Shapiro on Bamberger

Leonard Shapiro in the Washington Post writes of Michael Bamberger's actions:

I believe he was dead wrong and did the absolutely dishonorable thing for his profession. He was there as a representative of his publication, given credentials by the LPGA to "cover" the event, not officiate it. If he wanted to mark off the yardage to prove the error of Wie's ways to himself and then to his readers, no problem there. If he wanted to write about his findings in the magazine, again, that certainly was his prerogative.

So if Bamberger waited to spring this on readers in SI instead of reporting it to officials and the player at the tournament (albeit, way later than he should have), that would have been acceptable?I don't think so. 

Comments

[The Duke]

Here's the thing that bothers me about the excessive Bamberger criticism: Michelle Wie is the one who actually broke the rules, not Bamberger. In fact, it was Wie's hastiness and immaturity on the course which forced Bamberger (a, you know, grown-up) into an ethical quandry. After the improper drop he was thrust into an extrordinary situation which, I think, he handled with honesty. He has also appeared to be very straight-forward with all questioners of his actions thus far, even readily admitting that he could have made better decisions in the whirlwind aftermath.

What has really surprised me is that I haven't heard one golf pundit question whether Wie is ready for the big times if she can't manage something as simple as a proper drop. Moreover, I haven't heard anyone take note of the fact that all of the adults (Bamberger, rules officals, etc) were saying that her drop was 12"-18" closer to the hole, while Wie was saying that it was "like 3 inches" closer while holding her thumb and index finger a few centimeters apart.

Everything I just mentioned signals to me that we now live in a society where ignorant, immature children are held-up as royalty, while hard-working, accomplished and mature adults will be trampled-on in pursuit of pleasing our new leaders, the spoiled-brats. (That doesn't mean Paula Creamer whom I dig very much.)

[The Duke]

BTW, I think Shapiro is so upset becase his feminist-agenda has stalled at the golf country club-level.

[Geoff]

Duke,
It is interesting how Bamberger is being made to be the bad guy, when it has become apparent that Wie did break the rules, and perhaps did it to get herself a swing.

[JPB]

The absolute worst thing Bamberger could have done to Michelle is write about the rules breach after the fact. I don't care if it is his prerogative as a journalist or whatever. Michelle would be playing under a cloud of suspicion for a long time, and that would be unfair. Bamberger should have spoken up sooner, but it is much better that he spoke up in time to get her DQ'd than if he had written it up later. Shapiro is wrong on this one. Michelle will be happy he spoke up in hindsight, because of this came to light after the tournament and after she got her check, the situation would be much worse for her, and IMO unfair to her.

[Pete the Luddite]

The Duke raises several great points.

Forget it's Michelle Wie for a second. Are teenagers, barely 16 years old, prepared for professional golf? The Rules of Golf are broad and complex. Who among us hasn't had the discussion in their foursome on at least one occasion about how the rules apply to a particular situation?

Duke's also right on the Shapiro feminist issue, IMO.

Finally, the big question that may ultimately be answered in the long run. Reading through the articles this week, there's one point that people dance around, and few address directly. Should spectators be allowed to indicate infractions? Personally, I would love that to happen in baseball- I'm sure my Red Sox would have several more WS banners! I can't think of another sport where the spectator is allowed to call out a player's misplay.

Final thought that haunts me...two really. Why in the name of Old Tom Morris wasn't there a rules official with Michelle's group that day, especially where she was in the last group, and was under immense scrutiny?

Second final thought: why didn't her playing partner call foul at the drop? (Let's be honest, too. Michelle needs to learn how to do a real drop, from shoulder height, not the almost-waist thing she did.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I blame Grace Park for not observing the drop as much as I can fault Bamberger for waiting for a day. His waiting cost Michelle the DQ instead of a two-stroke penalty, but I don't think it was because he had an agenda or wished her ill will. As he says, he paced it off and then it weighed on him. As with all matters in golf, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and trust in his integrity.

I agree with the posters that she rushed her drop. Even when she measures her two clublengths, you can see that the second time she lays the driver down it's on a different angle than the first one, and it's much closer to the hole. It was just sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

Grace Park should have been over there observing, to protect herself and the field (and, in this case, it would have protected Michelle too). Michelle should have demanded that she be there.

Now, because Michelle is a sloppy dropper, she's going to slow play every time she hits one offline by requesting an official. And, as we've seen, that's pretty frequently.

As someone on TGC pointed out, Michelle "knows" the rules. She took a drop from the bees the day before (or earlier that round?), and that's a pretty obscure rule. She just rushed herself and made a sloppy drop. And it cost her a DQ.

[Eric]

The mistake that everyone is making is assuming that there was indeed conclusive evidence that Wie "broke the rules." The potential errors introduced in recreating the events of a previous day largely from memory are grounds enough for a "mistrial."

ESPN agrees:

http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=2198683