Golf Fans Divided Over Miguel Angel Jiménez’s Controversial ‘Double Hit’ at US Senior Open

The golfing world is abuzz with debate following an incident involving Spanish golfing icon Miguel Angel Jiménez at the US Senior Open, held at the historic Newport Country Club. During his second round, Jiménez inadvertently double-hit a chip shot, sparking a firestorm of discussion among fans, players, and analysts about whether the incident constituted cheating or was simply an unfortunate mishap within the rules. The controversy, amplified by social media and golf forums, has cast a shadow over Jiménez’s otherwise stellar performance at the championship, where he remains a fan favorite known for his charisma and competitive spirit.

The Incident

The incident occurred on Friday, June 27, 2025, during Jiménez’s second round at the US Senior Open. On the par-4 14th hole, Jiménez faced a delicate chip shot from just off the green. As he attempted to finesse the ball onto the putting surface, his club appeared to strike the ball twice in a single swing, a rare occurrence in professional golf. The ball, which initially seemed destined for the rough, ended up on the green, potentially saving Jiménez a stroke in a critical moment of the tournament.

Under the current Rules of Golf, specifically Rule 10.1a, an accidental double hit is no longer penalized with an additional stroke, a change implemented by the USGA and R&A in 2019 to simplify the game. The USGA quickly issued a statement via its official X account, clarifying: “The good news for Miguel Angel Jiménez is that an accidental double chip is not a penalty under the Rules of Golf.” The post included a link to a detailed explanation of the rule, emphasizing that the stroke counts as one, regardless of the double contact, provided it was unintentional.

However, the lack of a penalty did little to quell the growing controversy. Slow-motion replays of the shot, widely shared across platforms like X and golf media outlets, showed Jiménez’s club making clear contact with the ball twice. Critics argued that the outcome of the shot—landing on the green instead of in the rough—gave Jiménez an unfair advantage, intentional or not.

The Debate Erupts

The incident ignited a polarized debate among golf fans, with social media becoming a battleground for differing opinions. Some fans, like X user @JohnnySandbag, expressed outrage, claiming Jiménez intentionally manipulated the shot. “Miguel obviously saw the ball was coming out short so hit it again, it’s clear as day in the video. Now his ball is on the green, otherwise it would have landed in the rough again. That should be a 1 stroke penalty for Miguel,” the user posted. Others echoed this sentiment, accusing Jiménez of exploiting the rule change to gain an edge, with some even labeling it as “cheating” and questioning the integrity of the game.

On the other hand, defenders of Jiménez pointed to the rulebook and the unintentional nature of the double hit. X user @hugocostagolf, a Spanish golf commentator, noted, “Miguel Ángel Jiménez se mantiene en la pelea del US Open. Ayer se dio esta curiosa situación donde golpeó dos veces a la bola. Al ser accidental ya no hay penalidad y solo cuenta como uno.” (Translation: “Miguel Ángel Jiménez remains in contention at the US Open.

Yesterday, this curious situation occurred where he hit the ball twice. As it was accidental, there is no penalty, and it counts as one stroke.”) Supporters argued that Jiménez, a 61-year-old veteran with a storied career, had no reason to risk his reputation over a single shot and that the double hit was a rare mistake, not a deliberate act.

Golf analysts also weighed in, with many emphasizing the importance of intent in the rules. “The double-hit rule change was designed to prevent penalizing players for accidental errors that don’t significantly alter the outcome of a shot,” said Golf Channel commentator Mark Roe. “Jiménez didn’t gain a massive advantage here; it’s just an unlucky break that looks bad in slow motion.” Others, however, felt the rule itself needed scrutiny, arguing that it could allow players to benefit from sloppy technique in high-stakes situations.

Leave a Reply
Follow us for more recent updates
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website
Save my name, email, and website in this
browser for the next time I comment