-hoax for personal gain"? Now we know... BamBam's hero - Shyamalan.

I don't consider any of this as "evidence". I do, however, see the new information, that BamBam holds a notorious hoaxter in such high esteem, as making the Wie DQ incident worthy of some serious new investigative journalism.


2006-09-02 @ 11:46
Comment from: Johnny N. [Visitor]
Comment from Alex:
Ghet Rheel, Your theory that Bamberger may have followed her around the course hoping to notice a real or imagined infracton that would cause the LPGA to DQ Bubbles after his goading is without doubt the most convoluted conspiracy theory ever to be proposed on a golf blog.
________________________




Indeed Alex it is a convoluted theory.
Would you like an example of another convoluted theory?



_________________________
Comment from Alex:
the judgment or motives of BJ Wie, the quintessential stage father and money grubber par excellence. No matter how egregious and/or boorish his mercenary grasping,
_________________________


There is another example of a convoluted theory. Those who make claims about BJ Wie without knowing the facts.
2006-09-02 @ 11:51
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, If, according to you, none of these far-fetched suppositions of yours can be considered as "evidence", what would be the basis for the serious new investigative journalism that you advocate? I'm trying hard not to refer to you as a kook or a crackpot, but you're making it very difficult.
2006-09-02 @ 12:07
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Johnny N, Here's a little advice: Think up your own material if you want to be taken seriously. Quoting someone else's lines will do nothing for your resume.
2006-09-02 @ 12:12
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Means, motive, presence at incident, conflicting eyewitness accounts, etc. would all be elements of journalistic evidence.

As I said, the missing link in questioning whether the DQ was a hoax, was always - "who would stoop so low as to create a media-hoax for personal gain"? Now we know... BamBam's hero - Shyamalan.

When I wrote, "I don't consider any of this as "evidence"", I was referring to Sham's influence on BamBam as to creating media-hoaxes.

Again, as I said, I do see the new information (that BamBam holds a notorious media-hoaxter in such high esteem) as making the Wie DQ incident worthy of some serious new investigative journalism.


2006-09-02 @ 12:36
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
I suppose Bamberger's new “toecurlingly reverent” book on Shyamalan would be evidence of BamBam's admiration for an established Media-Hoaxter.
2006-09-02 @ 12:42
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, Which publication would you suggest as the proper vehicle for this serious new investigative journalism? Which journalist would be your choice for this startling expose? Do you believe that anyone outside of a few devoted Wie Warriors would care two hoots about anything so trivial? Would the purpose of this "serious" investigation be to actually unearth some evidence of a conspiratoial nature? Or would it be merely to discredit Bamberger? In my opinion, the general public would greet such insignificance with a giant collective yawn. I can't imagine any publisher paying more than a pittance for a smear job on Bam and Shy. Incidentally, I've never read a thing by Bamberger or seen a movie directed by Shyamalan.


2006-09-02 @ 13:03
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Every major paper in the country covered the Wie DQ... NOT because a promising young rookie was DQ'ed, but because a Sports Illustrated writer broke a cardinal rule of jounalism - he became part of the story. The way he did it was also roundly panned - i.e., after waiting a day to report it, and while having a new book in the pipeline.

If some enterprising investigative reporter were able to "connect the dots" of a BamBam hoax, every paper in the country would run with the story.

No conspiricy here, if BamBam blundered, he likely did it all by himself.
2006-09-02 @ 13:57
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Yes, It was covered but it wasn't headline news. And it was about a year ago. There are several hundred things that are more important than that to the general public. Any connecting of the dots should have been done by now. In my opinion. There was no hoax as far as Bubbles being DQ'ed. If there had been, her handlers and her parents would have never stopped bitching. Even they have dropped the subject. Guys like you with a wide streak of suspicion seem to be the only ones with a desire to keep such triviality alive.
2006-09-02 @ 14:25
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Front page news? No. Major sports-journalism story? Absolutely. The Bamberger-Shyamalan connection is new to most; and few have made the connection (by association) between BamBam and Shyamalan's documented media-hoax to get publicity for his film.

Hey, I was willing to drop it 14 comments ago... you're keeping the string alive. I don't mind talking about it, though.
2006-09-02 @ 14:44
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
I don't pay much attention to such "tempests in teapots" as disqualifications in golf tournaments. I always assumed that the marshals and the tournament directors were the final arbiters in such matters. The tenor of this blog as far as the postings by Ghet Rheel give me the impression that Bubbles was disqualified solely because of the reporting of the incident by Michael Bamberger. I find it impossible to believe that Bubbles would have been tossed on the word of a spectator a day after the fact.If that were the case, what would stop any third party from similarly accusing any golfer of a trumped-up abrogation of the rules? There would of necessity have to be corroboration of the infraction by a tournament official.
2006-09-02 @ 15:13
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
"I find it impossible to believe that Bubbles would have been tossed on the word of a spectator a day after the fact."

But that is exactly what happened. Below are some excerpts from an article in GolfWeek titled "Strings Attached" by James Achenbach.

