From The Inbox

Patrick Reed's rules gaffe prompts readers to pick sides

Reed should have fessed up and moved on

I am sure that there are a lot of people who watched the Hero World Challenge and think, as I do, that Patrick Reed has not done his image any good by his attitude to the penalty assessed by his actions in the waste area (“Patrick Reed denies cheating as questions persist,” Dec. 9).

I can see him doing it once as inadvertent, but twice? Why he didn't just admit to the breach, issue an apology and move on is hard to understand.

I think it tragic that a player of his talent level does not realize how his actions here are seen so negatively by golfers around the world. It's no surprise that Cameron Smith called him out on this incident, so I hope that this does not tarnish the U.S. team's performance this week in the Presidents Cup in Australia.

Paul Sunderland
Los Angeles

Turnabout would be fair play with Miceli
I guess Morning Read has turned into tabloid trashy reporting (“Patrick Reed denies cheating as questions persist,” Dec. 9).

I wish that Alex Miceli would have kept his article between the ropes, left out any personal issues irrelevant to Patrick Reed’s golf play and written about factual cheating in golf (i.e., allegations about college golf). I would say the same about any golfer's outside life, including Tiger Woods’ problems years ago.

Maybe we should have an article that digs into all of Miceli’s history that is irrelevant to his reporting?

Bill Martin
Quitman, Texas

Reasonable doubt
It irks me to see everyone jump to conclusions about Patrick Reed’s alleged cheating (“Patrick Reed denies cheating as questions persist,” Dec. 9; “From the Morning Read inbox,” Dec. 9).

As blatant and clear-cut as it looked on camera from behind the line of play, no viewer knows the texture of the sand. Nor do they consider that a very lofted club obscures the view of the sand behind the ball. And remember that in this waste bunker, grounding the club was legal.

Would any professional player – aware of the basic rules regarding improving one’s lie – be oblivious to the camera’s eyes in very close proximity?

I have no water to carry for Reed, but I hate to see his reputation stained when there is a reason to doubt the allegations.

Gary Stauffenberg
Phoenix
(Stauffenberg is the president and chief executive officer of Aussie Chiller Headwear.)

‘Bent’ rules elicit different reactions
I have watched the video of Patrick Reed improving his lie by brushing the sand while in the waste area (“Patrick Reed denies cheating as questions persist,” Dec. 9).

I also have watched the video of spectators removing the so-called loose impediment (a massive rock) in front of Tiger Woods’ ball during the 1999 Phoenix Open.

In each case, the Rules of Golf were bent more than a little. Yet the hue and cry of the public and the golf officials is sure different.

Ken Staroscik
Firestone, Colo.

Expect air time from Woods because he’s the captain
I tend to agree with reader Paul Modarelli (“From the Morning Read inbox,” Dec. 9), but in the Presidents Cup, Tiger Woods will get more of the interview time because he’s the captain.

I expect more balance on the course, as the coverage should track the most meaningful matches, no matter the players. But, if Woods is not playing a match, we will be hearing a lot from him.

Al Fiscus
Searcy, Ark.

Tiger and Rembrandt: Strokes of genius
Here we go again (“From the Morning Read inbox,” Dec. 9). If golf fans don't want to see and hear about Tiger Woods, get a TiVo. As we've heard often recently: Get over it.

The man moves the needle, and will forever. It would be like a discussion of great art without mention of Rembrandt.

Dick Greenwood
Bradenton, Fla.

Morning Read invites reader comment. Write to editor Steve Harmon at steve@morningread.com. Please provide your name and city of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, Morning Read will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We will not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.