or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › 2013 Masters Discussion Thread, Update with Tiger's Illegal Drop (Post #343)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2013 Masters Discussion Thread, Update with Tiger's Illegal Drop (Post #343) - Page 21

post #361 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cracker24 View Post

Eric, given that it seems you're the only person who noticed this and then made other people aware. I'll remind you now that you could be about to become one of the most disliked men in golf if Tiger gets DQ'ed.

I would shank him myself with a rusty spatula...
post #362 of 1228

Well I Paused each shot from the ESPN video.  Put them side by side.  The ball was MAYBE a couple feet behind his original divot.  I didn't see his drop but it is possible it bounced back a foot or too.  Watch the video...its not that far away from his orginal divot...and if it was dropped near his divot it is within the rules. 

post #363 of 1228
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallstreet View Post

Well I Paused each shot from the ESPN video.  Put them side by side.  The ball was MAYBE a couple feet behind his original divot.  I didn't see his drop but it is possible it bounced back a foot or too.  Watch the video...its not that far away from his orginal divot...and if it was dropped near his divot it is within the rules. 

 

The hill slopes the other direction. It wouldn't bounce backwards.

 

I haven't watched the replays. Two yards could easily look very close on TV though - telephoto lenses compress things like CRAZY. Two yards is not "as nearly as possible" to the original spot.

post #364 of 1228

I just think we are missing something.

 

I know Feherty said he could drop 2 yards behind his original spot, which was perhaps the 4th option you pointed out of a drop zone. I don't understand it obviously, and I don't think you are wrong, but I know it was brought up before he replayed the shot, because I expressly did a double take and asked myself why Feherty could say he could drop 2m behind him, but it was 100%, most definitely said.

post #365 of 1228

And Feherty also talked about it being red staked, which also sounded wrong, but I until I see a replay up, I cant be 100% sure that he said red. Still close though. Im positive he claimed it to be red.

post #366 of 1228
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

And Feherty also talked about it being red staked, which also sounded wrong, but I until I see a replay up, I cant be 100% sure that he said red. Still close though. Im positive he claimed it to be red.

 

Whether it was red is completely irrelevant. Tiger didn't drop within two clublengths of where it crossed.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

I know Feherty said he could drop 2 yards behind his original spot, which was perhaps the 4th option you pointed out of a drop zone. I don't understand it obviously, and I don't think you are wrong, but I know it was brought up before he replayed the shot, because I expressly did a double take and asked myself why Feherty could say he could drop 2m behind him, but it was 100%, most definitely said.

 

(Bold) No, that's not an option unless that line also happens to be along the line where it last crossed and the flagstick.

 

I don't think Feherty said that, and if he did, he'd have been wrong.

post #367 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

And Feherty also talked about it being red staked, which also sounded wrong, but I until I see a replay up, I cant be 100% sure that he said red. Still close though. Im positive he claimed it to be red.

It was not red. I remarked about it in the chat, and I'm pretty sure Feherty recanted a minute later. Either way, we saw enough close-ups of the line to be able to tell that it was yellow, not red. That doesn't really change anything though, Tiger didn't take relief laterally.
post #368 of 1228

Its also just perfectly possible that he was within two club lengths.

post #369 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

Its also just perfectly possible that he was within two club lengths.

Or does the rule say it has to be as close to the original spot as possible? I'm really not sure...
post #370 of 1228
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

Its also just perfectly possible that he was within two club lengths.

 

Of WHAT?

 

That's not "as nearly as possible." The rule says nothing about two clublengths except for laterals played from within two clublengths OF THE LATERAL HAZARD line.

 

C'mon. The rules are online. Read them if you want to discuss this please.

post #371 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

You guys signed off the chat prematurely.

 

See my Twitter feed, or https://www.facebook.com/iacas/posts/10151392268769227 .

 

This is awesome......if Tiger gets DQ'd he may never talk to the press again....LOL....Thanks Erik, great stuff

post #372 of 1228

I think it's a non-issue.  Watched the replay just now on ESPN, recorded, and re-watched, and re-watched again.  You can see his original divot while he's dropping, and he's roughly 1 yard directly behind it.  How strict are we talking about on the "as nearly as possible" rule?  Nobody is expected to drop in their divot, are they?

 

By the way, Feherty is wrong about how good his first shot was.  (He basically said it was going to skip, draw back, and go in)  That thing very well might have skipped over the green ... it hit the flag first about 2 feet up, and based on where his second shot hit and ended up ... he very well could have bogeyed anyway.

post #373 of 1228
Yeah you guys have to be kidding with this stuff. There's a reason no one else is talking about this, because its not worth talking about.
post #374 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 

Of WHAT?

 

That's not "as nearly as possible." The rule says nothing about two clublengths except for laterals played from within two clublengths OF THE LATERAL HAZARD line.

 

C'mon. The rules are online. Read them if you want to discuss this please.

 



I've pointed out multiple times that it doesn't make sense to me, as I generally know the rules. Point is, i'm just wondering if we haven't all missed something. Would he not have two club lengths from the original shot? Or same spot?

post #375 of 1228
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

I think it's a non-issue.  Watched the replay just now on ESPN, recorded, and re-watched, and re-watched again.  You can see his original divot while he's dropping, and he's roughly 1 yard directly behind it.  How strict are we talking about on the "as nearly as possible" rule?  Nobody is expected to drop in their divot, are they?

 

Telephoto lenses on cameras severely compress things. That's how ten foot putts look like they're three feet long sometimes.

 

They're expected to drop close to it - intentionally dropping two yards back is not "as nearly as possible."

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by walk18 View Post

Yeah you guys have to be kidding with this stuff. There's a reason no one else is talking about this, because its not worth talking about.

 

The #1 player in the world possibly taking a bad drop and possibly deserving of a DQ is "not worth talking about"? Okay.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

I've pointed out multiple times that it doesn't make sense to me, as I generally know the rules. Point is, i'm just wondering if we haven't all missed something. Would he not have two club lengths from the original shot? Or same spot?

 

Then stop mentioning two clublengths. That doesn't matter here.

post #376 of 1228

I am still banned from the chat.  Can I get unbanned for tomorrow? 

 

I apologize for my goof up haha. 

post #377 of 1228

I would argue that the "as nearly as possible" language is just a bad, bad rule......way too ambiguous...does it mean 1 foot, 3 feet....does it mean you have to try and drop it within an inch of the edge of the divot.......it should be governed by a club length rule.

 

That said, it is not ruled by clublength......and Tiger seemed to admit that he intentionally dropped it back of his prior spot.....

post #378 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallStriker View Post

I would argue that the "as nearly as possible" language is just a bad, bad rule......way too ambiguous...does it mean 1 foot, 3 feet....does it mean you have to try and drop it within an inch of the edge of the divot.......it should be governed by a club length rule.

 

That said, it is not ruled by clublength......and Tiger seemed to admit that he intentionally dropped it back of his prior spot.....

 

a. Proceed under the stroke and distance provision ofRule 27-1 by playing a ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played (seeRule 20-5); or
b. Drop a ball behind the water hazard, keeping the point at which the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard directly between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped, with no limit to how far behind the water hazard the ball may be dropped; or
c. As additional options available only if the ball last crossed the margin of a lateral water hazard, drop a ball outside the water hazard within two club-lengths of and not nearer the hole than (i) the point where the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard or (ii) a point on the opposite margin of the water hazard equidistant from the hole.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › 2013 Masters Discussion Thread, Update with Tiger's Illegal Drop (Post #343)