He has to do the right thing & DQ himself. Seriously.Originally Posted by JMM
He has to do the right thing & DQ himself. Seriously.
(•_•) ..
∫\ \___( •_•)
_∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \
Hmm is that pretty standard or did they bottle it because its Tiger?
They're doing this under a new rule implemented last year for rules violations caught on TV. It doesn't really apply here because he obviously took the drop under 1 rule when it should have been taken under another. He admitted this when he said he purposely dropped it 2 yards back for yardage purposes. It was totally inadverdant & I blame the rules official that should have been there. That being said he broke the rule. He was using the rule for unplayable lie & not a hazard.
Everybody knows I don't like Tiger but I believe he is honorable where it comes to rules on the course & I totally believe he will DQ himself like he should.
(•_•) ..
∫\ \___( •_•)
_∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \
I think it's two late for a penalty because card is signed. dq or nothing.
dq is bad for ratings, it's all about ratings.
Except that rule changed two years ago.They're doing this under a new rule implemented last year for rules violations caught on TV. It doesn't really apply here because he obviously took the drop under 1 rule when it should have been taken under another. He admitted this when he said he purposely dropped it 2 yards back for yardage purposes. It was totally inadverdant & I blame the rules official that should have been there. That being said he broke the rule. He was using the rule for unplayable lie & not a hazard.
Everybody knows I don't like Tiger but I believe he is honorable where it comes to rules on the course & I totally believe he will DQ himself like he should.
Read here if you want to.
They are well with in their bounds to only penalize for this situation.
It probably costs him the tournament though.
That new video rule does not apply. He took the drop under the wrong rule. He said he purposely dropped the balls 2 yards back thinking it was a legal drop. It wasn't. The new rule is for high definition TV. This has nothing to do with that.Except that rule changed two years ago.
Read here if you want to.
They are well with in their bounds to only penalize for this situation.
It probably costs him the tournament though.
My prediction is he will DQ himself.
(•_•) ..
∫\ \___( •_•)
_∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \
Tiger will not DQ himself. He will come to the course pissed off and fire a 68 or better.That new video rule does not apply. He took the drop under the wrong rule. He said he purposely dropped the balls 2 yards back thinking it was a legal drop. It wasn't. The new rule is for high definition TV. This has nothing to do with that.
My prediction is he will DQ himself.
He got 2 strokes. He really caught a break with the rule change last year, otherwise he would be gone 100%
Hard to believe someone did not pull him aside before he signed his card. I thought it was pretty obvious rule violation, although I did not see it live.
http://www.usga.org/ourexpertsexplai...?id=2147496891That new video rule does not apply. He took the drop under the wrong rule. He said he purposely dropped the balls 2 yards back thinking it was a legal drop. It wasn't. The new rule is for high definition TV. This has nothing to do with that.
My prediction is he will DQ himself.
Here is the problem.
Tiger combined situations 2 and 3 he didn't drop under a different rule.
In most situations if you flew a ball into the water instead of what happened his play would have been 100% legal.
It is the fact that it took a funny bounce off the pull that his drop line should have been different.
The second problem is "nearly as possible" is not defined in part 2 of the rule. In many instances on the tour that is within one club length and Tiger very well may have been within one driver club length. Also Rule 20-5 that is supposed to clarify section 2 of the Water Hazard does a piss poor job of clarifying the drop.
Then you have the whole problem of should they go back and review every water ball from 15, my guess is they could penalize more golfers for making the same decision. Should Tiger be held to a higher standard than everybody else? It would be very simple to confuse the rules in this situation and he thought he was making a totally legal play (which in most Yellow Stake instances he would have been). The rules official didn't step in and say anything to him either.
Basically it is a giant cluster fuck of a situation due to poor oversight by the Rules Official and poor explanation of the rule in the USGA rule book.
Just one more tidbit.
Making a stroke from the wrong place is not a disqualifying penalty.
