Tiger to be DQ'd?

[North Mimms]

Why - because the rules have been upheld? I actually think golf would actually come out the better for it; shows no-one is bigger than the game. I think Woods for one would also agree with that. The Guan slow play ruling was unfortunate, but the young lad took it on the chin and accepted it.

I agree.

We all know that golf is governed by a multitude of rules, and you have to be a pedant about them.

If it is shown that it doesn't matter if you are a 14 year old amateur or World number one, rule are rules, I think that;s a good thing.

 

[North Mimms]

For those that haven't seen the incident, here is a link, it occurred about 3:30 into the clip. You can see his first divot mark quite clearly when he plays his 2nd shot.

http://www.masters.com/en_US/news/index.html

Which clip?
I'm just getting an index?

 

[scratch]

Which clip?
I'm just getting an index?

Videos section, takes you direct to 2nd round highlights :thup:

 

[North Mimms]

Thanks. didn't look properly!

 

[pbrown7582]

Isn't there a rules official following? If they see a breach should they not 'referee' as a rules official and penalise the biggest player in the field on the spot, as they did with the slow play penalty on the smallest?

Exactly if there is a rules breech and the rules official has missed and TV trial proves a DQ is required there will be something hitting the fan this morning!

 

[Snelly]

I think that the penalty for Guan puts a greater focus on the question of applying rules evenly, but I can't see TW getting DQ'd.

Also, I would be very surprised if both he and an experienced caddy like Joe La Cava would get the rule so wrong.

Finally, it would be nice if we could discuss TW related matters like grown ups without people piling in and describing anyone with the negative view, in this case saying he should be DQ'd, as a hater.

I assume you are referring to me when you use the therapy speak term "hater". To clarify, I am a grown up and I don't like to see the number one player in the world gob on the green. I don't hate him and resent the implication.

At the moment , I don't hate anyone except slow players....

 

[FairwayDodger]

Why - because the rules have been upheld? I actually think golf would actually come out the better for it; shows no-one is bigger than the game. I think Woods for one would also agree with that. The Guan slow play ruling was unfortunate, but the young lad took it on the chin and accepted it.

I don't disagree but to the casual viewer it looks a tad silly, which was my point and is unfortunate. Golf fans have a different perspective and IMO it was right to penalise guan, who probably just doesn't know how to work he system like the other slowpokes do, and (sadly) tiger should be dq'd.

 

[Holty]

Having seen the replay, he doesn't seem to be 2 yards back from his original divot (although admittedly not exactly on top of it). I get the impression that if he hadn't have been loose with his interview response very few people would have thought twice about it.

I think that if they are going to DQ him, they may well have to go back and review a few other drops to check that they are applying the rule consistently first

 

[Ethan]

The Masters Committee and rules officials like John Paramor will know instantly on seeing that video if TW has broken a rule and the penalty, if one applies, is not in dispute.

But I think any delay in dealing with it is more to do with balancing the accusation of partisanship if they are not going to DQ him and the damage to viewing figures, sponsors and general disappointment if they do DQ him, and he is an honorary member of the club as well.

The bigger issue for me is the issue of post round viewers raising possible violations. I think that after a card is signed and accepted, any subsequent DQ should only be possible if the rule broken is one which clearly gives the player an advantage of is a gross violation of the game (i.e. a deliberate cheat).

Clearly neither of these apply in TW's case, so although I am not his biggest fan by any means, I really hope they do not DQ him.

 

[duncan mackie]

Having plainly said what he did, ie dropped two yards further back, then I can't see any way forward other than DQ.

The rules oficials following would have seen him drop and it would have looked as though he'd dropped correctly as he didn't say to them "I'm going to drop two yards further back". They wouldn't know that he'd deliberately dropped two yards further back unitl he later said so in his interview.

I assume that the reason he did it was so that he wouldn't hit the flag with his second attempt.
To me it's a careless misunderstanding/oversight of the rules by Tiger in thinknig he could go back as far as he likes, unfortunate for the competition but has to be DQ.

good summary, having watched it the mental effort he must have brought to bear on playing the shot again as he did was simply stunning, and could easily have have stopped him giving the appropriate thought to the rules.

going forwards I can see 2 extremes to the outcome

1. The ruling follows the line that despite what TW said he actually dropped the ball close to where he played the previous shot from.........

2. Tiger withdraws

The first could be a total disaster all round, the second would show Tiger in a competely new light to many.

 

[Fader]

It's situations like this that IMO highlight massive issues with the rules of golf & its officials.

Having watched it he does seem to be a yard further back from his original divot but it was "further back" not further forward so no distance advantage gained. So to DQ him would be the right thing to do according to the rule book but totally against common sense IMO. The reason being is he could have gained a distance advantage within the rules and gone and dropped a ball in the drop zone about 60 yards closer to the home and he'd be playing within the rules! Really where is the common sense in that! Take a 60 yard advantage your ok Mr Woods but go back a yard to far and your out of here pal!

