I suppose because it's a nuanced issue that would actually require some thought and consideration, a lot of people are going to shrug off Phil Mickelson's rough-induced-wrist-injury comments both on Golf Channel Wednesday night and after his round today.
There was the irony (or ignorance?) of the injury-plagued Johnny Miller blowing off Phil's remarks as the product of mistaken overpracticing. There was also the remainder of the NBC crew chiming in with a similar attitude, disregarding the fact David Howell also pulled out this week with a rough-induced injury. They also suggested this is typical of the U.S. Open, but is it?
Sure, like other years, this rough is a man-made hazard harvested to keep scores in check at apparently any cost.
But don't forget that the USGA's Mike Davis ordered that the rough cut be lowered to a unprecedented low of 2 3/4 inches prior to this week because it was so dense. There were plenty of other reports leading into the event about how unusually thick the grass was.
It's one thing for Mother Nature to leave a course so lush that such injuries are possible, but we know that the Oakmont mentality is in love with the idea of making the player suffer with over-the-top conditions.
So I find it shocking that there seems to be so little consideration that just maybe Phil has a legitimate point about the efforts to grow such dense rough and the possible impact on the players.