Me 2.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e515dbll1MvJYmw.html&ab_channel=RyderCup

Garcia is a Spanish headcase who's a joke anyway, Sergio doesn't know how to put his pants properly anymore. Berger isn't going to say anything useful at all. So Koepka just made alot of diva points. 5 majors for BK, fuck that's tight.

LMAO how is this not the most liked comment 🤣

Lol Bubba Watson😂

@@lrn_news9171bryson

That’s a free drop.

yeah very rude

Break

Koepka had a wrist injury in 2021 and was concerned about hurting his wrist again

LUXURY! I played a course once where the greens looked like that.

the lawsuit would've been filed before he made it to the green

He'd have built sandcastles. 😁

Maybe Brooks should do that to get what he deserves

Foot wedge

Woulda said ok thanks I'm moving it anyway lol

He was absolutely in the right for arguing his case. He was just not able to convince the referee that the shot he was trying to make would have interference from the object.

He should have hit the fairway bro

it was alternate shot ya dunce@@danielx3972

That there is only free relief where there is interference by an abnormal course condition for a reasonable stroke.

​@@Robert-Bobby-Rob its in every professional sport(flopping being most notable), im not sure if youre blah blahing for the obviousness of the comment but youre literally on youtube right now

@@Robert-Bobby-Rob youre acting like an ass to the most generic youtube comment

@Robert-Bobby-Rob and now you just delete your comments

It wasn't a bank. It looks like there is a sprinkler head/drain/some impediment in front of him.

You clearly can’t comprehend what they’re saying. Real golfers take divots after the ball nit before the ball like you do.

@@Dathockeyguy okay how does that change anything about what he said

@@timr1627 the ball was closely located next to a drain, which Koepka was arguing would fall under rule 16 for relief from abnormal course conditions. He was saying there was a chance he would hit the drain on his follow through. Even Sergio agreed with him. The lie wasn’t bad. In fact, for is being in fescue, it was pretty good. They weren’t asking for relief because of a bad lie.

@@timr1627 lol stick to your day job bud.

Pros don’t get freebies often at all. Bad take. Also, if the tournament is important enough he should take time to think about it.

and take the penalty

The first referee who denied relief is from the States, the second referee who also denied relief is from England.

They were arguing that attempting the shot could lead to injury

There was an imbedded water drain pipe about 3 inches in front of the ball in the direction he would have had to swing to advance the ball towards the green. Rule 16.1b permits relief from such abnormal course impediments in that situation. Even Sergio Garcia, his competitor in that match, came over and looked at it and thought he should have been given relief due to possible injury on a swing. Ref was wrong and was a clown for not permitting it. Maybe you should look at the rules, and you would understand what he was asking for. Apparently though that was expecting too much of you and the other clueless clowns, who liked your post. 🙂

It's not so much that it is a difficult lie. It's the fact that there is a drainage pipe sticking out of the ground a couple of inches ahead of where the ball lies, and Brooks argues that he's going to hit it in his followthrough. Now obviously from that lie, anyone would attempt to get a free relief, and a chance to drop it in the stort stuff, and if the drain does indeed interfere with his intended swing, he can get free relief. This video only shows the interaction with the senior referee, denying him relief, but another ref had just denied him relief before, and then granted Brooks and Daniel a second opinion. Maybe Brooks did end up glancing the pipe. Maybe it was deliberate to prove a point, but thats just speculations. Regardless - when 2 referees have said no, it's a no.

@@rcg9573 You can’t say if the the ref was right or wrong. The decision is made with all the facts that he can see. Another referee may make a different decision but they have to do it while being threatened by players which makes the situation even more difficult.

It was some kind of pipe or sometbing, you get relief from immovable obstructions but only if they're in your swing path or stance. Official said it wasn't in his normal swing path but brooks said he might hit it. I think normally he would get the drop which would be a huge advantage to get out of that long grass, bad call

Seve was a sorcerer.

