The Official NPR Golf Thread

[Kawazaki]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

[Blackmac]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

No it's not. The issue is not the tree, the issue is that by looking in the wrong tree and stating he can definitely identify his ball, when it can't possibly be his, he has lied and it's now been proved he played an incorrect ball. The ball must be 100% identified before it is claimed as "found" and that's not possible here. It's amazing reading social media how many people don't understand what the issue is.

If you listen to the interaction with the ref, Reed tells the ref the spectator said it landed in that tree and it looks like his ball. The ref tells Reed that is not good enough and he must be able to definitely identify it. By doing so Reed was lying.

[Insane_Homer]

Fatprick cheating again huh? who'd have thunk it.

[Insane_Homer]

Fatprick bogey on 16, back to -17 with Rory

Rory needs to birdie 18 to win

[Kawazaki]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

No it's not. The issue is not the tree, the issue is that by looking in the wrong tree and stating he can definitely identify his ball, when it can't possibly be his, he has lied and it's now been proved he played an incorrect ball. The ball must be 100% identified before it is claimed as "found" and that's not possible here. It's amazing reading social media how many people don't understand what the issue is.

If you listen to the interaction with the ref, Reed tells the ref the spectator said it landed in that tree and it looks like his ball. The ref tells Reed that is not good enough and he must be able to definitely identify it. By doing so Reed was lying.

I'm not saying he wasn't lying. The point is that he didn't need to be able to identify his ball to meet the terms of the rule;

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

[Insane_Homer]

Rory cans the putt on 18 to win!

[Blackmac]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

No it's not. The issue is not the tree, the issue is that by looking in the wrong tree and stating he can definitely identify his ball, when it can't possibly be his, he has lied and it's now been proved he played an incorrect ball. The ball must be 100% identified before it is claimed as "found" and that's not possible here. It's amazing reading social media how many people don't understand what the issue is.

If you listen to the interaction with the ref, Reed tells the ref the spectator said it landed in that tree and it looks like his ball. The ref tells Reed that is not good enough and he must be able to definitely identify it. By doing so Reed was lying.

I'm not saying he wasn't lying. The point is that he didn't need to be able to identify his ball to meet the terms of the rule;

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

According to the Sky and Golf Channel analysts, that's not correct in pro golf. There was a famous incident a couple of years ago where Rickie Fowlers ball lodged in a branch. It was the only ball in the tree and hundreds of spectators and TV pictures confirmed it was his ball. The ref made it clear that wasn't sufficient and Fowler must be able to positively identify his markings. A number of fans offered to climb the tree but Rickie said "fuck that" and took the penalty. It was harsh but the official was deemed 100% right.

I've been involved in plenty situations where a ball can be seen in a bush but can't be identified and even amateurs take their punishment.

[Blackmac]

Rory cans the putt on 18 to win!

Yep, justice prevails. Some of the stuff being rehashed on social media about Reed are incredible. It's not just the famous cheating incidents but the number of times he takes relief for things like embedded balls where the ball is cleanly not embedded and he fails to allow playing partners to check. Pro Golfers by nature seem to be fairly relaxed and most opponents just see to think "fuck it it's not worth the grief"

[Kawazaki]

According to the Sky and Golf Channel analysts, that's not correct in pro golf. There was a famous incident a couple of years ago where Rickie Fowlers ball lodged in a branch. It was the only ball in the tree and hundreds of spectators and TV pictures confirmed it was his ball. The ref made it clear that wasn't sufficient and Fowler must be able to positively identify his markings. A number of fans offered to climb the tree but Rickie said "fuck that" and took the penalty. It was harsh but the official was deemed 100% right.

Rule 7.2 is poorly written then;

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

[Blackmac]

According to the Sky and Golf Channel analysts, that's not correct in pro golf. There was a famous incident a couple of years ago where Rickie Fowlers ball lodged in a branch. It was the only ball in the tree and hundreds of spectators and TV pictures confirmed it was his ball. The ref made it clear that wasn't sufficient and Fowler must be able to positively identify his markings. A number of fans offered to climb the tree but Rickie said "fuck that" and took the penalty. It was harsh but the official was deemed 100% right.

Rule 7.2 is poorly written then;

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

I was actually confusing myself. Part 2 refers to the balm going into a hazard like a lateral water hazard or designated area where you are not allowed to retrieve it. If you are certain it entered the water you drop where it entered the hazard. If you are not certain you go back and reload.