Then there's the issue with officiating, World No1 golfs biggest name of the modern era and his group would have had a top rules official on the course with them. Now we all no they can't intervene at time of incident which IMO needs changing as its quicker to say you can't do that! But after completing the 15th hole whilst waiting on 16th tee he could say sorry Mr Woods you took an incorrect drop and will be penalised accordingly. Woods would be annoyed but it would've been dealt with and done. Now what we get is nothing from the officials allow him to sign his card and trial by TV which isn't right.

But fact remains if they want to be anal about the rules and to be fair they have to be then he has to be DQ sadly.

 

[Colin L]

Woods's predicament lies in what he said afterwards about what he intentionally did. A ruling on whether there is a breach of 27-1 should consider the player's intent. If I go back 160 yards to replay a shot and make my best effort to locate the place I played from would you say that I had failed to play from as nearly as possible to where I last played if I were unintentionally 2 yards out? Would you penalise me? I hope not. If I located what I thought was the place I had played from and then knowingly played from 2 yards away, would you penalise me? I hope so. By "knowingly", I just mean that I know I am playing 2 yards away from the spot, not that I am cheating. It could be that I innocently think that it is ok to do that.

I've no doubt that Tiger will be asked his intention when he played from where he did and from what he has already said, it doesn't sound as if the answer is going to be good for him.

 

[thecraw]

If this happens this will be the day the Masters dies!

Codswallop. Its the day that we know rules apply to all.

 

[Crow]

The Masters Committee and rules officials like John Paramor will know instantly on seeing that video if TW has broken a rule and the penalty, if one applies, is not in dispute.

But I think any delay in dealing with it is more to do with balancing the accusation of partisanship if they are not going to DQ him and the damage to viewing figures, sponsors and general disappointment if they do DQ him, and he is an honorary member of the club as well.

The bigger issue for me is the issue of post round viewers raising possible violations. I think that after a card is signed and accepted, any subsequent DQ should only be possible if the rule broken is one which clearly gives the player an advantage of is a gross violation of the game (i.e. a deliberate cheat).

Clearly neither of these apply in TW's case, so although I am not his biggest fan by any means, I really hope they do not DQ him.

But he did gain an advantage as he was able to play the exact same shot knowing that if he hit it correctly it would land short of the pin rather than clattering it.

I'd sooner not see him DQ'd but he has admitted to an incorrect drop and signed an incorrect card, it's black and white to me.

On another point about how close his ball was to his previous divot (assuming that was his previous divot) though the replays show the ball was close, it might have rolled down the hill towards it after the drop, has anybody seen footage of the actual drop?

 

[Backsticks]

Was there not a chage to tour rules a year or two ago about unintentional rules violations being noticed after the fact by TV or spectators ?
What was it ?

 

[Slime]

Tiger must drop at the nearest point.
He didn't
He should be dq'd
If he is not, he is bigger than the rules.

What bobmac said.
Unfortunately for Woods, I don't think the drop would have been noticed had he not said what he said in his interview.
He's effectively admitted to not dropping 'at the nearest point' and must be DQ'd.
I hope the authorities have the guts to do the right thing as they did yesterday to the Chinese kid for slow play.
Woods and Donald waited for half an hour on the fourth tee .............. the fourth tee for goodness' sake.
I think they took 5hrs 40mins to get round, they are given 4hrs 20mins I believe.
I'm glad action has been taken, it's just a shame that Crenshaw didn't have a little word with him after Guan had his first warning.
It's gonna get interesting, that's for sure.

Slime.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Just looked at the video and it looks much less than 2 yards, in fact it looks less than 1 club length

We need to define the "as near as possible" bit of the rule

i didnt see the actual drop, Im sure that people would be asking questions if he had dropped it from the exact position and the ball had rolled forward, so it was played from a position closer to the hole.

In this instance the ball is not closer to the hole, it is very close to where the last shot was played, In my opinion its close enough although I recognise that my opinion may not tally with others.

I would say its close enough, he gained no advantage, nobody picked it up at the time and I have to say that I am not a fan of retrospective trial by television.

If he does get DQ the general non golfing TV watching millions are going to think that Golf is a little crazy

 

[Backsticks]

We need to define the "as near as possible" bit of the rule

Not really. That isnt at issue here since Tiger clearly states that he did identify a spot (whether that is accurate or not doesnt matter at this stage) and that he move two yards back from it. i.e. clearly not as near as possible.

 

[bobmac]

 

[FairwayDodger]

View attachment 5687

First time I've had a look at this, other than the live coverage (I didn't notice at the time) if there's no photo trickery there it's not even close!