Golf Players

Pro Golfer Scottie Scheffler Embarrasses Ben Johns…or Does He?



Subscribe for Weekly Updates on Pro Pickleball! – https://fifthshotmedia.beehiiv.com/subscribe

I recap PPA Nationals | Regression Draw | Altercation between two players | Ben Johns clip goes viral | Fudge obtains a crucial point on referee’s lack of call. ALW wins her 20th triple crown. Chris Haworth beats Ben Johns In Singles.

____

@PPAtour
@MajorLeaguePickleball
@morekingofthecourt

_____

My Socials:

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fifthshotmedia/?hl=en

Twitter: https://twitter.com/FifthShotMedia

Business Inquiries: fifthshotmedia@gmail.com

__
FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

Related Posts

8 Comments

  2. Gideon Schminke

    I think I prefer the progression draw, but I wish I could have seen livestream replay… Tennis Channel doesn't have that.

  5. TheGoldenRooster

    People are really stupid, it’s an exhibition match. Celeb match, nothing serious. I can’t believe people are this stupid

  6. Kaleb Searle

    That ALW and CP moment was so inane. You should allow players to challenge their own calls if they still have a time put, even rallies they have won. You should also be able to challenge any call once you've run out of time outs at the expense of a point if you are incorrect. I believe the PPA switched to a ruling that makes it so say: player 1 challenges an in call, if they are correct, player 2 then loses a TO.

    It would get a little messy with allowing players to challenge their own calls with a system like this. Because, as the rules stand, if player 1 challenges their own "in" call, player 2 would lose a TO, which is obviously kinda ludicrous. The Jaume vs JW match comes to mind for this as well. Jaume called the ball in, then challenged his own call and the ball was then ruled "out" punishing Jaume for good sportsmanship.

    Here would be my change to the challenge rule. You get 2 free Challenges in the form of Time Outs. Once you have used up your Time Outs, you are then able to challenge at a potential cost of a point if you lose your challenge (Maybe set up a maximum of 5 or have each additional few challenges be worth more and more points to avoid "spam" challenging). If you challenge a call by your OPPONENT, and you happen to win the challenge, then your opponent loses their respective TO or, if they have no TOs remaining, a point.
    If you challenge your own call, then things would occur differently to prevent any possible shenanigans/challenge abusing. If you call a ball "in" or "out" and challenge to deduce if you called it correctly, there are two ways that can end. Regardless of which way you do it (calling it "in" and challenging or calling it "out" and challenging) the results would be the same.
    If it was actually "in" then you lose your TO/point and the ball is forfeited to your opponent/your second serve. If it was "out" then you retain your TO/point, the ball is yours/opponents second serve, and your opponent loses NO TO/point.

    I think this promotes fairness and still allows for sportsmanship within the game. You get punished for wasting time/getting the call wrong, but it doesn't allow you to abuse the system to steal points away from your opponent. It's not perfect, but I think it's better than the current system, at least

Write A Comment