If for example you hit your ball into a bush at the side of the fairway and you and your partners are certain the ball went into that bush. If you can see the ball in the bush, positively identify it but can't recover it you can drop by the bush. If you can't see and identify your ball, no matter how certain you are it went into the bush, you go back and reload.

Age old rule of golf.

[Kawazaki]

According to the Sky and Golf Channel analysts, that's not correct in pro golf. There was a famous incident a couple of years ago where Rickie Fowlers ball lodged in a branch. It was the only ball in the tree and hundreds of spectators and TV pictures confirmed it was his ball. The ref made it clear that wasn't sufficient and Fowler must be able to positively identify his markings. A number of fans offered to climb the tree but Rickie said "fuck that" and took the penalty. It was harsh but the official was deemed 100% right.

Rule 7.2 is poorly written then;

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

I was actually confusing myself. Part 2 refers to the balm going into a hazard like a lateral water hazard or designated area where you are not allowed to retrieve it. If you are certain it entered the water you drop where it entered the hazard. If you are not certain you go back and reload.

If for example you hit your ball into a bush at the side of the fairway and you and your partners are certain the ball went into that bush. If you can see the ball in the bush, positively identify it but can't recover it you can drop by the bush. If you can't see and identify your ball, no matter how certain you are it went into the bush, you go back and reload.

Age old rule of golf.

I'm not doubting what you describe is the generally accepted spirit of the rules, but they're not written that way at all. No mention of water or what types of hazard qualify the rule. A ball 10m up a tree is just as inaccessible as a ball in a lake.

[inactionman]

Rory cans the putt on 18 to win!

Yep, justice prevails. Some of the stuff being rehashed on social media about Reed are incredible. It's not just the famous cheating incidents but the number of times he takes relief for things like embedded balls where the ball is cleanly not embedded and he fails to allow playing partners to check. Pro Golfers by nature seem to be fairly relaxed and most opponents just see to think "fuck it it's not worth the grief"

He really is dreadful.

I read something about his college career, and he was utterly reviled - even his own team mates wanted him to lose.

Good on Rory, both glad he's won (again - he seems to do well out in Dubai?) and glad Reed didn't.

[Blackmac]

Rule 7.2 is poorly written then;

I was actually confusing myself. Part 2 refers to the balm going into a hazard like a lateral water hazard or designated area where you are not allowed to retrieve it. If you are certain it entered the water you drop where it entered the hazard. If you are not certain you go back and reload.

If for example you hit your ball into a bush at the side of the fairway and you and your partners are certain the ball went into that bush. If you can see the ball in the bush, positively identify it but can't recover it you can drop by the bush. If you can't see and identify your ball, no matter how certain you are it went into the bush, you go back and reload.

Age old rule of golf.

I'm not doubting what you describe is the generally accepted spirit of the rules, but they're not written that way at all. No mention of water or what types of hazard qualify the rule. A ball 10m up a tree is just as inaccessible as a ball in a lake.

But different hazards on golf courses have different rules. Other than in specific instances like water, a ball that cannot be retrieved must be positively identified to decide how the penalty is taken. If a player can genuinely identify their ball up a tree then fine, what Reed did was entirely correct. The issue we have here is that Reed has lied about that identification to save himself going back to the tee, so has therefore cheated. As Dame Laura Davis said, maybe Reed just got an incredible coincidence and a ball identically marked to his was up the tree he was looking at, but she had her tongue firmly in her cheek.

Reed has clearly seen a ball in the tree with a marking that he has decided to claim is his specific marking, however half the golfers in the world draw arrows through their ball. Golf refs tend to rely on a players integrity so that's why the ref got Reed to insist that was his mark but you could se the ref was unconvinced.

[dpedin]

Nearly start of new season here in Gods Own Country and the Home of Golf. As usual my seasons expectations exceed my skill level but really hoping to drop a shot or two of my handicap. Lost weight, been to the gym, bought a new driver, getting lessons from the pro on the trackman .... probably will all be a waste of time and money once the card is in my hand for the first medal and my knees turn to jelly and brain goes to mush. Ive been playing a bit over the winter now Ive retired and game is actually in a good place so this seasons will be an even bigger disappointment than usual. Anyone one else champing at the bit?

