In the Sybase Match Play Championship yesterday, on the LPGA Tour, Morgan Pressel appeared to be well on her way to defeating her good friend, Azahara Munoz, when Pressel won the 12th hole to take a three-up lead.

At the 13th tee, however, Pressel was given the alarming news that she had been assessed a two-hole penalty for slow play.

This left Pressel (obviously) disspirited, and swung the momentum sharply in favor of Munoz, who went on to win the match, 2 and 1.

The question that is being widely debated today is this: Was this penalty a wise one to call?

Against it is the fact that officials, in any sport, should be as inconspicuous as possible; and, by calling this penalty, the officials thrust themselves into the forefront of the game.

On the other hand, one always desires consistency in officiating. For instance, a home-plate umpire in baseball, who regularly calls strikes that are an inch off the outside corner, should do so consistently, for both sides. To call a penalty on one player, therefore, and then ignore the same sort of thing with another player, would be indefensibly inconsistent.

Yet Munoz insists that she--not Pressel--was the principal cause of the slow play.

What do others think?

There should be a warning first at least...

"Speed it up or you're gonna get penalized" should've been said before an actual penalty given...IMO...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

The duo had been warned.

And one of the co-hosts of the Golf Channel's Morning Drive made a very good point about this controversy: It is not sufficient to just complain about slow play. If one really wants to put an end to slow play, the rules must be enforced.

But this still begs the question: Was Pressel the more serious offender here? Or was it really Munoz, as Munoz, herself, claims?

Here is a link to an ESPN article on the matter: Azahara Munoz wins Sybase Match Play after controversial semifinal win against Morgan Pressel - ESPN