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 30

post #523 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOX View Post

They could tell it wasn't a couple inches. He clearly went to the divot and then moved back a step or two.

And if you think that moving a couple of yards is ok, imagine if there was a tree in the way and he went 2 yards sideways (no nearer the hole) to get a better line.
post #524 of 1228

Okay, so Morning Drive is finally talking about it. Whiny Gary Williams seems to be siding with not penalizing/DQing TW since "nearly as possible" is a grey area/vague and what Tiger said in post-round interviews has no influence on what actually happened during the round (can't be used against him).

 

John Cook is very non-committal about the whole thing because of the vagueness of the rule.

post #525 of 1228

any chance that he could play it off that he dropped farther back based on the assumption that his ball would roll forward to where he hit from originally?  If he dropped directly at his divot it looked like he would have rolled forward.


Should he have re-dropped if he assumed it would roll forward but it didnt?

post #526 of 1228
It really doesnt look like he violated the spirit of the rule nowhere in the rules does it say to drop it in your own divot by the video it looked as though he dropped a maybe a couple of feet away.I am not a tiger fan at all. Maybe even a tiger hater but I really cant see him being dqd for what I saw on the two videos that was definatly not two yards away from his original spot. That may not even been his divot you are looking at.For all we know he could have already replaced his divot and dropped it right on top of the old one.Point being there are really only two poeple who know whether he did not drop in the correct place tiger and the caddy.He will not be dqd for this and he may even just get the officials involved for every drop in the future so there is no question of his drops.
post #527 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by laconic517 View Post

any chance that he could play it off that he dropped farther back based on the assumption that his ball would roll forward to where he hit from originally?  If he dropped directly at his divot it looked like he would have rolled forward.


Should he have re-dropped if he assumed it would roll forward but it didnt?

He should have dropped as close as possible to his previous shot. If it rolled forward of where he hit his previous shot he just re-drops. Remember that his divot is forward of where his ball would have been so he can't end up in his divot.

Dropping 6 inches behind his divot would be ok, 2 yards is a very different story, especially as he's stated he did that to give himself the perfect yardage.
post #528 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mordan View Post


And if you think that moving a couple of yards is ok, imagine if there was a tree in the way and he went 2 yards sideways (no nearer the hole) to get a better line.

Geez mordan....!!

post #529 of 1228

 

13 of the last 14 winners were in the top 5 after round 2. Exception is Schwartzel in 2011. He was 12th  (Azinger tweet).

 

 

post #530 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mordan View Post


He should have dropped as close as possible to his previous shot. If it rolled forward of where he hit his previous shot he just re-drops. Remember that his divot is forward of where his ball would have been so he can't end up in his divot.

Dropping 6 inches behind his divot would be ok, 2 yards is a very different story, especially as he's stated he did that to give himself the perfect yardage.

 

 

Thats your subjective opinion.


What if I felt like he had to drop it right behind his divot? :)  How close is close?  The spirit of the rule seems to be if you have a lost ball and need to return back to where you previously hit.  Obviously something like dropping away from a tree or something is a completely different story and against the spirit of the rule.

post #531 of 1228

2013 Masters Discussion Thread, Update with Possible Illegal Drop from Tiger Po

Are they using Shotlink at this tournament? They should have detailed records of the yardages for both shots
post #532 of 1228

Yes he DID. He specifically said he purposely dropped 2 yards farther behind and hit it 2 yards easier. DQ the cheater.

post #533 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by laconic517 View Post


Thats your subjective opinion.


What if I felt like he had to drop it right behind his divot? :)  How close is close?  The spirit of the rule seems to be if you have a lost ball and need to return back to where you previously hit.  Obviously something like dropping away from a tree or something is a completely different story and against the spirit of the rule.

Because its quite possible to try and drop on a spot and miss by 6 inches. That's all I meant, I think missing by 6 inches is quite feasible as a best effort to drop as close as possible. 2 yards is not, especially when you get on TV after the round and say that you fancied that yardage more!!
post #534 of 1228

Mordan is right.
 

post #535 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickyBobby131 View Post

Yes he DID. He specifically said he purposely dropped 2 yards farther behind and hit it 2 yards easier. DQ the cheater.

 

 

cheating and a mistake are 2 different things.

 

Intent :)

post #536 of 1228

The rule states that you determine the line where the ball last crossed the hazard and go back from there as far as you want.  Part B below.  It can be behind the point in A.  If the ball curves in flight, the entry point to the hazard could be left or right of the line from the original shot.

 

 

26-1. Relief For Ball In Water Hazard

It is a question of fact whether a ball that has not been found after having been struck toward a water hazard is in the hazard. In the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty that a ball struck toward a water hazard, but not found, is in thehazard, the player must proceed under Rule 27-1.

If a ball is found in a water hazard or if it is known or virtually certain that a ball that has not been found is in the water hazard (whether the ball lies in water or not), the player may under penalty of one stroke:

a. Proceed under the stroke and distance provision of Rule 27-1 by playing a ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played (see Rule 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

post #537 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Martin View Post

Watching Morning Drive - took 57 minutes before they even broached the topic on TW's drop. 

 

They said that they're going to talk about it in depth at Live from the Masters at 9:30.

 

I honestly don't see how they can't dq him.  It wasn't any attempt to cheat, I just think he was thinking that he was dropping under 26-1b.  I think it was just a HUGE brain fart.

 

After giving the kid a penalty for slow play (rightfully so) and defending that, I can't see that there's an option. 

post #538 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickyBobby131 View Post DQ the cheater.

 

Hey, leave his personal life out of this....

post #539 of 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffj View Post

Are they using Shotlink at this tournament? They should have detailed records of the yardages for both shots
Nope. Augusta don't condone that kind of technology.
Quote:
But if he did in fact violate the rules, and there is reasonable (though by no means overwhelming) evidence to suggest he did, Augusta is bound by the rules of play to disqualify him, regardless of the impact on the weekend's telecast and the sport itself. This has already been a Masters marred by talk of rules application because of a slow-play penalty applied to Tianlang Guan; this decision, whichever way the ruling goes, will only keep talk (and criticism) rolling.

When asked about Guan's penalty after his round Friday, Woods issued what could be a prophetic statement. He said the decision to penalize Guan was "unfortunate," but "rules are rules".

Woods has apparently never been disqualified from a tournament. However, he has been penalized on occasion, most recently earlier this year at the HSBC Abu Dhabi championship. He suffered a two-shot penalty and missed the cut. The reason for the penalty? An improper drop.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/golf-devil-ball-golf/tiger-woods-might-disqualified-masters-113126819--golf.html

I honestly don't see how they can't DQ him. The tough part of the rules is being DQ'd for something which normally would just cost you a shot. Your score may affect others, which I suppose is reason to keep the rule as it is, but during the first three rounds, I don't know if it makes a difference. That goes for any professional having been DQ'd on similar matters of course.
post #540 of 1228

If he was going to be DQ'd would it have happened already or is it still possible?

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)