[Blackmac]

On my last trip to Turkey I played superbly from tee to green. Didn't lose one ball in 6 rounds and had a stableford average of 35 points. This was despite the fact I averaged 8 three putts a round and had quite a few 4 putts. I had totally lost my way on the greens and it was quite depressing.
I spent the winter practicing my putting on the living room carpet and lo and behold, practice does actually bloody help. My putting has improved beyond recognition. I've played 4 rounds a Gullane in the last couple of weeks and have only three putted twice. Shot a nice 79 off the tips at Gullane 1 yesterday, despite bogeying the last 4 holes in a 30mph hailstorm. Playing the Kings at Gleneagles on Thursday which is a bit of a bucket list round.

[dpedin]

On my last trip to Turkey I played superbly from tee to green. Didn't lose one ball in 6 rounds and had a stableford average of 35 points. This was despite the fact I averaged 8 three putts a round and had quite a few 4 putts. I had totally lost my way on the greens and it was quite depressing.
I spent the winter practicing my putting on the living room carpet and lo and behold, practice does actually bloody help. My putting has improved beyond recognition. I've played 4 rounds a Gullane in the last couple of weeks and have only three putted twice. Shot a nice 79 off the tips at Gullane 1 yesterday, despite bogeying the last 4 holes in a 30mph hailstorm. Playing the Kings at Gleneagles on Thursday which is a bit of a bucket list round.

Used to play the Kings regularly many years ago - love it! Gullane has beautiful greens and they run true there. Played my own course yesterday and the greens were still hairy and slow - they are getting them ready for opening comp on Saturday so leaving long this week so they can cut and iron on Friday I expect. Complete contrast to my round at Kilspindie a couple of days before which had lovely fast greens. Still not long now ...

[Blackmac]

The Gullane courses are in the poorest condition I have ever seen them, still decent for this time of year, but nowhere near the all year round perfection they normally are. No 2 is especially bad as the green staff seem to have spent the entire year revetting bunkers and the rest of the course is very scruffy. Lots of moss visible on all the fairways. I think it will mainly be down to costs of fertilisers etc. The members were asked to contribute an extra £40 to maintenance costs and voted against it which is ridiculous when you consider the demographic of the membership.

[dpedin]

The Gullane courses are in the poorest condition I have ever seen them, still decent for this time of year, but nowhere near the all year round perfection they normally are. No 2 is especially bad as the green staff seem to have spent the entire year revetting bunkers and the rest of the course is very scruffy. Lots of moss visible on all the fairways. I think it will mainly be down to costs of fertilisers etc. The members were asked to contribute an extra £40 to maintenance costs and voted against it which is ridiculous when you consider the demographic of the membership.

That's a shame and a bit short sighted by the members. I always thought Gullane was quite a rich club with big reserves although I presume they suffered a little with drop of income over the past few years due to pandemic ... although last year it was rammed with Americans due to £:$ exchange rate. I had heard that in first year of pandemic Lundin Links had lost £250k of income due to lack of visitors. Last year a mate asked me if I was interested in caddying at Gullane as they ran out of them on a number of days due to the number of US visitors. I heard that all the courses in East Lothian were struggling to find caddies and I must admit I am tempted for this year just for a bit of fun and beer money.

[Blackmac]

The Gullane courses are in the poorest condition I have ever seen them, still decent for this time of year, but nowhere near the all year round perfection they normally are. No 2 is especially bad as the green staff seem to have spent the entire year revetting bunkers and the rest of the course is very scruffy. Lots of moss visible on all the fairways. I think it will mainly be down to costs of fertilisers etc. The members were asked to contribute an extra £40 to maintenance costs and voted against it which is ridiculous when you consider the demographic of the membership.

That's a shame and a bit short sighted by the members. I always thought Gullane was quite a rich club with big reserves although I presume they suffered a little with drop of income over the past few years due to pandemic ... although last year it was rammed with Americans due to £:$ exchange rate. I had heard that in first year of pandemic Lundin Links had lost £250k of income due to lack of visitors. Last year a mate asked me if I was interested in caddying at Gullane as they ran out of them on a number of days due to the number of US visitors. I heard that all the courses in East Lothian were struggling to find caddies and I must admit I am tempted for this year just for a bit of fun and beer money.

