|
|||
|
|||
|
 |
|
|
RBC CANADIAN OPENJuly 26, 2009Steve CarmanDean RyanMike WeirOAKVILLE, ONTARIO MIKE WEIR: Instead of reading the grain, you have to read the current out there. Yes. I guess starting with the decision yesterday, and my situation on 18, Keith came to me when we were leaving for our first delay, and said we wanted to review the tape again. I was a little bit surprised, obviously. I thought we had come to a conclusion yesterday, but I guess the ruling is it's a very -- it's such a gray area. What we came to yesterday was two things. The first was addressing the ball. Addressing the ball is the weight of the club touching the ground, which with my routine I felt like I don't do that. The weight of the club's in my arms. Second thing is could it have caused it to move in any other way? Is that right? Is that correct? And that's where I was -- I didn't know. I guess -- I didn't think I did, but technically, yes, maybe I touched -- brushed the grass. Maybe -- whatever. Some other way I may have caused it to move in my back swing, so that gray area I read an 18.2.A that gray area goes against the player. So I said, with that gray area and knowing that there is a possibility, even though I didn't think I did, there is a possibility that I could have caused it to move, I felt like, you know, I guess I should be penalized a shot. So that was our -- right? I mean it was just such a -- I thought originally I addressed the ball. Yesterday I thought I had a stroke penalty. We went through it, addressing the ball was the weight of the club on the ground, which I know I didn't do, so that's, I guess, why it wasn't assessed yesterday. So after they reviewed that, there's the possibility that I could have. Q. You signed for a score yesterday, but is there not a conflict because you signed for an incorrect score? DEAN RYAN: Once Mike called for a rules official -- immediately as soon as it happened, Mike called for an official, and we looked at it, and over the radio we assessed the penalty, told Mike we would review it, look at the videotape. We did, and then today we reviewed it again, and in light of the evidence -- and it's just such an uncertain situation, and Mike looked at it, and we thought -- or Mike thought that certainly a penalty would be applicable in that case. Q. Doesn't that go back, though, to the incorrect scorecard? DEAN RYAN: Oh, when it comes to situations where you're determining questions of fact and the committees involved, our role is to ensure we get the ruling correct, get it right. And there are decisions which permit the committee to review this to relook at a situation, if any other evidence is there. And we reviewed it and looked at it, and I think we came up with the right decision. Q. What other evidence is there? DEAN RYAN: Just in looking at the videotape prior to, and that -- you know, there is a gray area that there wasn't conclusive proof that something else caused this ball to move. And when a situation like that arises, as Mike said, it gets resolved against the player. Q. But I mean you resolved it last night. With no new evidence, why did you resolve it again today? STEVE CARMAN: What we looked at last night in particular was whether or not he had grounded the ball. That's what we focused on in our interview with him in the scoring area and what we looked at individually. We looked at that small little window, and when we backed up and looked at a broader view of it, that's where the situation comes in. We're uncertain whether he did, but unfortunately the decision right now is it goes against the player, unless there's evidence that something else caused it. Q. What caused it to be reopened today? DEAN RYAN: In looking at the video, from end to end, and that we had specifically focused on just whether he had addressed the ball, and we came to that conclusion yesterday he hadn't addressed the ball, and it was quite clear, but is there a possibility that he could have brushed a piece of grass? And that's the gray area we looked at. STEVE CARMAN: So that's why I contacted Mike, and we had him look at it, and Mike takes the position based on our explanation, he's the one that makes the decision. MIKE WEIR: Even though I don't think I did. I guess there's that gray area, possibility I could have. So with that, I didn't feel comfortable myself not taking it, really, because there is -- even though I don't think I did, there's a small -- you know, I could have touched the grass. I don't know. You're in your routine. You're looking at the target. You know, I don't know. Maybe I did. I don't think I did. I didn't feel it. Didn't feel anything, but there's the gray area, and I read it and it says it goes against the player. DEAN RYAN: You look at the window, the time frame of when Mike placed the ball there, and you follow it through X number of seconds, a minute or a minute and a half, and then the time frame from when he got in close proximity to the ball and the ground around the ball, and it's very short, a second or two after within that proximity the ball moves. And that's the gray area. Q. Is that normal? DEAN RYAN: It very well could have been. But we need evidence to that effect. Q. Is that normal procedure to look at something the next day or did somebody request that or something? STEVE CARMAN: I wouldn't say it's normal procedure, but again, it kind of came -- our thought process was we need to take a broader look at this. We focused so much on whether he had grounded the club that we felt like we needed to take a broader look at it. And after reading through the decisions book, that also kind of gave us that feeling that we need to look at it in a broader