Bryson DeChambeau’s incredible second round at The Open Championship has been thrown into disrepute.
His second round of 66 brought him to within one stroke of the leading Lucas Herbert after two days at Royal Birkdale. After months of criticism being fired at DeChambeau after he missed three straight major cuts this year, this was the perfect response.
But after his round, DeChambeau is being investigated for improving his lie on the fifth hole. His drive saw him in the deep rough to the right of the fairway, and TV footage showed him standing around behind his ball, flattening the fescue to help his backswing.
There is no reason to believe that DeChambeau did this deliberately, but he also almost certainly improved his lie. The R&A are currently deciding if DeChambeau should receive a two-stroke penalty, and debate is rampant in the golfing world.
Dame Laura Davies says if Bryson DeChambeau should have received penalty at The Open
There was plenty of debate between DeChambeau and R&A officials on the fifth hole after play had concluded. DeChambeau has the right to feel hard done by, as he did not appear to deliberately stamp the grass down, and he has no track record of foul play.
Speaking on Sky Sports, Dame Laura Davies gave her take on this contentious issue: “I know why he went behind the ball because when you have a shot like that, you have a precise angle, so you have got to work out where you want the ball to start, you do need that final last look.
“When he was doing his practice swings, he was taking it up sharp, but by the time he hit the shot, it seemed like he could go back in a straight line, so it seems like a dubious one at this point.”
Wayne Riley was on the course with DeChambeau when he allegedly improved his lie, and he gave his take on the incident.
He said, “The thing for me and I’m not going to defend anybody here. But I can’t see how Bryson is going to get penalized without a camera directly behind him. There is his defence. We have a camera angle to his right, but you can only tell definitely if you have a camera behind him.”
He continued, “I don’t think there is enough evidence to penalize the guy, if he says he didn’t do it. I don’t think there is enough evidence.”
The penalty is harsh, but intent is irrelevant. If he improved his lie, whether he meant to or not, then it’s a two-shot penalty, as harsh as that sounds. Hopefully, this will fuel the two-time US Open winner to an incredible performance on the weekend.
Receive exclusive football transfer news and updates twice a week to your mailbox
