McIlroy and influencers

[Dpavs]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

Which isn't what the guy I quoted had in quotes. 

 

LOL, "overreacted"?  He was pretty cool about it in terms of attitude, temporarily taking the phone, probably not the best idea, but whatever.  It's over.

 

Snatching someone's phone is over reacting IMO. But that's just me I guess. If he really felt that the kid's comments were that egregious, have him tossed but grabbing his phone from his hands is just wrong.

Edited March 17 by Dpavs

[Dpavs]

2 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

If you're 35, that certainly explains a lot. 

 

 

 

 

You should know better than that by now... but your comment explains a lot too I guess. But hey, I appreciate you lowering your normal standards in order to make this post.

Edited March 17 by Dpavs

[Dpavs]

58 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

In what world would charges of any type be levied and for what exactly? It has nothing to do with being rich. There were no damages and only one person broke the rules of the tournament. The smart mouth, entitled college golfer. 

 

There are two possibilities here...conversion and\or battery.

 

In most states a conversion occurs when a person without authority or permission intentionally takes the personal property of another or deprives another of possession of personal property. It is a tort which allows the injured party to seek legal relief. The fact that the property was eventually returned by a third party may not make any difference.

 

Generally, Civil assault and battery is typically defined as an unwanted touching that is done in a rude or angry manner. It can be as simple as shoving someone, blocking their way, spitting on them, grabbing someone's arm, throwing something (liquid or otherwise) at them, or even grabbing something out of their hand.

 

I would suspect that the college kid nor any reasonable person would have felt threatened or in any fear of harm so yeah granted nothing criminal here. That said the standards do vary from state to state and the mere touching without consent could be enough.  I would also agree, as would you I guess,  that no prosecutor would pursue charges under this set of apparent circumstances.

 

Edited March 17 by Dpavs

[Sixcat]

[BiggErn]

11 minutes ago, Sixcat said:

Lol. This is about the most coddled forum on the internet. That’s ok 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

4 minutes ago, Dpavs said:

 

There are two possibilities here...conversion and\or battery.

 

In most states a conversion occurs when a person without authority or permission intentionally takes the personal property of another or deprives another of possession of personal property. It is a tort which allows the injured party to seek legal relief.

 

Generally, assault and battery is typically defined as an unwanted touching that is done in a rude or angry manner. It can be as simple as shoving someone, blocking their way, spitting on them, grabbing someone's arm, throwing something (liquid or otherwise) at them, or even grabbing something out of their hand.

That's a stretch from written vs reality--- Furthermore there was no force involved, he simply asked the kid and the kid presented it.  So in no court of law ever would Rory be charged with battery, assault, theft for anything else.  Most pertinent is the kid got his phone back so definitely no theft.

 

Heck this pales compared to when Steve Williams took a $5,000 camera from a photographer and threw it in the pond.  No charges were filled there either.  Rory's incident is miniscule compared to that.

 

But the college golfer was rightfully ejected for breaking the terms of his grounds pass.  I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some to comprehend.

 

While I have extreme dislike for Ian Poulter, I support him for having a heckler ejected which ultimately led to the guy being fired from his job.

 

More fans need to feel the consequences of rude behavior.  It would be nice if the PGAT took a stronger stance against obnoxious fans. 

[Hawkeye77]

22 minutes ago, Dpavs said:

 

There are two possibilities here...conversion and\or battery.

 

In most states a conversion occurs when a person without authority or permission intentionally takes the personal property of another or deprives another of possession of personal property. It is a tort which allows the injured party to seek legal relief. The fact that the property was eventually returned by a third party may not make any difference.

 

Generally, Civil assault and battery is typically defined as an unwanted touching that is done in a rude or angry manner. It can be as simple as shoving someone, blocking their way, spitting on them, grabbing someone's arm, throwing something (liquid or otherwise) at them, or even grabbing something out of their hand.

 

I would suspect that the college kid nor any reasonable person would have felt threatened or in any fear of harm so yeah granted nothing criminal here. That said the standards do vary from state to state and the mere touching without consent could be enough.  I would also agree, as would you I guess,  that no prosecutor would pursue charges under this set of apparent circumstances.

 

 

You agree but want to go overboard on the whole it might have been criminal bit?

 

Nobody lost an eye.  It's over.

 

It seems to bother you a lot - it's like it's nothing but somebody needs to get Rory for something . . . five days later.

Edited March 17 by Hawkeye77

[Dpavs]

 

35 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

That's a stretch from written vs reality--- Furthermore there was no force involved, he simply asked the kid and the kid presented it.  So in no court of law ever would Rory be charged with battery, assault, theft for anything else.  Most pertinent is the kid got his phone back so definitely no theft.