By the way, Wie played with Se Ri Pak (Pak scored Wie's card). Pak had no problem with the drop. The next day, officials could not make a determination of distances during the reenactment by "eye", so resorted to measuring the distances with strings, AND had to ESTIMATE where the ball was, and where the drop was made. Bamberger bulldozed the LPGA, plain and simple. - here are the excerpts from GolfWeek:

"PALM DESERT, CALIF. — Michael Bamberger made a mistake at the Samsung World Championship. Shame on him.

Bamberger, a writer for Sports Illustrated, felt that Michelle Wie mistakenly took an incorrect drop Saturday morning on the seventh hole of the third round.

The next day, Bamberger reported the incident to tournament officials. Wie, after completing 72 holes, was disqualified late Sunday afternoon in a retroactive ruling.

No journalist should become involved in the outcome of a sporting event.

That being said, any journalist inadvertently thrust into the sporting mix has an obligation – to act with intelligence, wisdom and sensitivity.

Bamberger did not do so. This was his mistake.

Some have talked about maintaining the integrity of golf, but let us talk about maintaining the integrity of journalism. It was his obligation, if he felt a violation had occurred, to report it promptly and impartially.

Golfweek reader Bob Leonard of Phoenix presented an interesting point of view: "One additional thought that occurred to me," Leonard said in an e-mail, "is that the officials should have been required to eyeball the distance, just like Michelle had done, and, if the infraction was not discernible with the naked eye, then no penalty should have been called.

"My rationale is that if the officials can't spot the infraction with the tools available to Michelle (i.e., the naked eye), then how could she be held to a higher standard? How could she expected to have spotted it herself?""

****


2006-09-02 @ 15:56
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
A Royal and Ancient rules official also took a stand on the issue as quoted in the Golf Blog 10-21-05:

"The Royal & Ancient, the oldest rules governing body in golf, seems to be indicating that it would have handled things differently. And the R&A places most of the blame for the whole fiasco on SI Reporter Michael Bamberger (aka the guy in the pink shirt).

R&A Assistant Secretary of Rules Grant Moir stated, "We feel very strongly that Michelle should not be hung out to dry over this....What Michelle did was not intentional and not a serious breach of the rules. Michelle thought she knew what she was doing and went ahead with the drop on her own. At her first attempt, she thought she had dropped closer and so she dropped again, which tells its own story as to how she was attempting to get it right.""
2006-09-02 @ 16:21
Comment from: Johnny N. [Visitor]
Michelle was dq'd from the 2005 Samsung tournament.

Big deal.

Chris Baldwin is a sad man for bringing it up, so long after it happened.
Other bloggers are sad for continuing it on.

It happened.
It's done with.

She was only in 4th anyway. She has plenty of tournaments with better placings so it is not a big deal.

So it's not as if it robbed her of something unique that she hadn't done before. She already had 2nd at a major at that stage so it is no big deal.
2006-09-03 @ 19:02
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Johnny N
"So it's not as if it robbed her of something unique that she hadn't done before."

In tournament stats, you're right - not a big deal. But there is a far larger issue. Bamberger (and Baldwin) appear to be trying to brand Wie as a "cheat".

Baldwin writes:
"...He [Shyamalan] saw a character flaw. "Michelle Wie's your subject, you're looking for moments when she reveals her character, and the moment she took that drop in front of that bush, she did," Shyamalan says..."

Baldwin neglects to mention that Shyamalan is a notorious hoaxter who has been accused of plagiarism on numerous occassions. Baldwin also fails to mention that Bamberger was roundly criticized by the national press for his mishandling of the Wie DQ affair.

The LPGA struggles for publicity, and Bamberger's position with Sports Illustrated may have forced them into that unprecedented retroactive decision to DQ Wie. (Wie's scoring partner, Se Ri Pak saw no infraction)

Bamberger's apparent admiration for hoaxter and possible plagiarist Shyamalan, does nothing to dispel the speculation the he bullied the LPGA into DQing Wie in order to create a media frenzy that would aid in promoting his new book. Bamberger's new book was just days from release at the time of the DQ incident.

A DQ is not a big deal. A child being falsely branded as a cheat by national media figures IS a big deal - particularly when the whole mess may have been a media scam to promote a new book.
2006-09-03 @ 20:26
Comment from: Bryan Lee Williams [Visitor]
Come on, character flaw?!?

The drop was simply a 16-year-old stressed out girl with the whole world watching and ctritiquing. I've seen many tournaments where adult golfers make an illegal play without asking for a judgement.

This helped Wie, because now I've seen her ask many times for a judgement before doing anything abnormal.

Better for her to make the mistake early than to do it when she might be in contention.
2006-09-03 @ 23:59
Comment from: arnold [Visitor]
Hamburger, as I recall, emphatically stated at the time that he didn't think Wie made the illegal drop intentionally. Now, after he's getting slammed, he's trying to shift the blame on Wie by flip flopping and saying she's a cheat. Real class act.
2006-09-04 @ 02:58
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]

Boston Globe sportswriter Jim McCabe was standing next to Bamberger at the 7th hole during “the drop” and stayed with Bamberger to examine the bush and the surrounding area after Wie and Pak Played on.

McCabe writes:
“First of all, no one can say for certain where in the bush the ball was lodged.”

