Under the new rules which allow certain tour players to escape DQ

[bobmac]

Tiger's drop has been done to death.
This is not about Tiger.
This is about whether Mark Roe would have been penalised or dq'd under the new rule

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Tiger's drop has been done to death.
This is not about Tiger.
This is about whether Mark Roe would have been penalised or dq'd under the new rule

Yes, he still would. As far as I am aware, this rule which was brought in last year is solely concerned with whether or not something is picked up by media coverage that the players were otherwise not aware of.

 

[Tommo21]

Tiger is current...thats why. The Mark Roe question is just a guess. My answer, they would still be DQd.

 

[USER1999]

Yes, he still would. As far as I am aware, this rule which was brought in last year is solely concerned with weather or not something is picked up by media coverage that the players were otherwise not aware of.

Tis is applying the wrong rule though?

 

[JezzE]

It's a long time ago, but I believe there was only 1 hole on which Roe had scored worst than Parnevik (so effectively signing for a score lower than actually taken on the wrong scorecard submitted), and but for that could have played on Sunday but with a Saturday score 12 or 13 shots worse than he actually scored. Not sure if that would have been better or worse than a DQ?

 

[Tommo21]

Yes, he still would. As far as I am aware, this rule which was brought in last year is solely concerned with weather or not something is picked up by media coverage that the players were otherwise not aware of.

You need to read the Harrington Law to understand how it came about.

http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?53735-The-Harrington-law

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Tis is applying the wrong rule though?

It certainly seems that way, but can't find any reference earlier in the thread to any other new rule which allows people to escape DQ. The only one which has been brought in recently which changes the punishment from a DQ to shot penalties is 'Harrington's Rule' as far as I am aware - although I'm happy to be corrected ...

 

[jimbob.someroo]

You need to read the Harrington Law to understand how it came about.

http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?53735-The-Harrington-law

Fully aware of that fella, had read through it when it was posted - but can't see any other "new rules" of late which change punishment from DQ to shot penalties?

 

[Tommo21]

No because they knew the rule and still done it, it Harringtons case and I suppose Woods case (which is slightly different as he didn't apply a rule correctly) neither were aware they had broken the rule.

Harrington would never have known, Tiger should have known.

 

[bobmac]

Doesn't the Harrington rule give committees the option to waive the dq rule and replace it with penalty shots?

 

[Tommo21]

Doesn't the Harrington rule give committees the option to waive the dq rule and replace it with penalty shots?

Thats how I see it Bob and thats how it panned out. IMO

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Harrington would never have known, Tiger should have known.

This thread isn't about Tiger. My response was referring to the Mark Roe incident, as Bob had asked.

 

[USER1999]

Doesn't the Harrington rule give committees the option to waive the dq rule and replace it with penalty shots?

Only if the player wasn't trying to cheat?

It looks like the rule was there to avoid a dq when the player was un aware of any infringement. Given ignorance is no excuse, then the rule was mis used in tigers case, as he should have known the rules. So should roe have done.

Harrington could not possibly have known his ball moved, so in his case a dq is hard to justify.

In the roe case, I thought the rule that applied to the paperwork side of golf had been amended, such that this could be corrected now. I'm certain that this would no longer be an issue.

 

[Val]

Harrington would never have known, Tiger should have known.

Which is the point I made later, the only similarity both had was the punishment for the rule ie 2 shots.

 

[Ethan]

The Mark Roe incident resulted in a rule change in 2005 which allowed Tournament Committees to consider entering the correct score on the wrong card as an administrative error which could be corrected without penalty.

http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/yeartodate/news05/roe.html

 

[cookelad]

Tiger's drop has been done to death.
This is not about Tiger.
This is about whether Mark Roe would have been penalised or dq'd under the new rule

With hindsight I wouldn't have dq'd him that way maybe he'd probably still be playing golf and not annoying the faeces out of everyone presenting on Sky Sports!

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Doesn't the Harrington rule give committees the option to waive the dq rule and replace it with penalty shots?

Yes. As I believe it was deemed too unfair to DQ people for something which they knew nothing about and had no way of knowing without the use of TV.

Since it was mentioned, the reason why I think Tiger should have been DQ'd is because he did know that he took an illegal drop and had done it deliberately to gain an advantage as stated in his post-round interview.

Harrington's rule isn't intended to benefit those who don't fully operate within the rules - it's for those who have done so inadvertently with no way of knowing they committed a misdemeanor.

 

[Val]

Yes. As I believe it was deemed too unfair to DQ people for something which they knew nothing about and had no way of knowing without the use of TV.

Since it was mentioned, the reason why I think Tiger should have been DQ'd is because he did know that he took an illegal drop and had done it deliberately to gain an advantage as stated in his post-round interview.

Harrington's rule isn't intended to benefit those who don't fully operate within the rules - it's for those who have done so inadvertently with no way of knowing they committed a misdemeanor.

Correct, which is why Tiger.........................wrong thread

 

[bobmac]

The Mark Roe incident resulted in a rule change in 2005 which allowed Tournament Committees to consider entering the correct score on the wrong card as an administrative error which could be corrected without penalty.

http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/yeartodate/news05/roe.html

Please see post no.4
Edit

 

[Tommo21]

This thread isn't about Tiger. My response was referring to the Mark Roe incident, as Bob had asked.

Calm down man......my answer was to Valentino, jog on.