 

Heck this pales compared to when Steve Williams took a $5,000 camera from a photographer and threw it in the pond.  No charges were filled there either.  Rory's incident is miniscule compared to that.

 

But the college golfer was rightfully ejected for breaking the terms of his grounds pass.  I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some to comprehend.

 

While I have extreme dislike for Ian Poulter, I support him for having a heckler ejected which ultimately led to the guy being fired from his job.

 

More fans need to feel the consequences of rude behavior.  It would be nice if the PGAT took a stronger stance against obnoxious fans. 

 

I do agree in theory with much of what you are saying here but not necessarily in the way you are ok with certain actions in practice.

 

As for the legal standards involved, I believe your are incorrect in many of your assumptions but I don't see the point into getting into all that here.

 

"More fans need to feel the consequences of rude behavior.  It would be nice if the PGAT took a stronger stance against obnoxious fans. "

 

Just a note... but I could not agree more with this if I tried for all sports including the PGAT!

 

Edited March 17 by Dpavs

[Hawkeye77]

It's like people still obsessing about the cell phone "incident" and just waiting to pounce after Rory didn't win the tournament, but he won . . . and now they can't let all that saved up stuff go to waste.

 

If I'm that UT golfer, I wouldn't be running on the grounds at Augusta National if I ever get to go - his pic has been given to all security, lol. 

[BiggErn]

4 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

That's a stretch from written vs reality--- Furthermore there was no force involved, he simply asked the kid and the kid presented it.  So in no court of law ever would Rory be charged with battery, assault, theft for anything else.  Most pertinent is the kid got his phone back so definitely no theft.

 

Heck this pales compared to when Steve Williams took a $5,000 camera from a photographer and threw it in the pond.  No charges were filled there either.  Rory's incident is miniscule compared to that.

 

But the college golfer was rightfully ejected for breaking the terms of his grounds pass.  I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some to comprehend.

 

While I have extreme dislike for Ian Poulter, I support him for having a heckler ejected which ultimately led to the guy being fired from his job.

 

More fans need to feel the consequences of rude behavior.  It would be nice if the PGAT took a stronger stance against obnoxious fans. 

Maybe they’ll stop selling alcohol. I’m sure if it had been one of the open bar folks in a corporate hospitality area the result would’ve been the same. 

[Dpavs]

5 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

You agree but want to go overboard on the whole it might have been criminal bit?

 

Nobody lost an eye.  It's over.

 

Again, I agree that no prosecutor would ever pursue this as it would certainly be a waste of time and tax money, but that is not really reflective of the letter of the law.

[aenemated]

Outstanding. 

 

 

 

[Ferguson]

1 hour ago, Dpavs said:

 

You should know better than that by now... but your comments explains a lot too I guess. But hey, I appreciate you lowering your normal standards in order to make this post.

 

I appreciate you as well. 

 

[Kai Slater]

I don't mind some heckling and rowdy crowd; some of these golfers tend to have rabbit ears and let the crowd get the best of them with noise, movement, etc....NFL quarterbacks, MLB pitchers and batters have to deal with a lot more than golfers  do when it comes to crowd heckling, loud noise, and so on.

 

I know the whole "golf is different" argument, but I'm just speaking in general terms.

[Dpavs]

15 minutes ago, Kai Slater said:

I don't mind some heckling and rowdy crowd; some of these golfers tend to have rabbit ears and let the crowd get the best of them with noise, movement, etc....NFL quarterbacks, MLB pitchers and batters have to deal with a lot more than golfers  do when it comes to crowd heckling, loud noise, and so on.

 

I know the whole "golf is different" argument, but I'm just speaking in general terms.

 

Well said, I completely agree with this!

 

And perhaps to add some clarity, my position is simply that when it does get out of hand there are appropriate and inappropriate responses. The athletes involved should learn to take the high road. Does this mean maybe they are being held to a somewhat higher standard than the crowd? Probably, but maybe I am just old fashioned but I truly don't see an issue with that.

[Dpavs]

47 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

I appreciate you as well. 

 

 

So we agree then that mutual respect and appreciation are good things, right?

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, Dpavs said:

 

Again, I agree that no prosecutor would ever pursue this as it would certainly be a waste of time and tax money, but that is not really reflective of the letter of the law.

Which is why it’s well lettered and left to all those who wish to use it to take situations and context into account!

 

If he’s not convicted of anything he’s innocent! This ain’t France partner nor any Gulags in the Everglades! 😀

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

7 minutes ago, Dpavs said:

 

So we agree then that mutual respect and appreciation are good things, right?