It is a two stroke penalty, unless determined he gained a significant advantage. Which playing from 2 yards back of the original lie, I don't know how anyone could interrupt that as a significant advantage.
http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules...Rule-20/#20-7c
Incorrect. Tiger would have to call over the Rules Official to get a ruling, they do not randomly approach golfers giving there opinion, they have to be called. And at the Masters there is an official within a hundred feet of Tiger, so access is not the issue.http://www.usga.org/ourexpertsexplai...?id=2147496891
Basically it is a giant cluster fuck of a situation due to poor oversight by the Rules Official and poor explanation of the rule in the USGA rule book.
Apparently, a viewer called in when Tiger was the 18th and complained. This is when it was reviewed, but he had already signed his card so there was nothing he/they could do.
Either way he was facing a 1 stroke penalty, and last year he would have been DQ'd. He clearly dropped the ball 5 feet away to make a better shot, he even said that. 2 strokes is more than fair. One stroke is not severe enough and a DQ is overkill.
Fair ruling in my opinion.
Lol at allowing viewers to call in to influence anything.Incorrect. Tiger would have to call over the Rules Official to get a ruling, they do not randomly approach golfers giving there opinion, they have to be called. And at the Masters there is an official within a hundred feet of Tiger, so access is not the issue.
Apparently, a viewer called in when Tiger was the 18th and complained. This is when it was reviewed, but he had already signed his card so there was nothing he/they could do.
Either way he was facing a 1 stroke penalty, and last year he would have been DQ'd. He clearly dropped the ball 5 feet away to make a better shot, he even said that. 2 strokes is more than fair. One stroke is not severe enough and a DQ is overkill.
Fair ruling in my opinion.
Could you ever see the NBA allowing viewers to call in or have a live voting system to cause a play to be overturned or reviewed?
That is precisely why the implemented the new rule. Golfers were getting nitpicked to death by viewers, the PGA was faced time and again with having to DQ a golfer over something completely immaterial. I guarantee the caller calling in probably did not have Tiger winning the Masters in his bet.Lol at allowing viewers to call in to influence anything.
Could you ever see the NBA allowing viewers to call in or have a live voting system to cause a play to be overturned or reviewed?
If this were last year, 100% Tiger gets bounced. This rule changed worked exactly how they wanted it to.
The rules committee is partially to blame for this debacle. There was an issue & made a ruling without even talking to the player? A 10 second conversation with Tiger would have revealed he dropped 2 yards further for an advantage & he would have to accept the 2 shot penalty after realizing he, did indeed, make an error. He admitted as much in his post round interview.
This should have been rectified before he signed his card.
I agree with Hunter Mahan's take on the situation. He said those that think he should be DQ'd aren't wrong & those that think he should be allowed to continue aren't wrong. It's a very grey area. It would have been better if the first incident for this type of ruling hadn't involved Tiger Woods.
(•_•) ..
∫\ \___( •_•)
_∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \
I disagree here too. He should keep on playing. Rule 33 was put in for situations like this, if he drops out it renders the rule pointless.
The rules committee taking over The Masters, starting to think that place is rigged.
What they did to a 14 year old playing on that grand stage yesterday was hilarious, now this.
I think he was warned on 6 different holes prior to them enforcing the rule.
How many chances should he get?
I get it, it is a Professional tour stop, but sometimes it is actually right to bend the rules.I think he was warned on 6 different holes prior to them enforcing the rule.
How many chances should he get?
The Normcast has begun.
http://www.youtube.com/user/VideoPod...twork/featured
From what I saw today, the official who penalized him is tremendously respected. They don't want to do this.I get it, it is a Professional tour stop, but sometimes it is actually right to bend the rules.
I was at the US Championship in Oakmont a few years ago, they were warning players to speed it up. Nobody got warned twice. If this kid was warned 6 times what else can you do but clip him a stroke? A lot of these punks now think the rules don't apply to them. He'll remember this his whole life.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
