Four months from now, the 125th US Open Champion will be crowned on the 18th green at Oakmont. Hard to believe as of the time I write this, my weather apps show it is 21 degrees at the Pittsburgh area club.
Oakmont has a rich history of hosting the National Championship: Jack Nicklaus’s first Tour victory and first major in 1962 in a playoff over Arnold Palmer, Johnny Miller’s 63 in 1973, Ernie Els winning a three-player playoff in sweltering heat, Arnold Palmer’s final US Open in 1994, and Angel Cabrera holding off Tiger Woods in 2007.
Dustin Johnson’s first Major Championship in 2016 is quite the story as well – he would later add the November Masters in 2020. What made the 2016 Championship though, was a rules controversy that muddied the waters of the Final Round.
First, what happened.
What happened to Dustin Johnson at the 2016 US Open?
On the 5th green, Dustin Johnson marked his ball, lifted it, cleaned it, and replaced it in advance of a putt. After replacing the ball, he used his putter to gently prop himself up (like what just about any golfer would do) so he could progress through his pre-shot routine. As he stood up, the ball moved. He called for a Rules Official.
After a discussion, the Rules Official told him to play the ball from the new spot and there would be no penalty, presumably deciding the ball moved on its own. He would make par and continue play.
Shortly thereafter, using Fox’s telecast, the USGA would scrutinize the video to determine if Johnson himself had caused the ball to move. Eventually, the USGA would inform Johnson later in the round they would like to review the video with him after the round to determine if he should have been penalized.
At the suggestion of Fox’s commentators, the USGA would share with other contenders that Johnson’s score on the 5th hole is uncertain and would know after the round.
Eventually, Johnson would birdie the 72nd hole to win by four shots. Four shots would become three shots after the USGA determined, he caused the ball to move, and he should have been penalized one stroke on the 5th hole.
So, what happened on the 5th green?
The Rules Official did not see the ball move and had to rely on information provided by Johnson himself and others who were around. This makes sense as Rules Officials tend to remain at a distance and only interject themselves when requested. It is plausible that Johnson felt that nothing he did caused the ball to move, and the Rules Official was content with the explanation. It is also plausible the wind and Oakmont’s extremely fast greens could have combined to cause the ball to be blown to a new spot.
What happened after the round?
The USGA decided Johnson had, in fact, caused the ball to move, and would be penalized one shot under then-Rule 18-2. The rationale was the ball had been replaced for a “considerable amount of time” and then the ball “moved almost immediately after he grounded his club” beside the ball, as later explained by the USGA. The ruling that took place on the 5th hole was determined to be incorrect, but Johnson would not have any further penalty, specifically that he did not return the ball to the original spot, as directed by the Rules Official.
What is the actual controversy?
Whether or not Johnson should have been penalized seems debatable. The lack of clarity of what Johnson’s score should be on the 5th hole generated angst amongst the Fox broadcast team and tournament competitors. Fox’s telecast had a tough time describing the action, for example, showing the live leaderboard. Players, including Johnson, struggled as well to understand exactly where they stood on the leaderboard. There was also controversy regarding the ‘no penalty’ decision in the moment versus the ‘penalty’ decision watching video a few hours later.
My thoughts.
I agree that whether there should be a penalty or not is debatable. At the time, and continues to this day, there is a general philosophy that scores are not finalized until the scorecard is turned in at the end of the round.
Rules buffs and tournament players are well-versed on the concept of playing two balls when there is uncertainty about how to proceed. For example, if there were no Rules Official available to Johnson, he could have played out the hole from the spot the ball moved to, a second ball from where it was originally, and looked for a decision later. In this case, he would have two scores on the 5th hole for a period. This type of thing happens somewhat often, but usually it falls under the radar.
The USGA deciding to not impose a penalty shot without allowing Johnson to review the video and hear from him, and potentially others, is perfectly understandable. I would not want someone telling me I am penalized and without presenting evidence.
Where the irritation and angst really come from, at least to me, is how it related to the other players and TV viewers. Unfortunately, the USGA was really in a tough spot here no matter what they decided. Ultimately, the USGA opted for the fairest course of action to Johnson, it just caused the balance of Championship Sunday to be thrown off.
Had the decision been to apply the penalty while on the 5th green, there would have been debate over the penalty itself. Had the USGA decided on no penalty, there would be debate on the video of the ball moving. Had the USGA decided on the penalty a little while later, but still while the round is in progress, there would be angst over how or when Johnson would be informed, though the remaining players and TV would merely see the change reflected on the leaderboard.
Would this happen today?
In short no, thanks to the 2019 major rewrite of the Rules of Golf, specifically Rule 13.1. Once Johnson marked his ball and lifted it, his ball “owns” that spot. If the ball moves by the wind, fast greens, or Johnson himself, there is no penalty, and the ball is moved back to where it was.