scope. Q. How far back do you go? Do you go back to tournaments last month or last week? STEVE CARMAN: No. Once the 72-hole competition is over. Q. Does this happen with any regularity? I mean can you point to another instance where you've reviewed a ruling the day after you've actually made a ruling and decided, or like Dean and I talked yesterday, you said one of the instances that this would happen here is because the camera is on Mike the whole time, sort of like a Tiger thing. Right? You get somebody else on the 13th hole, there's no way of reviewing. DEAN RYAN: There's certainly a different dynamic, obviously, when you have the video of a player. Without that you go on testimony of the player, the caddie, spectators. We try to gather all the evidence in determining any question of fact. DOUG MILNE: The answer to your question, this doesn't happen with regularity. This is a rare occurrence. Q. Can you remember a time where it's happened before? DOUG MILNE: I personally can't, no. Q. Going back to signing for the incorrect score, to be clear, are you saying that if you guys reopened the investigation, so to speak, then that gets wiped out somehow or how do we get around that? DEAN RYAN: The committee, when the decisions in the rules of golf, if a committee makes a decision or an error, we can certainly correct it. And that's our goal. Q. How do you replace it? DOUG MILNE: We initially applied the penalty, and then the committee rescinded the penalty in the scoring area. And then after this review, we felt like the penalty needed to be applied, and we concurred with Mike's beliefs that there was this gray area, and we had no evidence that something else caused the ball to move. Q. Rules review? Do you go back and say, I think -- (Indiscernible). DEAN RYAN: It comes up more frequently in the rule 18.2.B and the ball moving after you address the ball. In this case, Mike hadn't addressed the ball. But you'll see it on fast greens. You'll see it at the Masters and other tournaments where a player walks away from the ball after addressing it and the ball moves, and you're thinking there's no way that player cause that ball to move. MIKE WEIR: That actually happened to me here. It was one of my first years playing here, the hole No. 9, hole No. 2. It was a really windy year, and I was on the side of the green, and I took a couple practice strokes and a chip shot. Then I walked to the other side of the green, and my chip shot was actually closer than the two guys putting. So they putted. One guy putted, the other guy putted. I was still on the other side, so probably three or four minutes. And I started walking back towards my ball, and it was blowing 30 straight back this way, and as I got probably five yards from my ball, my ball blew in the bunker. But since I had taken the practice strokes before, I touched the ground, such as, you know, it's that gray area, I guess. Q. Mike, did you initially think when you were called back in and once the ruling was made, did you fear that there was a DQ coming, and how relieved are you to know that you're still playing and you're not disqualified? MIKE WEIR: Well, yeah. I was originally -- I didn't know. We went to take a look at it, I said I thought we were good yesterday, but I knew that the way I played the shot from the fairway was the ruling, like I had a penalty because I replaced the ball, played the shot. So it was like they assessed a penalty. So I thought, well, at least I played the shot correctly from the fairway. STEVE CARMAN: Towards the end of the conversation and the review of the tape, we let Mike know. (Indiscernible). Q. Did anyone complain or any outside person call in or? MIKE WEIR: Not that I know of. STEVE CARMAN: No. It was something we felt like we needed to have Mike review it again. Q. Mike, given this situation and that you made a hole-in-one and the rain, is this about as strange of a week as they come? MIKE WEIR: Pretty much. It's crazy, actually. The rain came at a good time. Actually, today, being 3-under I was happy with. I was not really finding the fairway a whole lot. So it gives me a little time to kind of retool things just a little bit and adjust things to kind of get ready for 25 holes tomorrow. But yeah, it's been a crazy week. Look at all this. I mean this is bizarre. DOUG MILNE: Mike's just got time for a couple more questions, but Steve and Dean said they could stick around. So maybe one or two more for Mike. Q. Talk about the ace. When is the last time you've had one? MIKE WEIR: It's been a long time. I think it's my tenth hole-in-one, my second one on the PGA TOUR, but my first hole-in-one in probably eight or nine years probably. Before that it was at a local mountain golf club. Before that was No. 11 at TPC. Before that I had a couple on the Canadian Tour, I was just playing with buddies. Yep. Q. What event were you playing in? MIKE WEIR: Practice round for the Ontario Juniors. Q. How old were you then? MIKE WEIR: I was 14, I think. 14. Q. Does that mean you have to buy everybody a round? MIKE WEIR: I was told that today by a lot of players. So okay. Good drinking weather. Q. (Indiscernible). MIKE WEIR: Yeah. I know. They give them away for 9-irons, that hole with a 4-iron. DOUG MILNE: We've gotta get Mike out, but these two have agreed to stay if y'all have further questions. End of FastScripts |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
About ASAP Sports •
FastScripts Archive •
Recent Interviews •
Captioning •
Upcoming Events •
Contact Us
FastScripts | Events Covered | Our Clients | Other Services | ASAP in the News | Site Map | Job Opportunities | Links |
|
ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297
|