It was all guesses and posturing from that murky point forward.

Scorer/playing-partner Pak approved the drop and signed the scorecard.
NBC/Golf Channel analyst Mark Rolfing (on he scene) saw no foul.
The TV replay was inconclusive.
The officials attempt to “eyeball” the distances was inconclusive.
The officials attempt to “pace off” the distance was inconclusive.

After receiving no support for his claim, Bamberger pulled out a roll of string to measure the 45 or so yards to the hole. AND THE LPGA PERMITTED THIS FOLLY. Measuring 45 yards on a perfectly flat surface is with string is futile. All string is elastic. (When you buy a roll of mason’s cord, look at the label where it says “not to be used for measuring”) 3% to 6% elasticity is normal in the best quality strings. That yields a margin of error of 48” to 96” in a 45 yard distance (on a nice flat surface). Add ground and plant undulations and slope, etc., and you’re just kidding yourself as to any hope for accuracy.

Bamberger reopens this issue in his recent book in which he has the unmitigated gall to question Wie’s character. With Bamberger's new attack on Wie, it is incumbent upon the LPGA to reopen it also. Hopefully, after review, the LPGA will declare Bamberger’s challenge inconclusive, remove the DQ, and work out something with the Wie’s to donate the lost purse money to First Tee or some other worthy cause.

Bamberger has shown remarkably bad judgment, yet again. The LPGA has a mess to clean up (they helped make it). It is not going away all by itself.
2006-09-04 @ 06:28
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Hey Bamberger... want some REAL press coverage? Apologize to Wie and the LPGA. Then admit you were just guessing on the position of the ball in the bush and the spot of the drop; and disclose the complete unreliability of "string" as an accurate measuring device.

You'll come out smelling like a rose.
2006-09-04 @ 06:51
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Bam - Just spoke with Matt Lauer's people... They want you to break the story on the Today show just before the Samsung.
2006-09-04 @ 07:04
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, I thought you said you wanted to drop the subject. Seems like a few fellow Wie Warriors got you up and running. What have you made? About 40 postings on this trivial matter?
2006-09-04 @ 07:49
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Bryan Lee Williams, I find it interesting that you would credit Bubbles' illegal(?)drop and subsequent disqualification to her being a stressed out 16 year old girl. Why would she be stressed out? According to all the Wie Warriors, her parents and handlers would never think of putting her under the least bit of pressure. She had just signed multi-million dollar endorsement deals, she flies around the world in a private jet in the company of her doting parents. She stays in the finest accommodations. She is always under the watchful eyes of her various coaches. She has never had a worry in the world. Where would the stress come from? As far as the whole world watching, according to Ghet Rheel, NOBODY besides Bamberger was watching. As a result, the LPGA was forced to take the jaundiced opinion of Bam and DQ Bubbles.
2006-09-04 @ 13:01
Comment from: Mark [Visitor]
I always thought Bamberger was this sleazy, weasely type of character. This latest just confirms that.
2006-09-04 @ 14:03
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Alex writes:
"...according to Ghet Rheel, NOBODY besides Bamberger was watching."

Five boxes above, I point out the on-site witnesses to Wie's drop.
Mark Rolfing - NBC golf analyst Rolfing saw no foul... said the ruling was "a travesty"
Se Ri Pak = Scorer/playing-partner Pak approved the drop and signed the scorecard.
Jim McCabe, Boston Globe sportswriter, was standing next to Bamberger at the 7th hole during “the drop”; said the facts were inconclusive.

Wie and Johnston were there. Wie said, "I was honest out there. I did what I thought was right. I was pretty confident. If I did it again, I'd still do that. It looked right to me."

I mentioned the "measuring by string" method to a surveyor neighbor. He chuckled. He said a rubber band would be as accurate. He said even the laser range-finders are plus or minus one yard.

SAMSUNG would be doing a great service if they would sit down with the LPGA and help clear Wie's name. Its been less than a year and retroactive rulings didn't bother the LPGA when they DQ'ed her on "Bamberger String Theory". C'mon SAMSUNG, untangle this fishin' line.

DQ'ed with a stretchy string by a writer with a book to plug? What a joke.
2006-09-04 @ 14:48
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, Was Bubbles "stressed out" as Brian said? That was the gist of my post.
2006-09-04 @ 15:06
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Bryan infers that Wie made incurred an infraction of the rules because she was "stressed". Neither stress or an infraction are supported by the facts.

Wie said, "I was pretty confident... It looked right to me."

Impartial observers included Se Ri Pak, Boston Globe reporter McCabe, and NBC golf analyst Rolfing. None saw an infraction.

A surveyor (an avid golfer) told me that he would not attempt an accurate measurement in such a case, without a professional laser transit. He said that even with the laser, there was still no established point of origin for where the ball rested in the bush, or for the point at which the ball was dropped. He said no professional surveyor could offer an opinion on distance without pinpointing those beginning marks.

Bamberger reopened his "stretchy string" can of worms with his new book (and his new claim of a "character issue"). Bamberger's infatuation with a notorious hoaxter (Shyamalan) weakens, if not destroys, his journalistic gravitas. SAMSUNG and the LPGA need to sit down and clear Wie's name.
2006-09-04 @ 16:07
Comment from: KB1931 [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, there's more.

