Tiger to be DQ'd?

Tiger not being DQ is not his fault its the committees however he could DQ himself as he admitted taking the drop illegally (maybe not in those words though). That is not trial by television that is self refereeing and for me the rule 33- whatever should not have been used.

It is what it is and so be it, doesn't make it right though.

Anyway, final round looks poised for a good finish.
 
This has now set an interesting precedent!
last year in a ladies open - one of my ladies was DQ'd - her playing partners claimed that she played a wrong ball on something like 5th hole - but they didnt tell her at the time. they waited until she had signed her card and handed it in.
they then went to the committee to say her score was wrong, she should have had a penalty added.
unfortunately my lady cant remember what she had for breakfast let alone what she did on a certain hole. As she didnt have a good score anyway, no 2s or any other prize winning stuff, i told her that if she couldnt remember what the situation was then there was no harm in her accepting the DQ.

So, if this had happened this year, she would have come away with an extra couple of penalty strokes as i would have argued that she was not aware of the rules!

hmmm...this is gonna be messy!
 
At the end of the Day, Tiger's been allowed to play on - right or wrong.
The Master's Tournament Committee are the Villains here. Not Tiger.
Tiger broke the Rules and has been penalised - in, I think, the majority of eyes not enough but that's done and dusted now.
He could have withdrawn but, under the Rules, he doesn't have to.

My biggest worry now is what the "outside World" will take from this.

Forget the facts for now - how will Joe Average in the street see it?
He doesn't really understand Golf that much and, to his eyes, Tiger has had the Rules bent to the extreme to allow him to continue.
Whether they have or not is largely irrelevent to those outside Golf.
They will see a game that has given the impression that it has changed rules to let the best player in the World play - that can't be good for the image of Golf.
They will see a game that has Rules so complicated that even the World No.1 gets them wrong - that can't be good either.

The whole thing is a mess and the blame lies squarely at the Tournament Committee's door.

This is a tarnished Masters. It'll forever be debated, should Tiger win, as to whether he should be there to win or not. If he doesn't win it will be debated forever that the incident distracted him and the final result is false. Should Tiger lose by a shot then I don't want to imagine the meltdown that will occur.

The whole episode is a complete and utter cock-up. It hasn't done the Masters any good, it hasn't done Tiger any good and it hasn't done the game any favours either.

Anyone got a Time Machine so we can go back to Thursday morning and start all over again...?
 
Heidi said:
This has now set an interesting precedent! !
Click to expand...

Probably, but not the one you describe. Tiger's DQ was not waived because he wasn't aware of the rules but essentially because the Committee changed its ruling on the incident after his card was submitted.

The wording of Decision 33-7/4.5 is very tight:

However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d.

And the examples that follow that are very specific.

The lady in your description could easily have known the facts of her playing a wrong ball - she could have identified it as not being hers.
 
Colin L said:
Probably, but not the one you describe. Tiger's DQ was not waived because he wasn't aware of the rules but essentially because the Committee changed its ruling on the incident after his card was submitted.

The wording of Decision 33-7/4.5 is very tight:

However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d.

The lady in your description could easily have known the facts of her playing a wrong ball - she could have identified it as not being hers.
Click to expand...
I don't really want to start this all over again but could Tiger have reasonably known that he'd breached a rule?
Is it reasonable to assume that the World No.1 who has been playing since he could walk would know one of the most common rules?

I think this is where most people can't get their heads around the ruling.
 
Colin L said:
Probably, but not the one you describe. Tiger's DQ was not waived because he wasn't aware of the rules but essentially because the Committee changed its ruling on the incident after his card was submitted.

The wording of Decision 33-7/4.5 is very tight:

However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d.

And the examples that follow that are very specific.

The lady in your description could easily have known the facts of her playing a wrong ball - she could have identified it as not being hers.
Click to expand...
No no - the ball in question was hers! she had a ball in play, but lost it in the rough, looked for a couple of mins and then thought she might go back to the tee to stick another into play. as she turned round to walk back, her ball was found by one of the members, so she played it.
her 5 mins searching time wasnt up
unfortunately, as i said, she has the memory span of a gnat, and couldnt argue with the committee cos she couldnt remember.

she actually didnt do anything wrong. her playing partners said cos she had started to walk back then she should have abandoned the ball and played 3 off the tee

it was all very messy - and a DQ didnt hurt.

But it is going to throw up a lot of issues in club golf
 
Imurg said:
I don't really want to start this all over again but could Tiger have reasonably known that he'd breached a rule?
Click to expand...

Yes he could. It is his responsibility to know that rules and facts of what he did were clear. 33-7/4.5 is about waiving a DQ because facts come to light later that the player could not have known - such as when it takes close-up HD television to show that his ball had moved. And that as far as I am aware is not why the DQ was waived in his case anyway.
 
Do you think Tiger could claim a convenient "injury" this morning which prevents him playing the final round?
gives him an opportunity to withdraw without disaggreeing with committee
 
Heidi said:
This has now set an interesting precedent!
last year in a ladies open - one of my ladies was DQ'd - her playing partners claimed that she played a wrong ball on something like 5th hole - but they didnt tell her at the time. they waited until she had signed her card and handed it in.
Click to expand...

Is THAT in the rules?
 
Fascinating stuff all this and an incident which has clearly divided opinion down the middle, especially when you throw what happened to Guan into the mix too!

I'm not 100% sure where I stand, other than to say that something unsavoury has happened, and regardless of the rights and wrongs of various parties in the whole episode, I struggled to get even remotely excited watching the golf last night, which is a shame as normally I'm glued to the coverage without averting my eyes until the final putt is holed
 
birdieman said:
If you don't understand why there is worldwide criticism of Woods for not DQ'ing himself you don't understand golf. It's a sport where there is no referee watching, you referee yourself and you are entrusted to play fair and not cheat. A cheat tag at golf sticks with you for life and makes you a pariah at any golf club. It is never forgotten by other members.
Even if, in this case, the committee can be blamed for giving him a way out Tiger should have the moral fibre to handle this himself in the correct manner, walk away and his reputation would have been greatly enhanced by taking it on the chin.
Incidentally I am a Tiger fan and enjoy watching him as much as anyone, not a hater. It is nothing personal, people like me want the spirit of the game to be upheld.
Click to expand...


Plus 1.....that is my feelings exactly and I am a great Tiger fan....not so much now though.
 
JezzE said:
Fascinating stuff all this and an incident which has clearly divided opinion down the middle, especially when you throw what happened to Guan into the mix too!

I'm not 100% sure where I stand, other than to say that something unsavoury has happened, and regardless of the rights and wrongs of various parties in the whole episode, I struggled to get even remotely excited watching the golf last night, which is a shame as normally I'm glued to the coverage without averting my eyes until the final putt is holed
Click to expand...

Jezz,do you think that 'outside agencies' clouded the competition committee's ruling?


i.e. TV audiences/exposure for sponsors etc?

Just asking as it was thrown around over a cuppa and a bacon roll down the club this morning after the hurricane had mauled me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rufuss Thoo
Couldn't positively identify ball
2 3
Replies
43
Views
5K
salfordlad
S
T
Dropping a ball when original thought to be in water hazard
Replies
0
Views
477
Titanic
T
T
Dropping a ball when original thought to be in water hazard
Replies
10
Views
2K
rulie
R
J
Water hazard
Replies
18
Views
3K
jusme
J
C
Some interesting facts about the Augusta National
Replies
9
Views
2K
HomerJSimpson
HomerJSimpson
Top