As Ted Lasso would say, “I appreciate you man!” Happy St. Patrick’s Day! Let’s “influence” some positive waves Moriarty!

[Dpavs]

25 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Which is why it’s well lettered and left to all those who wish to use it to take situations and context into account!

 

If he’s not convicted of anything he’s innocent! This ain’t France partner nor any Gulags in the Everglades! 😀

 

 

 

Fair enough!

 

 

[eddiecut]

3 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

Which isn't what the guy I quoted had in quotes. 

 

LOL, "overreacted"?  He was pretty cool about it in terms of attitude, temporarily taking the phone, probably not the best idea, but whatever.  It's over.

What was said? I am not seeing you quote anything... 

[Hawkeye77]

15 minutes ago, eddiecut said:

What was said? I am not seeing you quote anything... 

Look it up!

[eddiecut]

35 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Look it up!

I have looked it up and what you are saying is false... in 3 articles " Just like the 2011 Masters" 

 

So wondering what you are reading to be so different. 

[Chunkitgood]

There’s a sort of Gresham’s Law of media, with influencers being the debased celebrity worshipping medium that has driven good journalism into hiding, so that now McIlroy can say when a reporter asked if he can ask a question(!):

 

“No, you can’t,” said a laughing McIlroy when a reporter suggested asking about the incident on Thursday. “Because I don’t want you to.”

[Hawkeye77]

28 minutes ago, eddiecut said:

I have looked it up and what you are saying is false... in 3 articles " Just like the 2011 Masters" 

 

So wondering what you are reading to be so different. 

Then you should be satisfied. 

[Ferguson]

2 hours ago, Dpavs said:

 

So we agree then that mutual respect and appreciation are good things, right?

 

On St. Patrick's Day, yes.  

 

[Chunked]

On 3/14/2025 at 7:41 AM, golferdude54 said:

 

It's not that YouTube golf influencers are hurting others physically or mentally by doing what they want to do and make money at it.

 

It's that the YouTube algorithm shows them everywhere when one doesn't want to watch them at all, that's what the haters are mad about.

 

I mean, sometimes I want to search for exclusively Ben Hogan swing videos and nowadays the results are mostly "THIS IS BEN HOGAN'S SECRET" by random instructors.

 

I guess this also brings up the question as to what is a “YouTube golfer”? I see all the instructors as something different than the guys who are mostly playing rounds and entertaining, but I guess they are all one and the same. 
 

It is interesting that 18- 34 year olds are playing more golf than ever. Feels that’s directly related to YouTube. 

[Ferguson]

1 hour ago, Chunked said:

 

It is interesting that 18- 34 year olds are playing more golf than ever. Feels that’s directly related to YouTube. 

 

18-34 year olds are the largest segment at ~6.3M players of ~123M. There is no data to support this segment playing an increased number of rounds per year, and while YouTube might stimulate interest, there no data that shows YouTube is driving more play.  

 

[Scotty1140]

On 3/15/2025 at 11:51 PM, Puttersaurus Rex said:

This got me thinking...Do we need another “What’s wrong with Rory?” thread?

 

 

 

Is there something wrong with the old thread? Might be a worthy discussion point.

 

Perhaps a "What's wrong with the 'What's wrong with Rory?' thread before we start a "What's wrong with Rory now?" thread

[jimecherry]

5 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

18-34 year olds are the largest segment at ~6.3M players of ~123M. There is no data to support this segment playing an increased number of rounds per year, and while YouTube might stimulate interest, there no data that shows YouTube is driving more play.  

 

sorry to be that guy but played rounds isnt the only measure any more in fact in 2023 off course participation for the group in question almost equaled the on course numbers.

[Ferguson]

10 hours ago, Chunked said:

 

It is interesting that 18- 34 year olds are playing more golf than ever. Feels that’s directly related to YouTube. 

 

3 hours ago, jimecherry said:

sorry to be that guy but played rounds isnt the only measure any more in fact in 2023 off course participation for the group in question almost equaled the on course numbers.

 

@jimecherry, no need to apologize for not following the context of my response, or being that guy. 

 

I was responding directly to the comment from @Chunked (see above) about this age group "playing more golf than ever."  The operative word was playing, not participating.  Presently, and to my knowledge, there exists no measure or clear definition for off course "participation in golf."

 

Husband: Hey honey, today, I went to the vacant lot across the street from our country club and participated at golf by air swinging. 

 

Wife: Great, I went to mall today and participated in growing our debt. 

 

Debt - easy to define and measure.

Off course golf - not so much.

 

 

I simply said there are no data directly showing this age group actually "plays more golf", defined narrowly as "rounds played."