Tiger to be DQ'd?

Not at all but I think we all know had this not happened tiger would have gone on to win and easily. In my personal opinion he gained no advantage so why would I want to win my green jacket by default. I'd want it because when alls said and done I was the best player.


:rofl::rofl::rofl:
That is just such an astonishingly, unbelievably ridiculous comment that you must surely be joking.
Or are you smoking something that maybe you shouldn't be?

Slime.
 
I just watched this :rofl: everytime a reporter asked a leading question to Fred it was like err umm ahhh I cant answer that er hmmm,Fred says at one point that when Tiger was interviewed by him Tiger says that he's first shot that hit the pin was too long and he "adjusted"(adding 2 yards) to get closer to the pin............ but they still didn't DQ him,UNBELIEVABLE :confused:

you raise the only valid discussion point left open Shivas - and it's a good one.

Note 1 to 20-7 makes it realy clear that "Note 1: A competitor is deemed to have committed a serious breach of the applicable Rule if the Committee considers he has gained a significant advantage as a result of playing from a wrong place."

And the penalty for a serious breach os DQ not 2 shots.

Here's my take on the ruling (based on what we now know)

The committee got a call saying that TW hadn't dropped at the right place. While TW was still playing, and without discussion with him, the committee determined that where he dropped the ball was not a 'wrong place' ie it was close enough, given the overall environment, to where he played his previous shot from. It follows that they inherently determine that where he dropped did not constitute an advantage.

TW's statement that he deliberately dropped there in order to gain an advantage must result in a penalty for wrong place but the committee, having already ruled that it wasn't an advantage, can't now decide that it was an advantage because the player said so - it's a committee decision as to whether there was an advantage! (the corollary would be that the player stating he didn't get an advantage would be binding on the committee - and that's obviously incorrect).

TW is one lucky bunny that the committee got that call when they did - if it had happened after he finished he's toast. He would probably also be toast if the committee had discussed it with him before he returned his card; on the basis that he said the same things to them that he did in the press comment.

Hope this helps
 
I'll admit here from the get go, that I've not read through the previous 44 pages, there's golf on the tele and I don't to miss Tiger cheat and then openly admit it in his post round interview.

The only reason he's still in the masters is soley because he is Tiger Woods and the organisers have bent the rules to suit and keep him in, thousands or people has flocked to Augusta to watch Tiger and money talks. If Tiger was to walk then so would a lot of revenue.

NO one should be above the rules, no matter who you are.
 
What saddens me about the whole affair is how this makes the rules committee look overall; happy enough to be heavy handed on a 14 year old for slow play when I watched yesterday's play and say alot of players taking an age with no warning. Then when it comes to the world number one they choose to go softly softly so's not to a) upset the man himself and b) upset the paying public/damage potential income as there was still two days play left.
So, what have I learned from the noble game's ruling parties? Pick on 14 year olds, they are a soft target.
 
Top