@@rocketamerica2450 You described Seve perfectly.

@mpsymonds1 Thanks, Wizard wasn't going to cover it.

Even Sergio Garcia thought he should have been given relief and he came over and looked at it himself.

Because Koepka is the player, that's why.

​@FastZL1Convertible Imo, Bruce was discussing. Berger was in argument territory.

@@CrazyAboutVinylRecords Koepka was one of two players involved. It was Berger's drive that put the ball there dummy. They were both involved as a team. Clear as mud? 🙂

He did. He was in the right.

I do too... I just start complaining and whining like those soccer floppers! if we can take advantage of the game, why the f*ck not? It's basically legal cheating and I'm all for legal Cheating in the gentleman's sport of golf! Builds character and trustworthiness. Play it as it lies? please! For guys like you and I, it's more like "get a free drop or play it as I whine!" Am I right? We take the badge of "The Complaining golfer soyboy" with an honor... Because even though we still lose, this gives us a better chance & it's legal....well, maybe not but it's a gray area. I've gotten so good at trying to weasel my way out of any poor lie I get, that I only slow down the game a few minutes.. and I'm kind of a dick because I still complain about guys who take an extra few seconds to hit their shot.

Silly

@@integrito3323 americanally silly

The putt would have been much longer though. 🤪

except the video shows he was wrong

Although he’s Australian….

You don't have to play out forward if he played out sideways then his low point wouldn't have been an issue.

@@dsh301 But... He's entitled to hit it the direction he would hit it without the obstruction and if it interferes, take a few drop.

@SouthernUtahGolfAcademy But not for the quoted rule if for instance it was a tree in front he would have to find a different direction to get a swing.

@@dsh301 Agreed. But a tree is a natural obstruction. This was a drain area that you would be given relief from if it interferes with your stance or swing.

There's a difference between the ruling on a natural obstruction and unnatural obstruction. If you assume what was in front of Brooks was something like a concrete water fountain and it was in his follow-through, he would be allowed to move the ball without penalty. The referee was contending that Brooks' natural follow through would not have hit that drain area. Brooks' contention was that it was and if you watch the swing he was still making contact with the ground past that drain area.

No. There was an imbedded water drain in the ground a few inches in front of his ball directly in his swing path to hit the ball towards the green. Rule 16.1b permits relief from such abnormal impediments to prevent injury to a player on his follow through (really a rule that impacts players, who take their divot on an iron shot after the ball just as Koepka and all other pros do). That is what he wanted relief from because he knew his follow through divot might hit that drain and injure himself. Sergio Garcia, his competitor in that match, came over and looked at it and even he nodded and said he thought he should have been given relief. The washout they were talking about was the washout from the water drain, and they were asking the ref to take a look at it and how close his ball was to the drain's edge. The ref tried to claim that because of the topography of where the ball lied there was no chance his follow through would hit the drain, but even Garcia did not think that was true.

Well...I hope you don't watch baseball.

@@UpdogGolf different sports, different etiquette.

the official was an idiot

He's not pressuring him, what are you talking about? lol he was making his case and asked for a second opinion.

@@lrn_news9171 If I end up breaking my hand, knee, whatever, it's coming back on you, bro. I would say that's pressuring the official. All three of those stooges are gone to the LIV tour anyways.

but over

As a ref you would know the rule he should (or should not) get free relief from. -It would be 16.1b. In this case it was deemed that he was not entitled to free relief. But as a referee you are there to help the players in rules situations. Not to challenge their knowledge of the rules.

Not a sportsman I see

way of the fair

What is it that you would like help with?

Berger hit it there

I always try but !🤗

John my friend you’re wasting time here on the internet. You really should be in a think tank somewhere changing the world.

If you don’t want to die, than just live, idiot.

@@dellgriffen8318😂

you realize how an arc works right?

@@rowstyles You should try to stay on topic, Said nothing about an arc, Isn't that what Noah used to put his animals in