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

[boogielicious]

I hope Tiger goes on the win.  Not because of the decision or because I am a Tiger fan.  But because this will become the all time longest thread in Sand Trap History!

[trh98]

Having had a bit more time to think about this, I think the right outcome has been reached. Had the committee done a decent job of investigating the incident during the round yesterday, then Tiger would have been penalised 2 shots before he signed his score card. Tiger should not be penalised for the failings of the committee, so a two shot penalty but no DQ is correct given the circumstances. There is leeway under rule 33, in the general exception (not 33-7 as has been erroneously mentioned). A botched job all round, but the right and fair result in the end. The fact that nothing was released to the public regarding the committee's initial review of the drop is a bit of an indictment of the way things are run, a completely lack of transparency that in many ways fed the resulting twitter/media storm.

So, basically, no player should ever be DQ'd for violating a rule? I thought it was a player's responsibility, not the committee, to abide by the rules and sign a correct scorecard.

[jamo]

http://thesandtrap.com/chat

[Golfingdad]

They showed examples with both Camillo Vejagas and Padraig Harrington.

As I understood, those situations are what led to them creating the rule ... Not that they were situations where it was applied.

[Ernest Jones]

The algorithms required to stage arguments in the GOAT thread just got a little more complex. Does Tiger need 20 majors now?

[Ernest Jones]

Is there any coverage yet? My TV optons all start at 3pm local time.

[Mordan]

Originally Posted by jamo

Tiger (or Tiger's people) on Twitter, just a bit ago:

Tiger Woods ‏@TigerWoods 10m

At hole #15, I took a drop that I thought was correct and in accordance with the rules. I was unaware at that time I had violated any rules.

Tiger Woods ‏@TigerWoods 8m

I didn’t know I had taken an incorrect drop prior to signing my scorecard. Subsequently, I met with the Masters Committee Saturday morning..

Tiger Woods ‏@TigerWoods 7m

and was advised they had reviewed the incident prior to the completion of my round. Their initial determination...

Tiger Woods ‏@TigerWoods 5m

was that there was no violation, but they had additional concerns based on my post-round interview. After discussing the situation...

Tiger Woods ‏@TigerWoods 5m

...with them this morning, I was assessed a two-shot penalty. I understand and accept the penalty and respect the Committees’ decision.

Such a poor effort from the committee not to talk to Tiger when initially assessing his drop. I know we're in the days of HDTV but come on surely any real investigation requires talking to the main protagonist??

[Mordan]

Originally Posted by trh98

So, basically, no player should ever be DQ'd for violating a rule?

I thought it was a player's responsibility, not the committee, to abide by the rules and sign a correct scorecard.

Nope. If it was not raised with the committee prior to him signing his card then of course DQ would be correct. But if the committee had done their job correctly then he would have ended up signing at -1. Tiger should not be penalised (more than the correct 2 shot penalty for a bad drop) for their failings.

[LeftyTrevor]

[quote name="MyrtleBeachGolf" url="/t/65568/2013-masters-discussion-thread-update-with-possible-illegal-drop-from-tiger-post-343/720#post_831740"] They showed examples with both Camillo Vejagas and Padraig Harrington.

As I understood, those situations are what led to them creating the rule ... Not that they were situations where it was applied.[/quote] That's what I understood from the discussions this morning. They also said since this is the first time the rule is used it will most likely be dubbed "Tigers rule".

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Mordan

The statement from the Competition Committee seems to imply that they're saying that this is an exceptional circumstance and thus they're waiving the penalty of disqualification.

They're basing this on the fact that they initially reviewed video of Tiger's drop, and apparently without talking to him decided his drop was ok. They then allowed him to sign his card without mentioning this to him. And because of this his violation of a pretty straight forward rule is ok, because the committee screwed up.

Setting aside Tiger's brain fart, this is a major mistake by the tournament committee. How did they review his drop without talking to him? And given that they didn't talk to him regarding the issue, what difference does it make to him signing an incorrect score card?

Such a disappointment that what could be a fantastic Masters is going to be soured by an incident that could have been avoidable on quite a few levels.

Since they had ruled among themselves that he had not committed a breach, the implication is that even had he mentioned it, they would have given the same answer.  The later review wasn't made until Saturday morning, so he wouldn't have known different before returning his card.

[Rick Martin]

Originally Posted by atb5079

Here's another thought, albeit a dumb one but just curious. Why did TW ask Freddie for a ruling? I just dont get why players do that? It clearly means nothing. Tiger made his drop, he asked Freddie if it was ok and Freddie said yes. Freddie is a friend and coworker essentially; not an official. Why was there not an official there when he made the drop. That is not TW's fault. That is on Augusta.

Are you talking Dustin Johnson because he played w/ Freddy.

[Rick Martin]

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones

Is there any coverage yet? My TV optons all start at 3pm local time.

masters.com had internet stream of Amen Corner

[rehmwa]

Originally Posted by Zeph

Maybe they should use more rules officials to follow the players and try to pick up on any issues before the score card is signed, to give the players some help and time to get things right.

this

[boogielicious]

The rule states:

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 the hazard , 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

Because b provides "no limit  to how far behind",  can't you drop further back than the point in A as long as it is on the same line?  Tiger was really penalized because it was not on the same line, correct?

[laconic517]

Originally Posted by rehmwa

this

yeah

Why there isnt a rules official with every group, especially for a major, is beyond me.

The purse is 8 million dollars lol and the masters has only 4mins of commercials.  Theres no monetary excuse.

[jamo]

http://thesandtrap.com/chat

[trh98]

Nope. If it was not raised with the committee prior to him signing his card then of course DQ would be correct. But if the committee had done their job correctly then he would have ended up signing at -1. Tiger should not be penalised (more than the correct 2 shot penalty for a bad drop) for their failings.

I guess I just see it differently. It is the player's responsibility to sign a correct scorecard. I don't think the committee is at fault. If Tiger had asked for a ruling at that time and they had told him the drop was fine, I would blame the committee. That is not what happened. We can't go by "ifs". Tiger signed an incorrect scorecard without any feedback from the committee, without him asking for a ruling, with him just simply violating a rule, and he signed the card. That should be a DQ.

[laconic517]

Originally Posted by trh98

I guess I just see it differently. It is the player's responsibility to sign a correct scorecard. I don't think the committee is at fault.

If Tiger had asked for a ruling at that time and they had told him the drop was fine, I would blame the committee. That is not what happened. We can't go by "ifs".

Tiger signed an incorrect scorecard without any feedback from the committee, without him asking for a ruling, with him just simply violating a rule, and he signed the card. That should be a DQ.

If you want to do it that way though you should never inform the players of a penalty so its even for everyone.  If its truly a players responsibility and you want to protect the field, you need to make it the same for everyone (which obviously wont happen because not every shoft by every player is on camera).

Augusta blew it plain and simple.