Phil Mickelson: The wild play that nearly got him DQ’d at U.S. Open

Phil Mickelson struggled mightily on Moving Day at the U.S. Open. But what his week will be remembered most for is a weird play that nearly got him disqualified.

Phil Mickelson celebrated his 48th birthday on Saturday, and he did so the same way he has for 26 of the last 28 years – playing in the U.S. Open. Lefty’s challenges at the one major that continues to elude him are well documented.

However, through all those trials and tribulations, we’ve never seen anything quite like what happened at Shinnecock Hills. Phil Mickelson nearly got disqualified from the championship thanks to one stupid swing.

If you haven’t seen it yet, it’s a sight to behold. First, a little setup for the biggest “What?” moment of the week.

Mickelson shot 69 in the second round on Friday to make the cut at +6. Tied for 35th place and ten shots behind leader Dustin Johnson, he would need an absolute miracle to have any chance of winning, but putting together a respectable top-ten certainly wasn’t out of the question.

Unfortunately, he struggled early. An early birdie on the par-4 4th was offset immediately by a bogey on No. 5. As if things weren’t bad enough, Mickelson strung together four straight bogeys between the eighth and 11th, moving to 10 over. At this point, it just became a matter of “how quickly can this all be over?”

Not quickly enough. The scene at the par-4 13th is something you have to see to believe.

Wait…what? If you’re wondering just what that was all about, you’re not alone. The biggest confusion was just what his penalty would be. As it turns out, it wasn’t really that big of a deal, especially to Phil.

Should Phil Mickelson have been disqualified?

The rule in question has to do with contacting a ball already in motion. Really, it should come as no surprise that the USGA Rules of Golf aren’t particularly helpful here.

There are two rules that could have come into play. The first, and the one with the worse penalty, is Rule 1-2, which loosely states:

"A player must not (i) take an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play, or (ii) alter physical conditions with the intent of affecting the playing of a hole.Exceptions:An action expressly permitted or expressly prohibited by another Rule is subject to that other Rule, not Rule 1-2.An action taken for the sole purpose of caring for the course is not a breach of rule 1-2."

Seems about as simple as the USGA can get, right? The biggest issue here is the penalty, which gives the Committee (ie. the USGA itself at the U.S. Open) the right to disqualify in the case of a “serious breach”. There is a clause allowing for a two-stroke penalty if the breach is considered intentional, but doesn’t give the player a “significant advantage” in the playing of the hole.

More from Pro Golf Now

• Golf Rumors: LIV set to sign Masters Champion in stunning deal
• Fantasy Golf: Grant Thornton Invitational DFS Player Selections
• Brutal return leaves Will Zalatoris looking towards 2024
• Stars You Know at World Champions Cup Starts Thursday at Concession
• Fantasy Golf: An Early Look at the 2024 Masters Tournament

Per the USGA, the violation Mickelson committed was on Rule 14-5, regarding striking the ball. The key verbiage in that rule is that a player “must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving”. There is even a clause that states if the player purposely “deflects or stops” his ball, it goes back to Rule 1-2, along with the potential DQ.

If your head isn’t exploding by now, congratulations. You’re either a golf scholar or you actually work for the USGA, most likely. Or, you might actually be Phil Mickelson himself – happy birthday, and thanks for stopping by!

This is Phil’s explanation of the situation, which actually makes a lot more sense than the rules themselves.

This opens up two situations. First, it sounds like Phil clearly knew that he was giving himself an advantage by making that return putt. However, by not simply “deflecting” or stopping the ball, and by actually trying to make the return putt, he actually used the Rules to the letter.

The potential DQ was off the table, as rule 14-5 addresses striking a ball in motion, which carries the maximum two-shot penalty. If it was anybody else, I’d say it was dumb luck. From Phil, it was a savvy move of a vet who knew that the two shots wouldn’t change a thing for him.

Next: Dustin Johnson nearing elite PGA TOUR Lifetime Status

I choose to look at this from the perspective of “did the punishment fit the crime?” If Phil was in contention and pulled a move like this, sure, DQ him. But he’s 10 shots off the lead, playing horribly, and clearly not trying to impact anything but his own time spent on the course. With his short game, even if he putted into the bunker, maybe he gained a stroke doing this. Maybe he lost one. Who can say?

I do know that I wouldn’t want to be the USGA official who gave Phil the boot. So all in all, justice is served.