The rule of golf, to take relief from an unplayable lie, is to place the ball no more than two club lengths away from the unplayable position of the ball, not nearer the hole. No procedure is specified.

In general, a golfer visualizes the line from the hole to the ball in its unplayable position. Using that line, the golfer takes two club lengths from the position of the ball perpendicular to that line. The ball is placed at the end of the second club length. The penalty is one stroke.

What Michelle did was use geometry which she explained at her post round interview. But Bamberger and Smith did not understand the basic geometric principle.

Visualizing the line from the hole to the ball, Michelle took one club length perpendicular to that line and formed a right triangle. She then created a mirror image of that right triangle by moving the end of the second club closer to the hole. The length of the first line (from the hole to the unplayable position of the ball) and a second line from the hole to the end of the second club are equal. Michelle played behind the end of the second club, and said so in her post round interview.

Because Bamberger did not have understand geometry (and Smith), he saw Michelle’s movement of the second club head toward the hole as a violation because in his mind, he saw Michelle was moving the ball away from some bush.

Michelle tried to explain that, at the connecting point of the two clubs, there is an isosceles triangle (Michelle said equilateral) that she used to be sure that she had not placed the ball nearer the hole. Bamberger (and Smith) still did not understand.

Michelle accepted the DQ. With that level of understanding by Bamberger and Smith, she had no other choice.

The position of the ball using general practice, would be 15 to 18 inches back from where Michelle played her ball. A day later, using guestimates, line of sight and “string,” Smith ruled on the DQ.

It would take accurate scientific instruments to find an error of 3 inches out of 80-90 yards (that is 3 inches out of 2880 inches--80 yards times 3 feet per yard times 12 inches per foot--a guess since this was a par 4 hole and Michelle pitched to 15 feet of the pin).

If Smith had understood the geometry, he should have ruled in favor of Michelle. The rules of golf are one thing but interpreting the rules of golf without understanding the basic principles of logic, science, and mathematics is quite another.
2006-09-05 @ 02:31
Comment from: KB1931 [Visitor]
My error:
A similar post. was made on the Discussion board/Sports/Michelle Wie.
2006-09-05 @ 02:55
Comment from: KB1931 [Visitor]
Sorry: Meant to write that a similar post was made on the Discussion Board/Sports/Michelle Wie of the Honolulu Advertiser.
2006-09-05 @ 02:57
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
KB 1931, No need to apologize. Your explanation has made the whole issue as clear as mud.:-) I'll bet that even Ghet Rheel can understand it now, even though his specialties are plagiarism, conspiracies a la Astroturf, Child Protective Services, and civil libel lawsuits. Thank you, KB 1931! Long live the isosceles triangle!
2006-09-05 @ 08:12
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
KB1931

Thanks for the new info. It is clear that Michelle made the drop and estimated the proper spot using her best judgment, and with the approval of her marker/scorer Se Ri Pak. This is exactly what the rules call for... her best judgment.

Bamberger got millions of dollars in free press and name-recognition out of the bogus fiasco; and did so at the time of releasing a new book. (Though I think BamBam foolishly thought he'd come out, in the press, looking like a hero)

BamBam bullied Michelle and the LPGA into this absurd DQ. Nike, SONY, Samsung should apply some counter-pressure to the LPGA. The LPGA should seriously consider having this ruling reviewed in light of Bamberger's recent attack on Wie's character (based on "the drop"), and Bamberger's newly revealed association and admiration for Media-Hoaxter Shyamalan.
2006-09-05 @ 08:18
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel has frequently vented his wrath on those who dare find fault with Bubbles, BJ, or Bo. To Ghet, such miscreants are child abusers, male chauvinists, sexists, and worst of all, racists. But now, an invidious form of that which he professes to abhor has crept into Ghet's blogs. He has flatly accused M. Night Shyamalan, a distinguished movie director, of being a "notorious hoaxter." Mr. Shyamalan happens to be a dark-skinned native of the Indian sub continent. Michael Bamberger, a well-known columnist for Sports Illustrated and a prolific author, has been villified as a child abuser for supplying information to the LPGA that resulted in Bubbles being disqualified in a golf tournament. Mr. Bamberger is Jewish by birth. Is Ghet's excoriation of these fine and accomplished gentlemen justified? Or is he guilty of the same racism and also anti-semitism of which he recklessly accuses others?
2006-09-05 @ 10:00
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Shyamalan has admitted to being a hoaxter in the national press for the fake documentary he produced (along with Sci-Fi Channel) to hype the movie Village.

Here's some info on Shyamalan quoted from the Wikipedia article on him:

“The New York Post wrote that the film [Lady in the Water] was "dead in the water", criticizing Shyamalan as a "crackpot with messianic delusions".

In recent years, M. Night Shyamalan has been accused of plagiarism. [2] The Sixth Sense resembles the Orson Scott Card novel Lost Boys, and The Village has strong elements found in the Margaret Peterson Haddix novel Running Out of Time. Plots and elements from these books can be found in both movies.

