"It was like giving someone the death penalty on hearsay.”
Jim Achenbach digs up more on the dreadful Duramed DQ of Sarah Brown and it paints an ugly picture considering that there was an on-site testing device (not used) and some silly on-course behavior from the rules official, who is identified in the story as Jim Linyard. I'd like to give Linyard the benefit of the doubt since this isn't exactly the big leagues of officiating work and there were inevitably issues with determining conforming clubs on a tour that only this month adopted the groove condition of competition, but it's hard to look past the events reported by Achenbach.
“I asked him (Linyard) what he would do if he was wrong,” said Keith Brown, who was caddying for his daughter. “What if he disqualified Sarah and later found out he was wrong? How would he rectify that? He refused to answer. He said: ‘The club is illegal. Sarah is disqualified.’ That was it. It was like giving someone the death penalty on hearsay.”
As for compensating Brown for a lost paycheck...
At this point, there has been no discussion about a financial payment to Brown.
“She had averaged 4 under on the back nine,” her father said. “I pleaded with them to let her finish the round. She had a real shot at a top 5 or even a top 3. Instead, they held up play for probably 20 minutes. They were sitting in a golf cart with a laptop. A crowd was gathering. Sarah was sobbing the whole time. It was a circus.”
“The rules official came up when Sarah was on the ninth green,” said her father. “He started pulling clubs from her bag. She had a 10-foot birdie putt on 9, and she could see him pulling the clubs because he was directly on her line. She burned the edge of the cup on 8, and she did it again on 9. She was ready to play the back.”
Keith Brown, a former mortgage banker who has not had a job for the last year and a half, said his daughter was “devastated and sobbing uncontrollably on the course, but she impressed the heck out of me. By the time we got to the clubhouse, she was dignified and she was courteous. We knew they were wrong, but she kept herself under control.”
Tuesday, July 27, 2010 at 07:51 PM
Reader Comments (30)
In actuality, a $1,000 paycheck from that event is really about $440 plus the entry fee, which based on the payouts, looks like it was $660. The Tour changed the payouts a few years ago so that everyone who makes the cut at least makes their money back, and the last place finisher of those who made the cut made $660. They should, at the very least, pay Sarah that money, and they should add that to her official earnings.
I assume that since they both live in AZ and the tourney was in NH that they travel full time with the Futures Tour? Are there even applications for such a gig?
http://www.nj.com/golf/index.ssf/2009/07/video_oldschool_family_finding.html
"
Exactly.
If there is a question on the legality of the club, the player finishes the round, signs the card, and THEN the club is tested as to legality. If the club in question conforms, score stands, if it doesn't DQ. That would be the professional way to handle the situation.
Linyard has to go.
Anyone who has been an ump (or rules official) as well as a parent, teacher or boss, knows how hard it is to be decisive, calm and correct all the time. It's hard.
What is missing, however, is any comment from the officials. They blew this call big time. We need to hear an apology from them directly, and one that expresses that they were wrong, they know that, and they regret it.
This is insane.
You would think that in a world of policies and procedures that they would have a policy and procedure for this. And I dont believe sitting in the fairway for 20 minutes holding up play is part of the procedure.
Even though I am still a bit troubled by her father saying somewhere that this young girl was going to be the family breadwinner, and they have 9 kids.
wonder what Stevie would have done if it was Tiger's bag?
i think the whole thing is getting blown out of proportion, though. this is really not much more than an official who blew a call, apparently based on poor organizational management, something that happens all the time in every sport. the sobbing golfer part seems a bit much to me. i understand being upset at the way she was treated, but come on.
i also can't help but wonder if the way the official treated her has anything to do with the fact that she is a woman. the comparison with phil and/or tiger is an interesting one, but i suspect this kind of thing wouldn't happen on the nationwide tour or any of the mini-tours either.
If Sarah were smart, she'd bank the amount of money she would have won if she'd stayed right where she was, and donate the rest to one of the visible LPGA/Futures charities.
It's win-win-win. LPGA looks good, Sarah looks great, a charity gets more money, and the LPGA gets far more than $15,500 worth of priceless free publicity.
Alas, the officials should never work again, except perhaps as actors in a How-Not-To-Rule video.
How about cutting a few staff and let the PLAYERS get more prize money.
http://www.golfweek.com/news/2010/jul/28/dqd-rookie-futures-tour-2k-not-enough/
Rooting through her bag was beyond dumb - it had to distract her playing partners as well.
I want a hamberger, a hot dog...
You'll get nothing and like it!
Now, when an admittedly lousy thing happens to his daughter, he chooses to conduct a negotiation through the press and threatens litigation by saying "litigation is not off the table"
Why does everybody have to watch LeBron James (or Latrell--"i got a family to feed")and think that whatever he does, everyone should do.
Regardless of what you may think of Mr. Brown, he is not wrong to demand some kind of compensation for such a blatant injustice on the part of the Futures Tour. I just can't believe this is how he gets his 15 minutes.
Amazing how everyone thinks it's a travesty and that the Brown's are OWED something for the outrage until he makes some demands. And then he's unreasonable. Guess you can't please everybody. And somehow, I don't think Mr. Brown really cares. And good for him. He has his daughter to think about, and securing some restitution for her.
The guy is intense, no doubt. But, since when is that a bad thing? Once upon a time in our country, our world, all men were intense. Now, as Rush puts it, we're all a bunch of "Castratis."
Yep-- nine kids. Yep-- we know what causes it. Yep-- we have TV. Yep-- one marriage-- a strong one, at that. Nope-- it's nobody's business. Yes, Sarah is going to help the family. Why not? She's part of a large family. Everybody pitches in. If a man shall not work, he shall not eat.
My husband was a casualty of the mortgage business-- still rather defunct mortgage business for what he specialized in. Jobs aren't there-- until jobs materialize, he'll work with and for Sarah. She'd pay a caddy. Why should it be any different if the caddie is her father? With the money she's earned from the Future's tour so far this year, she has bought herself a car. Does this sound like a girl who's forced to "support" her family? Thankfully, Sarah and all our children have a good handle on what we do and why we do it around here-- and while it is difficult to read such negativity, when it's all said and done it's not anyone's approval here on this forum or any other forum that we seek.
Bottom line, people-- free country, and all that jazz. Spout whatever garbage opinion you want-- but, a good rule of thumb is to have at least some basis of fact before doing so in public.