Tiger to be DQ'd?

[Sweep]

I think he was genuinly confused with the two choices and thought he could go back on line as long as he was no closer to the hole. Under the pressure of playing in the Masters, I would have probably made the same mistake. He clearly intended to go back 2 yards and his strategy worked on the second shot. It is also such a shame, as they were two brilliant shots, the kind of shots we all watch the Masters for. Sadly, I think Tiger has to call this one on himself. Otherwise he risks becoming a VJ figure.

 

[Fader]

Whatever happens now one thing is for sure whoever wins this now has to know their victory will be overshadowed by the slow play penalty ad Tigergate!

Woods wins and all the sticklers will complain he cheated! He gets DQ'd and everyone says if Tiger was still in the field it could have been a different outcome.

Sounds like no one noticed this till Tiger gave post round interview and now the rule police are being anal for the sake of it. I get what the infraction is but don't agree with the way it's being applies when in the rules you can legally drop 60 yards closer but not a yard further back. Yes I know that then says so how far back etc but it really does just seen a case of being anal for the sake of it as no-one noticed it at the time.

Perhaps I should say no more on this as my view doesn't sit within the ruling

 

[Neddy]

Common sense has nothing to do with it.

That pretty much says it all!

IMO, if it's a rule that not one rules official, former pro, tv commentator/pundit or fan noticed or believed had been broken until the player inadvertently says something in a TV interview after the event....then it makes a farce of the whole thing.

You call a foot fault on a tennis player after he has served. Not 12 hours after the match has finished.

BTW can someone clarify something for me....is it true that Jim Furyk dropped 15 yards behind his original position when he chunked his 3rd into the water at the same hole? And if so why is that allowed when Tiger's isn't.

 

[LeeTurner]

Interesting to see the forum members at GolfWRX trying to put their own interpretation on the rules http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/825693-tiger-dqd/ :lol:

 

[Fish]

http://www1.skysports.com/golf/news...lified-for-incorrect-drop-during-second-round

 

[Nashy]

I understand the fact that he has said he has gone back to where he played the last shot from and gone back 2 yards. What happens if where he has taken this shot from in inline with the point it crossed the hazard and the flag? That needs to be looked at because the 3rd shot might have been inline so this is the reason he went back.

 

[fundy]

Betting mkts drifted pretty strongly now, gone from 3/1 to 7/1

 

[CMAC]

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

Poppycock! you never read the further explanation!

 

[Imurg]

That pretty much says it all!

IMO, if it's a rule that not one rules official, former pro, tv commentator/pundit or fan noticed or believed had been broken until the player inadvertently says something in a TV interview after the event....then it makes a farce of the whole thing.

You call a foot fault on a tennis player after he has served. Not 12 hours after the match has finished.

BTW can someone clarify something for me....is it true that Jim Furyk dropped 15 yards behind his original position when he chunked his 3rd into the water at the same hole? And if so why is that allowed when Tiger's isn't.

Because Jim went straight in
Tiger hit the flag and the ball LAST crossed the hazard to the left.

 

[CMAC]

BTW can someone clarify something for me....is it true that Jim Furyk dropped 15 yards behind his original position when he chunked his 3rd into the water at the same hole? And if so why is that allowed when Tiger's isn't.

his was straight back from where the ball last crossed the hazard, Tigers hit the flag and went in at a different angle than when it crossed the hazard.

 

[North Mimms]

New nike advert released.

Tag line

"Just blew it"

 

[Keyser Soze]

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.

If it was the young chinese boy he'd have already had his marching orders. I agree, he should be punished.

 

[Neddy]

Is not a massive failure of the rules officials to not have noticed this before he signed his card??

A 2 shot penalty at the time would have been much preferable to what is now happening surely?

 

[Val]

Is not a massive failure of the rules officials to not have noticed this before he signed his card??

A 2 shot penalty at the time would have been much preferable to what is now happening surely?

Absolutely, but in fairness there cannot be a rules official on every game, there just isn't enough of them. It wouldn't be the first time someone was DQ'd because of what had been found afterwards, I don't like this trial by television personally where viewers call in for slight ball movements etc.

I do remember one event where Howard Clark spotted that Phil Price tee'd up in front of the markers and asked the TV guys to clarify, this allowed Price to replay the hole (I think) and apply the appropriate penalty rather than get a DQ so it can work both ways.

 

[Dodger]

He is out.

There is no other outcome possible.

 

[bluewolf]

I do remember one event where Howard Clark spotted that Phil Price tee'd up in front of the markers and asked the TV guys to clarify, this allowed Price to replay the hole (I think) and apply the appropriate penalty rather than get a DQ so it can work both ways.

I think that was the Welsh Open and unfortunately Pricey had teed off on the next hole when they informed him, resulting in a 2 shot penalty (I think, and have not yet checked on the t'interweb). Clarkey was mortified as it was a bit of a throwaway comment when he made it.

It just goes to show that although the rules seem ridiculous sometimes, they are there for a purpose and attempt to be fair to everyone in the field....

 

[Doon frae Troon]

He has to be Disq. IMO
Interesting to see the fall out for a slow play penalty for the first time in 17 years going to a 14 year old Chinese citizen...hmmmm.

Tiger makes silly mistakes for a man of his golfing stature. I still think he lost the plot when he picked up the ball in the last Ryder Cup singles.

 

[CMAC]

Rules should be interpreted and invoked at the time.......... (only caveat would be for blatant cheating)

Can you go back after video evidence to change a football result because its clearer now

Maybe Henman actually won Wimbledon as footfaults were spotted on video after the matches finished

 

[IM01]

Is there not a new rule regarding "trial by TV" following other DQ's (Harrington maybe) were you just take the penalty.

If not....he has to be DQ'd

 

[Val]

Is there not a new rule regarding "trial by TV" following other DQ's (Harrington maybe) were you just take the penalty.

If not....he has to be DQ'd

I think that is the case but was sure it still had to be implemented before signing the card?