In 2004, Shyamalan was involved in a media hoax with the Sci Fi Channel, which when eventually uncovered by the press prompted Sci Fi's parent company, NBC-Universal, to denounce the undertaking as "not consistent with our policy at NBC. We would never intend to offend the public or the press and value our relationship with both".”

I haven't accused Bamberger of child abuse, and I am not anti-Semitic in any way shape or form. I have accused Bamberger of grossly mishandling the Wie-Samsung matter and I stand by that position.

You're pushing your luck, Alex. I can assemble a long list of racially insensitive remarks that you have written on these blogs; along with some truly horrific anti-Semitic remarks made by some of your supporters.

Michelle Wie - the Harris Poll says she is one of the five MOST POPULAR female athletes in the nation... you're fighting a losing battle. Maybe you enjoy such enterprises... all losers do.

2006-09-05 @ 10:36
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, That's quite an obsession you have, compiling reams of copy about your arch enemy, the distinguished M. Night Shyamalan. Perhaps you can devise some sort of cottage industry out of your mania. Do you hate Mr. Shyamalan for his success or for the fact that he is of Indian heritage and thus different? I just really enjoy "pushing my luck." Should I fear the power of the mighty Ghet Rheel? As my 10 year old grandson would say, "I don't think so."
2006-09-05 @ 13:24
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Nice try, but nope. I admire the great people of the nation of India. That said, I don't think much of Shyamalan. Not because of his heritage, but because he is an apparant narcissist and phony. Not at all surprised that you find Sham to be "distinguished" and a "gentleman".

Here's an excerpt of a New York Magazine review of Shyamalan and his work:

Born Manoj Nelliyattu Shyamalan in 1970, the director of Signs and Lady in the Water invented his middle name, “Night,” while studying film at NYU. He’s “playfully embellished” his biography ever since, including filming a hoax-documentary special, The Buried Secret of M. Night Shyamalan, for the Sci Fi Channel to promote The Village. The hoax, picked up by the AP, the New York Post, and others, claimed that the director had been legally dead for a half-hour after drowning in a frozen pond—and thereafter communicated with supernatural spirits.

In the absence of a neurological disorder, a filmmaker who boasts about hearing voices is either scamming the congregation or has come to believe that the universe revolves around him.”

Or both?
2006-09-05 @ 14:54
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
As I previously stated, I had never in my life ever heard of Shyamalan until this blog. I only read a few articles in SI by Michael Bamberger. You obviously don't have the same disinterest as I do. You seem to know EVERYTHING of these two and you want the rest of us to know it. As if you don't have enough dirt on this infamous duo, KB 1931 gave you some additional information along geometric lines for which you were most grateful. Ghet Rheel, your posts reek of jealousy of these two successful artists. Just as you like to think that Bubbles is on the verge of stardom and immortality along with her ill-gotten wealth, Shy and Bam are at the top of their games and already have reached that level. Get used to it.
2006-09-05 @ 16:03
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
It is always easier to write in a disinterested manner when you know little or nothing about your subject matter.
2006-09-05 @ 17:39
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
If you say so, Ghet. Elitism rears its ugly head. Tell us how much YOU know, Ghet. Incidentally, how many successful films have you directed lately? Or ever? How many books have you had published lately? Or ever? Ridiculous, you say? So is the Wie Warrior reply of "what were you doing when you were 16."
2006-09-05 @ 17:54
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
This is your 28th post on this string. For someone who neither knows much about the subject nor cares much about the subject, 28 posts has to be some kind of record.

Babble-on Bubula.
2006-09-05 @ 18:11
Comment from: Sam [Visitor]
Alex, you're no match for GR. Not even close, but it's entertaining seeing you get totally outclassed.
2006-09-05 @ 18:37
Comment from: Johnny N. [Visitor]
Comment from Ghet Rheel:
Johnny N
"So it's not as if it robbed her of something unique that she hadn't done before."

In tournament stats, you're right - not a big deal. But there is a far larger issue. Bamberger (and Baldwin) appear to be trying to brand Wie as a "cheat".
________________________________

You are absolutely right there Ghet Rheel.

Hamburger is an asshole.
Baldie is an asshole.

However, there's nothing new there.

That is nothing new for Chris Baldie. He even wrote a blog a while back complaining that Michelle wore Paula Creamer's pink colour.
He would critisise anything from the watch she wears to her earnings. He is an obsessed freak and nothing more.

2006-09-05 @ 19:29
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
"He even wrote a blog a while back complaining that Michelle wore Paula Creamer's pink colour."

Sounds like Baldwin's got way too much time on his hands.

