Mickelson tells his critics to “toughen up”
Left-hander says “knowing the rules is never a bad thing” after hitting a moving ball deliberately.
Phil Mickelson told his critics to “toughen up” after admitting he deliberately hit a moving ball to gain an advantage in the third round of the US Open.
Mickelson, who was already four over par for the day on his 48th birthday, badly overhit a putt on the 13th green which was set to roll off the putting surface.
The five-time major winner prevented that happening by running after the ball and hitting it while it was still rolling, a breach of rule 14-5 which incurs a two-shot penalty.
A remarkable sequence on Hole 13, where Phil Mickelson was assessed a two-stroke penalty for hitting a moving ball and ended up making a 10 on the hole. pic.twitter.com/kx6ieYiOGR— U.S. Open (USGA) (@usopengolf) June 16, 2018
Former US PGA champion Steve Elkington called for Mickelson to be disqualified, writing on Twitter: “Absolutely 100% conduct unbecoming … hes trying to embarrass the @USGA DQ his ass.”
And LPGA player Christina Kim wrote on Twitter: “I have never done anything so ghastly. I’m curious to know what sort of “logic” caused him to do that. I’m in shock.”
However, Mickelson, who eventually made a 10 on the 13th in a round of 81 which equalled his highest score in the US Open, said: “If someone is offended I apologise, but toughen up.
“Knowing the rules is never a bad thing. You always want to use them in your favour. I know the rules and the ball was going to go off in a bad spot. I did not feel like continuing going back and forth. I would still be out there potentially.
“I’ve wanted to do it many times before and finally did. I should have done it a couple of times on 15 at Augusta. That would have saved me a shot or two back then.”
Mickelson and playing partner Andrew Johnston were laughing about the incident as they walked off the green and Mickelson added: “How can you not laugh? It’s funny. I just wanted to get to the next hole and did not see that happening without the two shots.”
Commentating on the incident for Fox, former Ryder Cup captain Paul Azinger said: “That’s the most out of character I have ever seen Phil. I think he just snapped. I’m sure he is going to regret that.”
And two-time US Open champion Curtis Strange added: “He will feel some embarrassment because there are a lot of people and kids watching that really admire this guy.”
I have never done anything so ghastly. I’m curious to know what sort of “logic” caused him to do that. I’m in shock. https://t.co/UfVN1nMvxo— Christina Kim (@TheChristinaKim) June 16, 2018
David Fay said he would have “lobbied for disqualification” if a similar incident had occurred while he was executive director of the USGA, adding: “I think the current language of [rule] 14-5 is too friendly.”
Asked why Rule 1-2, which covers a ball being “influenced or deflected” and can lead to disqualification for a “serious breach” was not invoked instead, John Bodenhamer, the USGA’s senior managing director of championships and governance, said: “Phil didn’t purposely deflect or stop the ball, which is talked about in the reference under Rule 14-5. He played a moving ball.”
USGA chief executive Mike Davis later revealed that Mickelson had telephoned him to clarify whether or not he should have been disqualified.
Davis said: “Phil really did want to understand how the rule operates because he didn’t want to… frankly, as he said to me, he goes, Mike, I don’t want to play in this championship if I should have been disqualified.
“That’s where we clarified that, Phil, you actually made a stroke at a moving ball, and so we have to apply that rule (14-5).
“That’s different than if he had deliberately just stopped the ball or whacked it in another direction or something like that. So it’s just, it’s us applying the rules.”
Rule 33-7 also gives a tournament committee the right to disqualify a player for a serious breach of etiquette, but Davis added: “It was really put in there to give the committee some ability when you have an outright, egregious situation. It tends not to be applied when a player just reacts with some quick intent.
“For instance, under that rule if somebody damages the course out of temper, typically what a committee would do is say, you do it again, and we’re going to remove you from the competition, but you typically wouldn’t do that the first time unless it was so egregious.
“So it’s there, but 33-7 is rarely used. Wouldn’t be appropriate in this case.”