You either believe Tiger cheated and Chamblee has the right to say so as a journalist despite the lack of evidence; or you feel that Chamblee has the right to say what he wants because he isn't a journalist; or you just don'l like Tiger and anything goes. That's how it seems to boil down anyway.
There is another option. I'm not willing to say Tiger cheated. To put it another way: I'm not really sure whether he cheated or not. I can't give him the benefit of the doubt based on character alone, and the objective evidence--circumstantial as it is--doesn't convince me either way. So, as it lies, if I were asked to "judge" Tiger, I would err on the side of saying he's innocent. However, I don't think Brandel is wrong for stating his opinion. His job is to "comment" on sports. He did that. And his "comment" has prompted discussion. That's what "commentary" is supposed to do, so he did his job well.
Fourputt, you and I have gone back and forth a lot in this thread. I'm pointing out here what I know you recognize: the weight of your conclusions is really summarized by the words in your post that I've left in above. It's what YOU THINK, YOU FEEL, and what SEEMS to YOU. I'm more than willing to accept your opinion, and I think your opinion is well supported by the facts. But the facts themselves don't say anything.
You feel Tiger is innocent because you believe in him. You base that on his entire career/record, but it's still your belief.
The world is not required to agree with you. Based on the 3/4 incidents from 2013, the issue with Sergio, boulder-gate from several years ago, etc. some folks might think that Tiger is willing to push to the very limits of the rules to improve his position. And, if he's willing to go to the very limits of the rules of golf to improve his position (i.e. boulder-gate), then is it that much of a stretch to think that he'll go that extra inch and cross the line? The extra inch would take him to "well I know it wiggled, I'm not sure if it moved or not, but because I can't be sure I'm just going to play it as if it oscillated." Some might call that cheating.
Again, I'm not one of those people who will say Tiger cheated. But I can understand why some would believe that. That's all.
No you are reading me wrong. I believe Tiger because there is absolutely no evidence to believe otherwise. There is only supposition and suspicion, and neither of those is evidence, nor in my opinion, justification for what Chamblee wrote. I've never cared one way or the other about Chamblee before this incident. He has always showed an apparent bias against Tiger, but that didn't matter to me. I have personal biases for and against quite a few sports figures, sometimes without much justification. That's just being human. I just don't see it the same way in this instance. Chamblee crossed a line that you aren't supposed to cross when you have a public soapbox. That is all I see in this. He made a serious accusation based on nothing more than his opinion, and that is simply bad journalism.