BTW, What happened to Shanks, Jennifer Mario, etc.? Their bylines and photos (about ten writers) have disappeared from the top vertical column. Anybody know?
2006-09-05 @ 19:42
Comment from: tim [Visitor]
They're still here. Jennifer has a column out front and Shanks is still blogging.
2006-09-05 @ 19:51
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Sam, You're right. That Ghet Rheel is good. And do you know how we know he's good? He admits it! And he has you and Johnny N to lick his boots. Ghet, you have about 50 posts on this triviality and you said you wanted to give it up long ago.
2006-09-05 @ 21:59
Comment from: Florida Mike [Visitor]
Alex, you respond to logic with attacks on the person applying the logic. I do not want to revisit the DQ, but I agree that there is a cheat angle to this that was not part of the original story. As you know, I have respect for Ms Wie and I saw no "flaw of character" in her explanations and her subsequant acceptance of the DQ. I did, do and will always see a problem with the reporter in question, for his thrusting himself into the story, his waiting till the next day to report and his just having to come prepared with string to "help"... Integrity.. come on. Now it is Ms Wie's character that was at fault? This is a bullcrap situation and any credence lent to either of these idiots by you and others just proves the lengths you will go to prove your point. I have always tried to respond more to Ford and other more reasonable Wie detractors as you and your ilk seem to take on ANY point in order to put Michelle Wie in a bad light. If you are really objective do 2 things, one, check into the safeguards that BJ Wie has taken out on Ms Wie's earnings. Two, re-examine the evidence of the DQ. I teach Physics to Xray students and I understood the mud of a previous blog. the LPGA's acceptance of this idiot and his string just proves another point in the 2nd rate mind of the current LPGA commisioner.
A couple of charlatans throwing mud at a young golfer, for something like that farce is really a new low.
2006-09-05 @ 23:23
Comment from: Gary [Visitor]
To the Wie cheated theory, was there any real advantage to being 18" closer in 30 yards? Bamberger states that if she made a "correct drop" her back swing would have been impeded by a bush. But since this was a penalty drop, doesn't she get nearest point of RELIEF? So isn't she's allowed to drop at a location where there is no problem with bushes or whatever? I just don't see a motive to cheat here.
2006-09-05 @ 23:59
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
The Boston Globe writer (McCabe) was with Bam during the drop and just after Wie hit her shot. McCabe and Bam examined the area within minutes after the incident. McCabe wrote, “First of all, no one can say for certain where in the bush the ball was lodged.” McCabe went on to say that he was not certain where the ball was finally hit from either. Remember, this was minutes after "the drop".

A day later, with a string and an agenda in his pocket, Bamberger has all the answers. He bullied Wie into guessing where the ball was in the bush, and where the ball was hit from. The LPGA went along with this folly because Bamberger had media clout and was perceived as having credibility (would any rules official in the country listen to him now?).

No clear point of origin in the bush, no clear point of where the ball was hit from, and BamBam's stretchy string.

BamBam got millions in pre-release publicity for his [then] new book (was released two weeks after "the drop"). And now, in his book released this Summer, BamBam wants to brand Wie as having a "character flaw".

Moron
2006-09-06 @ 04:51
Comment from: jayz [Visitor]
“But really everyone should read Shyamalan's words again. This isn't a traditional sports guy obsessed with whether Wie's winning or not. He's talking character. And Wie's coming up lacking in his estimation. Interesting. Something Wie's own camp should be thinking about.” Baldwin

Shyamalan is a sham as is your credibility as a credible journalist. YOU talking about character? What a laugh. Calling Bamberger a “very accomplished SI journalist” with his history is also a joke. You fall into the same category as Steve Duemig on the Golf Channel, just a big joke and not taken seriously because of your over-the-top commentary.

You are an idiot’s idiot.
2006-09-06 @ 06:01
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
The Wie Warriors have really circled the wagons on Bubbles' soon-to-be one year old disqualification. According to the Wie-wee's, Michelle did absolutely nothing wrong, nothing that could even be considered slightly amiss. Neither she, her caddie, her playing partner(s), the course officials nor any spectators, save one Michael Bamberger, saw anything that might have been deemed an infraction in any of Miss Wie's play. Then on the following day, on the word of the vile Bamberger alone, the governing body of women's golf, the LPGA, went through the motions of some laughable re-enactment and measuring of the drop in question, decided summarily that it was illegal, and DQed Bubbles with extreme prejudice. I assume that no video tape of the incident exists. Miss Wie's ever-present entourage meekly accepted the decision and did not offer any defense. How does Bamberger have that kind of influence? Is he some sort of "Svengali?" The scenario you Wie Warriors have presented here has some serious gaps in it. If a guy like Bamberger can pull off such a ruse with no appeal by the aggrieved player, what is to prevent any crackpot with an axe to grind from doing the same to another player?
2006-09-06 @ 08:15
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Ahhhhh! Yes, exactly! It took you a while, but now you understand it. It was a complete travesty (NBC's Mark Rolfing used the same word... travesty). There was videotape of "the drop", and no infraction could be seen by officials who reviewed the video... inconclusive is the word they used.

On "influence" - The press has enormous influence with struggling sports promoters. The LPGA is a struggling sports promoter. Senior Sports Illustrated reporter is major press credential. Bamberger bullied the LPGA into DQing Wie... everybody seems to know this but Alex. Now that he has the facts straight, maybe he's starting to come around too.

