Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Not sure if it has been said but this whole sorry episode would never have happened on Stevie Williams watch.
Tiger to be DQ'd?
- Thread starter Stuey01
- Start date
Colin L
Tour Winner
They did not employ this 'new rule'. Decision 33-7/4.5 is not applicable to this incident and was not applied to it, so you don't need to feel uncomfortable about it.
The Committee exercised its power to waive a disqualification under exceptional individual circumstances (Rule 33) The exceptional circumstances in effect were that the Committee messed up by not sorting the matter out before Tiger handed in his card. It decided it would be too harsh to disqualify a player where it had been at fault. That may have been a good or a bad decision, but it wasn't made as a result of 33-7/4.5.
MashieNiblick
Tour Winner
I think in relation to the Rules it has effectively all been said, for which I for one am grateful in particular for the expert knowledge of Duncan, Colin and JezzE and others.
The recent Decision (33-7/4.5) based on the Harrington situation is not applicable as confirmed above because Tiger's mistake was due to a misunderstanding of the Rules not ignorance of the facts.
It seems the Committee therefore exerised a wider discretion under Rule 33-7 to waive the DQ on the grounds that they were alerted to a possible breach but took no further action as they thought the drop was OK (maybe fooled by the foreshortening of the camera lens).
They therefore missed the opportunity to warn Tiger so that he could add the penalty before signing his card. Later following his interview everyone realised what had happened was wrong and that Tiger should have incurred a penalty and had therefore signed for a wrong score. However the DQ for this was waived it would seem on the grounds that the Committee's earlier decision that the drop was Ok had had a direct bearing on this.
Whether they were right or wrong is hard to say.
Their statement says
"The penalty of disqualification was waived by the Committee under Rule 33 as the Committee had previously reviewed the information and made its initial determination prior to the finish of the player’s round."
Which I am not sure really sheds much light on what their reasoning was.
Ultimately though a decision has been made which effectively put Tiger where he would have been had the incorrect drop been properly identified by the Committee when they were first alerted to it (although I am not sure where that leaves a player's responsibility under Rule 6-1).
It is hard to try and enjoy what is left of the golf though as I think Tiger will be in the mix tonight and accordingly can't help feeling that we haven't done with this yet.
The recent Decision (33-7/4.5) based on the Harrington situation is not applicable as confirmed above because Tiger's mistake was due to a misunderstanding of the Rules not ignorance of the facts.
It seems the Committee therefore exerised a wider discretion under Rule 33-7 to waive the DQ on the grounds that they were alerted to a possible breach but took no further action as they thought the drop was OK (maybe fooled by the foreshortening of the camera lens).
They therefore missed the opportunity to warn Tiger so that he could add the penalty before signing his card. Later following his interview everyone realised what had happened was wrong and that Tiger should have incurred a penalty and had therefore signed for a wrong score. However the DQ for this was waived it would seem on the grounds that the Committee's earlier decision that the drop was Ok had had a direct bearing on this.
Whether they were right or wrong is hard to say.
Their statement says
"The penalty of disqualification was waived by the Committee under Rule 33 as the Committee had previously reviewed the information and made its initial determination prior to the finish of the player’s round."
Which I am not sure really sheds much light on what their reasoning was.
Ultimately though a decision has been made which effectively put Tiger where he would have been had the incorrect drop been properly identified by the Committee when they were first alerted to it (although I am not sure where that leaves a player's responsibility under Rule 6-1).
It is hard to try and enjoy what is left of the golf though as I think Tiger will be in the mix tonight and accordingly can't help feeling that we haven't done with this yet.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
They did not employ this 'new rule'. Decision 33-7/4.5 is not applicable to this incident and was not applied to it, so you don't need to feel uncomfortable about it.
The Committee exercised its power to waive a disqualification under exceptional individual circumstances (Rule 33) The exceptional circumstances in effect were that the Committee messed up by not sorting the matter out before Tiger handed in his card. It decided it would be too harsh to disqualify a player where it had been at fault. That may have been a good or a bad decision, but it wasn't made as a result of 33-7/4.5.