The caddy masters at Muirfield and the Renaissance are both ex cops and there are a huge amount of retired cops working down there. I've had a few offers myself but never had the time. They had a purge about 15 years ago to get rid of the old jakie generation and employ guys who could actually make a good impression and converse with the visitors. Great way to earn a bit of beer money
Had a great day out at Gleneagles. Played okay tee to Green but struggled around the greens which were a bout soft and slow.

[Biffer]

European Tour has won it's case against the LIV golfers. They have thirty days to pay their £100k fines.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/65198669

Also means they'll be banned from Tour events and the Ryder Cup.

[Slick]

Is any of the Masters being shown on BBC?

[Openside]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

7.2/1 – Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:

Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player’s ball, or

Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player’s stroke.

No it's not. The issue is not the tree, the issue is that by looking in the wrong tree and stating he can definitely identify his ball, when it can't possibly be his, he has lied and it's now been proved he played an incorrect ball. The ball must be 100% identified before it is claimed as "found" and that's not possible here. It's amazing reading social media how many people don't understand what the issue is.

If you listen to the interaction with the ref, Reed tells the ref the spectator said it landed in that tree and it looks like his ball. The ref tells Reed that is not good enough and he must be able to definitely identify it. By doing so Reed was lying.

I thought Reed had told the rules official how the ball was marked and the rules official confirmed Though Bonoculars that the ball in question had those markings?

[Blackmac]

Tony Johnstone has pointed out that the tree they were looking in was where spectators said the ball landed. That alone is enough to satisfy the rule on ball found.

No it's not. The issue is not the tree, the issue is that by looking in the wrong tree and stating he can definitely identify his ball, when it can't possibly be his, he has lied and it's now been proved he played an incorrect ball. The ball must be 100% identified before it is claimed as "found" and that's not possible here. It's amazing reading social media how many people don't understand what the issue is.

If you listen to the interaction with the ref, Reed tells the ref the spectator said it landed in that tree and it looks like his ball. The ref tells Reed that is not good enough and he must be able to definitely identify it. By doing so Reed was lying.

I thought Reed had told the rules official how the ball was marked and the rules official confirmed Though Bonoculars that the ball in question had those markings?

Reed had already had a look so knew a ball with that marking was in the tree. As you know, half the golfers in the world mark a line on the ball. The official was obviously dubious but ultimately it's not up to him to call Reed a liar if Reed is prepared to do so. Some of the highlights you can find of Reed cheating are extraordinary. He is shameless

[Blackmac]

European Tour has won it's case against the LIV golfers. They have thirty days to pay their £100k fines.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/65198669

Also means they'll be banned from Tour events and the Ryder Cup.

That is brilliant news. If only they had acted with the dignity of DJ and just accepted that it is what it is and not moaned their faces off. Westwood and Poulter have been among the worst.

Norman greeting about not getting an invite from the Masters is just pathetic. Not qualified to play, buy a bloody ticket

[Biffer]

McIlroy miked up on course and talking to the commentary team live as he's playing a hole! Never seen that before, really interesting hearing what he's thinking and trying to do as he's doing it.

[fishfoodie]

McIlroy miked up on course and talking to the commentary team live as he's playing a hole! Never seen that before, really interesting hearing what he's thinking and trying to do as he's doing it.

They've been doing it in the PGA this year, & while I like it as a viewer, I'd be buggered if I'd want anything to do with it as a competitor.

I loath the way the Ozzies insist on interviewing players as they come off at HT, for the same reason, but I suppose they're the product & the PGA wants the viewer in the players head.

[Blackmac]

McIlroy miked up on course and talking to the commentary team live as he's playing a hole! Never seen that before, really interesting hearing what he's thinking and trying to do as he's doing it.

I feel for McIlroy these days. He has been forced to carry the mantle for the PGA in their LIV battle. Constantly criticised for getting too involved but every question he faces makes it impossible for him not to.

[Blackmac]

Koepka seems to be finding some form but is also clearly regretting his decision to join LIV. It seems incredible that there are such punitive get out clauses in their contracts. So much for being independent contractors.

Never liked the guy but I felt he came across as a bit of a tortured soul in the Netflix documentary. All the arrogance is clearly a defence mechanism.

[fishfoodie]

Koepka seems to be finding some form but is also clearly regretting his decision to join LIV. It seems incredible that there are such punitive get out clauses in their contracts. So much for being independent contractors.