So, that's right, no one on the scene saw a bad drop but Bamberger. Not the NBC announcer, Hall of Fame golfer, Boston Globe reporter, NBC videotape, course official - no one. And Bamberger, with his stretchy string (and book to sell) created a media frenzy, or perhaps more correctly, book-promotion-media-hoax.
2006-09-06 @ 11:41
Comment from: Florida Mike [Visitor]
Alex, Why don't you try responding to logic. Your side of the story is the one with gaps. Like I said, a new low. Your inability to respond to anyones legitimate questions show the level of your intelligence.
2006-09-06 @ 11:43
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Oh, and the Wie's decision not to appeal? Probably a savvy Public Relations move. As time goes on, as to "the drop", Wie looks better and better, and Bamberger looks worse and worse.

And what's to stop this from happening again? All a player has to do, is look the rules official in the eye, and say, "Bamberger".
2006-09-06 @ 11:54
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, I wouldn't call the DQ a media frenzy. Interesting story, perhaps. Right now it is a non-story to all but the Wie Warriors. Probably not one person on one hundred presently knows or cares about Bubbles getting tossed. Even Michelle herself, her parents, and her entourage don't seem to be concerned with it. Florida Mike, who asked you?
2006-09-06 @ 12:06
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Alex - Your prior position had more credibility... That you don't know much nor care much about the issue being discussed. Why not find a topic you know about and care about?

Your silly statement that the DQ was did not create a media frenzy supports your prior position, but couldn't be farther from reality.
2006-09-06 @ 12:41
Comment from: BB [Visitor]
I am amazed to see just how many people log into this 'shit' site written by nobodies and waste their time writing back to some 'shit bags' who look like 'shitload' ?

Save your time & energy for something else, cause you guys are all responsible for this 'shit blog' going.
2006-09-06 @ 12:59
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
BB, Speaking of shit, as you obviously are, and shitbags and shitloads, my reply to you is it takes one to know one. Ghet Rheel, I suppose it's all a matter of semantics. One man's "media frenzy" is another man's "interesting story."
2006-09-06 @ 13:16
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Comment from: BB [Visitor]

Hmmmmm. "BB"... BamBam?

If BamBam is posting, then this blog has indeed hit rock bottom.
2006-09-06 @ 13:46
Comment from: George [Visitor]
Comment from: Shanks [Member] · http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/shanks
Also a big fan of Shyamalan. The Village was good, but not quite as good as Signs or Unbreakable - one of the most underrated movies of the last decade.

Not to get off on too much of a tangent, Shanks, but if you thought 'The Village' was "good", you are one of the most OVER-rated movie reviewers of the decade.

***** SPOILERS ***** FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT CONSIDER SEEING THE TRAVESTY KNOWN AS THE VILLAGE FOR THE FIRST TIME

I mean, come on. The monster wasn't real? It was all an elaborate plot by people who wanted to withdraw from the world? And these clowns had enough money to buy off the FAA to make sure an airplane, commercial and private, never once strayed over the preserve? Or did they just try to explain to the kids that those were flying dragons that would burn your eyes out if you looked too long? If they had that much money, just go buy a deserted island someplace and you can really make sure you're out of touch with civilization.

Look, if the monster had been real, then you might have had a good movie.

You're better off if you scribble about golf, Shanks. That's a safer sand box for you.

*****END SPOILERS*****

Finally, about the Wie Warriors. I notice none of you fanatics ever criticized Jennifer "Who Tells Fibs About Heat-Related Withdrawls At the John Deere Classic" Mario for blatantly peddling her own book about your hero Michelle Wie. Seems like it's OK for Mario to make a buck, but not Bamberger or Shaymalan.

Once again, we behold the hypocrisy and lunacy of the Wie Warriors.

-George

2006-09-06 @ 14:51
Comment from: George [Visitor]
Comment from: Johnny N. [Visitor]
*****
Michelle Wie
- youngest to ever win an adult usga event.
- youngest to qualify for an lpga event.
- youngest to make the cut at the US Womens Open.
- only female to get past local US Open qualifying.
- only female to make the cut on the Asian Tour.
- first female in 61 years to make a cut on one of the 6 pga tours.
- first female to qualify for the US Publinx, and got to quarter final stage giving her automatic qualification for the next years event, had she not turned pro.
- top amateur in several lpga majors.
- 6 top 5 places in majors while still 16 years old. Impressive.
*****

Johnny, don't forget to include all of the pro tournaments Michelle has won.

In contrast, let's look at folks who have actually accomplished something impressive:

Five PGA wins in a row: Tiger Woods

Two PGA majors in a row: Tiger Woods

#2 in career majors: Tiger Woods

#1 in career majors: Legendary Jack Nicklaus

Youngest LPGA winner (multi-round event): Paula Creamer.

See how simple these sentences are, Johnny? Yours are so long because you had to twist yourself into a pretzel to make Michelle's accomplishments seem legendary.

Face reality, Johnny.

Until, or if, Michelle wins her first LPGA event, the questions and skepticism surrounding Wie will continue -- and intensify.