Thanks Colin, my mistake :thup:
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
You also have to ask whether, had the rules committee deemed that "exceptional circumstances" were relevant in the historical cases quoted, whether the players in question would have continued. Of course, we can't answer that but if there were no exceptional circumstances, then they are not the same as Tiger's predicament.
bobmac
Major Champion
Tiger made a wrong drop at around 3pm (their time) ish.
His 'telling interview' was, say, 5 pm.
And yet Tiger didn't hear anything about the investigation until the next morning?
Why wasn't he told the night before?
And if he had time to sleep on it, would he have withdrawn the next morning?
As it was, he was summoned by the committee in the morning, told of the 2 shot penalty and told to go and play.
His 'telling interview' was, say, 5 pm.
And yet Tiger didn't hear anything about the investigation until the next morning?
Why wasn't he told the night before?
And if he had time to sleep on it, would he have withdrawn the next morning?
As it was, he was summoned by the committee in the morning, told of the 2 shot penalty and told to go and play.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
These are all very good questions Bob, the answer to which we will probably never know.
richart
Major Champion
I find the fact the drop was discussed by the commitee and a decision made as Tiger played the last hole, 'very convenient'
Piece
Tour Winner
Totally agree. A great summary of the facts and not driven by conspiracy theories. :thup:
bluewolf
Money List Winner
I find the fact the drop was discussed by the commitee and a decision made as Tiger played the last hole, 'very convenient'
Totally agree mate. It appears that the committee have taken the hit to protect the games biggest player. It's over and done now though so best to just hope that TW doesn't challenge and make things worse for everyone.
upsidedown
Tour Winner
Wasn't he out in one of the last groups which woud have made it a bit later? Think it's five hour difference from UK.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
I find the fact the drop was discussed by the commitee and a decision made as Tiger played the last hole, 'very convenient'
I still maintain that, assuming the US get the same footage at the same time, it's very unlikely anyone watching the tv would have been able to tell with sufficient confidence that Tiger had dropped incorrectly.
When you see it again it's obvious but first time, in real time...??
upsidedown
Tour Winner
Bit that I cant get round is if it's ok for a viewer to phone in with concerns why in Majors is there not a designated rules official watching the TV coverage ?
Slime
Tour Winner
Heidi
Tour Rookie
not my committee...it was an open
i have no idea what was going on
if it had happened to me personally and not just one of my ladies then i would have got to the bottom of it
as it was the girl didnt give two hoots about the DQ!
just goes to show that committees dont always make the right decisions.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
Sorry to bring this thread up again but I think I have finally got off the fence on this one and decided that Tiger should have been disqualified. The committee messed up, but it isn't the committee's job to tell the player he has broken the rules, particlarly, a rule that top pro's and caddies should know.
However, once the ruling had been made that he was to continue, I don't think he should have withdrawn.
However, once the ruling had been made that he was to continue, I don't think he should have withdrawn.
triple_bogey
Tour Rookie
Pictures circulating around. Suggests his drop wasn't as far as the TV made out. Interesting all the same.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Actually, in the 'trial by television' age, when it was a viewer that notified the Committee that there was a breach, It IS the Committee's job to do so. That's also why they brought in the 'television age' rule - recognising that such incidents might be unfair. If it has happened to his playing partner (Luke Donald), I doubt whether it would have been spotted - I only saw him hit 1 shot in the first 2 days!
If the comp was played like most club comps - without anyone but the players watching - then the breach would not have been noticed, the card would have been signed and no-one - including Tiger - would have been the wiser. I'm certain this sort of error - and it's not cheating imo - happens a huge amount in club comps.
Last edited:
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Pictures circulating around. Suggests his drop wasn't as far as the TV made out. Interesting all the same.
Quite brilliant.............it took me a while!!!
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
I made a similar point on page 3651 I think. Just about anyone else in he field wouldn't have even got the 2 shot penalty.
I still can't agree that it is anyone else's responsibility but the player. Particularly when it is a rule which should be understood