Never liked the guy but I felt he came across as a bit of a tortured soul in the Netflix documentary. All the arrogance is clearly a defence mechanism.

The LIV guys are hilarious in their defenses of their decision.

If they really gave a shit about growing the game, they'd put pressure on the existing tours, & foregone Pro Tour prize money, to have the tour spend that money on expanding the existing programs they have, but ..........

Now in some cases, as you say, I see players who mentally look for the security of the big payoff, & can't resist; but for the majority, especially the big names, I just see naked greed, & nothing else.

[Slick]

McIlroy miked up on course and talking to the commentary team live as he's playing a hole! Never seen that before, really interesting hearing what he's thinking and trying to do as he's doing it.

I feel for McIlroy these days. He has been forced to carry the mantle for the PGA in their LIV battle. Constantly criticised for getting too involved but every question he faces makes it impossible for him not to.

I liked the comments from the Netflix guys that it took a while to get Rory involved but once he was they knew he was all in.

[Blackmac]

Koepka seems to be finding some form but is also clearly regretting his decision to join LIV. It seems incredible that there are such punitive get out clauses in their contracts. So much for being independent contractors.

Never liked the guy but I felt he came across as a bit of a tortured soul in the Netflix documentary. All the arrogance is clearly a defence mechanism.

The LIV guys are hilarious in their defenses of their decision.

If they really gave a shit about growing the game, they'd put pressure on the existing tours, & foregone Pro Tour prize money, to have the tour spend that money on expanding the existing programs they have, but ..........

Now in some cases, as you say, I see players who mentally look for the security of the big payoff, & can't resist; but for the majority, especially the big names, I just see naked greed, & nothing else.

Only the likes of DJ, Varner and Bland have come across with any credit and been open about it being purely a financial decision. I don't blame any of them to be honest but all the "growing the game" is just laughable.

[Biffer]

Koepka seems to be finding some form but is also clearly regretting his decision to join LIV. It seems incredible that there are such punitive get out clauses in their contracts. So much for being independent contractors.

Never liked the guy but I felt he came across as a bit of a tortured soul in the Netflix documentary. All the arrogance is clearly a defence mechanism.

The LIV guys are hilarious in their defenses of their decision.

If they really gave a shit about growing the game, they'd put pressure on the existing tours, & foregone Pro Tour prize money, to have the tour spend that money on expanding the existing programs they have, but ..........

Now in some cases, as you say, I see players who mentally look for the security of the big payoff, & can't resist; but for the majority, especially the big names, I just see naked greed, & nothing else.

Only the likes of DJ, Varner and Bland have come across with any credit and been open about it being purely a financial decision. I don't blame any of them to be honest but all the "growing the game" is just laughable.

Varner’s comments are quite funny

[dpedin]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

[Blackmac]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

Sounds perfect. Weather is unreal. Looks set for the weekend and I've got a round at Swanston on Sunday which I always really enjoy.

[dpedin]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

Sounds perfect. Weather is unreal. Looks set for the weekend and I've got a round at Swanston on Sunday which I always really enjoy.

Never played it funnily enough even though it is 5 mins up the road from me in Colinton. Looks like it might be a bit windy at times? I've got Baberton today, Kilspindie tomorrow.

[Blackmac]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

Sounds perfect. Weather is unreal. Looks set for the weekend and I've got a round at Swanston on Sunday which I always really enjoy.

Never played it funnily enough even though it is 5 mins up the road from me in Colinton. Looks like it might be a bit windy at times? I've got Baberton today, Kilspindie tomorrow.

It's great fun. Lots of quirky wee holes in amongst a few monsters. The new bit is a bit of a contrast to the old part as it's very USGA style. Obviously the views are incredible.

[Biffer]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

Underneath a naked and enthusiastic Jennifer Lawrence?

[Slick]

I’ve been forced into getting SkY Sports for the gold this weekend.

When does the fucking gold start!

[Slick]

Oh ffs, genuinely just seen what’s going on

[Grandpa]

Off for 18 holes at lunchtime in glorious sunshine then, after a quick post round drink, back home to watch the Masters in all its glory and Leinster v Leicester ERC game. Is there a better way to spend Good Friday?

Underneath a naked and enthusiastic Jennifer Lawrence?

Is that something you can just order? Via Uber?