-George
2006-09-06 @ 15:05
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Here are a few more of Bubbles' scores: Only female to miss the cut in NINE attempts in men's events. Only person to be carried off the course in an ambulance at the John Deere regardless of age. Longest earrings and most sparkly watch in all of golf.
2006-09-06 @ 15:21
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
How about the most financially successful female golfer in the history of the game. Pro rated, she's made more than a quarter of a million dollars in the eight days this blog has been running... probably the most popular ever, as well.
2006-09-06 @ 15:45
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
And her father is the most avaricious, mercenary stage father in the history of all sports.
2006-09-06 @ 15:49
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Or, the most accomplished business advisor in the history of women's golf.
2006-09-06 @ 16:01
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ghet Rheel, as far as Bubbles' quarter million in eight days, I'm glad you had the good sense not to use the word "earn" in connection with thay filthy lucre.
2006-09-06 @ 16:01
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Yes, indeed, she has earned that endorsement money. She has provided great value to Nike, SONY, etc. in their efforts to market their products world-wide. She has accomplished things in professional golf that no sixteen year old golfer has ever done before. She has Star-Power beyond any female golfer who has ever played the game.

She'll win many many tounaments during her career. Vegas has odds against, if you want to put your money where your mouth is.
2006-09-06 @ 16:13
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
het, the BS is getting pretty deep. If my shovel breaks, I'm going to be in real trouble.
2006-09-06 @ 18:39
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
By all accounts Wie’s drop was OK – except by BamBam’s illegal measuring device…

Scorer/playing-partner Pak approved the drop and signed the scorecard.
NBC/Golf Channel analyst Mark Rolfing
(on he scene) saw no foul.
Jim McCabe (Boston Globe) said "inconclusive"

The "next day" LPGA official revue:
The TV replay (viewed by officials) was inconclusive.
The officials attempt to “eyeball” the distances was inconclusive.
The officials attempt to “pace off” the distance was inconclusive.

BOTTOM LINE: INCONCLUSIVE

When the LPGA found the TV replay, the attempt to "eyeball", and the "pacing off" of the distances Inconclusive, then the rules review was finished... no infraction, no DQ!

Measuring devices (stretchy strings included) are ILLEGAL in LPGA tournament play. Penalty? DQ - Wie had no access to a measuring device and she thought the drop looked OK. If she had used Bamberger’s stretchy string, she’d have been DQed.

The LPGA made a mistake in DQing Wie. They should fix the mess they made and reverse the DQ ruling.









2006-09-07 @ 07:04
Comment from: Florida Mike [Visitor]
George, I would have commented on Jennifer's book, if she had used a blatant attack on say, Paula Creamer or Morgan Pressel to call attention to it. No, class is as class does.
Alex, as couragious and intelligent as always, what else can you expect from a lawyer
2006-09-07 @ 07:14
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Thanks, Florida Mike! Besides being COURAGEOUS and intelligent, I'm also cute and witty. Ask my wife.
2006-09-07 @ 09:25
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Bubbles racked up a brillant seven-over 78 today at the Omega Masters, only 12 shots out of the lead in 147th place. Her spectacular round included two birdies and only six bogeys and one double bogey. In her post-round interview, Bubbles was very upbeat and optimistic about her chances to make the cut. "I feel I played well and learned a lot today. I'm getting close. I feel like I am right there," she said. Another cause for optimism in the Wie camp was the fact that Bubbles finish second among Americans entered. Previously unknown, but now a star in the making, Nathan Fritz, the other American entered, edged her out by five strokes.
2006-09-07 @ 13:29
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
Back to the subject -
A savvy gallery, and NBC cameras saw "the drop". No one, save BamBam saw an infraction. Next day, LPGA officials looked at video, eyeballed it, paced it off - verdict? Inconclusive. The review, under the rules, was over... no DQ.

Bamberger then pulls out a measuring string (illegal) and bullies the LPGA into DQing Wie.

Wie would hve been DQed if she had used ANY outside measuring divice during play. She used her best visual judgment. Why did the LPGA permit Bamberger to use a measuring device (illegal in play) during the revue?

Looks like Bammo got what he was after... free press for his new book. Media-Hoax? In the old days we just called it a "Publicity Stunt".
2006-09-07 @ 14:16
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Bubbles may have learned too much from her DQing. Today, she was constantly asking for rulings. So much so that her threesome was put on the clock for slow play. Where have I heard about Bubbles' slow play before? Her footdragging must have gotten to her playing partner, Nick Dougherty. He shot an uncharacteristic 79 while the other member of the threesome carded a 70.
2006-09-07 @ 15:07
Comment from: Ghet Rheel [Visitor]
LPGA, PGA, etc. should adopt a "Bamberger Rule" similar to the NFL replay challenge rule. If you don't challenge an action before the next snap of the football (or next shot takes place), then the matter is history. No cell phone? Tough luck.

Or conversely, maybe the NFL should give every spectator in the stands a red flag to toss on the field, to challenge rulings at will.

The ripples of the LPGA/Bamberger will be felt until some definitive corrective action is taken.

2006-09-07 @ 16:34

Comments are closed for this post.

Simply select where you want to play, find a tee time deal, and golf now!

Dates: March 1, 2014 - October 31, 2014
The Lakes #1 Golf Package Provider Offering a 2 Nights Stay and Play Package for as low as $135 plus tax per person.
Price range: $135