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

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by dave67az

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

That misunderstands things. They already RULED that there was no infraction. As Ridley said, whether or not they told Tiger there was no infraction was irrelevant.

No, they didn't. They, acting on the information they had at the time, assessed no further penalty. When more information became available later, they assessed the appropriate penalty, and waived the DQ because the penalty was not of a significant nature.

The difference is easily seen: both committees made the best decision with the available information. In Stacy's case it was on the sixth hole IIRC, and the committee could see all they needed on the tape.

In the case of the Masters, only after he'd signed his card and gave a post-round interview did more information come to light. Rules officials can only know what they know - they don't possess extra-sensory perception to know more than is available to them.

Yes, they had already ruled.  But they should NOT have ruled until they got all the information.

You make it sound like the information they got later wasn't available earlier.  It most certainly was, and all they had to do to get the information was ASK TIGER what he was doing, because he had that information from the moment he made the drop.  The failure to GET all the information when it was easily available (just like the Stacy Lewis case) is a failure to act consistently in both cases.

You say that in the Lewis case "the committee could see all they needed on the tape" as though we're supposed to pretend they didn't approach her and ASK her whether she and Travis were testing the surface.  I could just as easily cop out and say that you can see all the evidence you need on tape in Tiger's case, but I'm not willing to use different standards just because they're different tournaments.  Both are supposed to be judged by the same standards.  They didn't just inform Stacy that she was being penalized.  They asked her what she and Travis were doing before they penalized her because the tape doesn't show as must as you say it does.  They didn't wait until her press conferences after the round to see if she said something about it.

- Dave

Right or wrong, the committee made the assumption that the video was all that was needed.  It wasn't until after the fact that Tiger condemned himself in his post round interview, an interview which the committee clearly didn't even see until late that evening after being told about it by an outside party.  By then it was too late for the committee to do anything but what they ultimately did.  You clearly have an ax to grind here for some reason if you can't see any difference.  Tiger didn't think he had broken a rule.  After reviewing the evidence they had at the time, the committee didn't think so either, not even enough to pursue the matter with Tiger.  If Tiger had kept his mouth shut, this debate wouldn't be happening and everyone would be unaware that any breach occurred.

In the Stacey Lewis matter, the video itself was damning.  The discussion with her was just for confirmation.

[pepsiplusconker]

Could someone post the chat please?

[jamo]

http://thesandtrap.com/b/pga/2013_masters_final_round_chat

[Stretch]

I think it would be fair to propose that the committee, in their initial review, was probably not exactly exerting itself to find a reason disqualify the #1 player in the world and overwhelming favorite to win their tournament.

As Fourputt so eloquently puts it, if only Tiger had "kept his mouth shut" the whole thing could have been quietly swept under the rug in Butler Cabin where it was supposed to end up.

[iacas]

Since it wasn't clear before, we are no longer discussing the Tiger drop. Discuss it and your posts may vanish into the ether, regardless of what you think about it.

It's Sunday, not Friday or early Saturday. Move on.

http://thesandtrap.com/b/pga/2013_masters_final_round_chat

[Pablo68]

Fantastic start to Sunday; going to be a wild finish. I'm stoked.

How about Langer..................great start but coming back to Earth now.

[clarkeycats]

Bubba with a 10 on the par 3, now +8. Whoops.

[Mulligan Jeff]

Snedeker, Cabrera, Day, Scott, Westwood - would like to see any one of them put on the Green Jacket!

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by Mulligan Jeff

Snedeker, Cabrera, Day, Scott, Westwood - would like to see any one of them put on the Green Jacket!

Looks as if it won't be Tiger... started slowly and went downhill from there. Putting is horrid ...  for him, so far. He just doesn't do well from behind.

[Pablo68]

Don't get me wrong; I'd love to be there right now but imagine spending thousands for those tickets and getting rained on with the temps in the low 60s.

I saw a pair of tickets for all 4 rounds go on Ebay for $16,000+. At least there was free shipping on them though.

[9424tm]

I'm surprised Taylormade did not send out an R1 or at least an R11s umbrella to Jason Day. He's going old school (for Taylormade) with the R9 umbrella. Of course as often as TM pumps out equipment, that would be difficult.

[colin007]

Bubba with a 10 on the par 3, now +8. Whoops.

Anyone have the details on this?

[iacas]

Anyone have the details on this?

3 wet balls.

[onephenom]

Originally Posted by iacas

3 wet balls.

didn't na do the same thing earlier?

[MyrtleBeachGolf]

didn't na do the same thing earlier?

Yes. Exactly the same thing.

[blondzebra]

Announcers mis spoke themselves when they were saying Cabrerra needed to be cautious when making his practice swing on ten. They said it would be a penalty if he had knocked off a leaf. It is not a penalty if there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected. Now all the weekend warriors will be calling penalties on there buddies when they see them knock a leaf off a tree.

[mvmac]

[iacas]

Originally Posted by blondzebra

Announcers mis spoke themselves when they were saying Cabrerra needed to be cautious when making his practice swing on ten. They said it would be a penalty if he had knocked off a leaf. It is not a penalty if there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected. Now all the weekend warriors will be calling penalties on there buddies when they see them knock a leaf off a tree.

It's helpful if you quote the actual Rules or Decisions.

It used to be 13-2/22, but now it is included in 13-2/0.5.

Q. Rule 13-2 prohibits a player from improving certain areas. What does "improve" mean?

A. In the context of Rule 13-2 , "improve" means to change for the better so that the player gains a potential advantage with respect to the position or lie of his ball, the area of his intended stance or swing, his line of play or a reasonable extension of that line beyond the hole, or the area in which he is to drop or place a ball. Therefore, merely changing an area protected by Rule 13-2 will not be a breach of Rule 13-2 unless it creates such a potential advantage for the player in his play.

Examples of changes that are unlikely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:

• repairs a small pitch-mark on his line of play five yards in front of his ball prior to making a 150-yard approach shot from through the green;
• accidentally knocks down several leaves from a tree in his area of intended swing with a practice swing, but there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected; or
• whose ball lies in thick rough 180 yards from the green, walks forward and pulls strands of grass on his line of play and tosses them in the air to determine the direction of the wind.

Examples of changes that are likely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:

• repairs a pitch-mark through the green five yards in front of his ball and on his line of play prior to making a stroke from off the putting green that might be affected by the pitch-mark (e.g., a putt or a low-running shot);
• accidentally knocks down a single leaf from a tree in his area of intended swing with a practice swing, but, as this was one of very few leaves that might either interfere with his swing or fall and thereby distract him, the area of intended swing has been materially affected; or
• pulls strands of grass from rough a few inches behind his ball to test the wind, but thereby reduces a potential distraction for the player, or resistance to his club, in the area of his intended swing.

The determination as to whether a player has gained a potential advantage from his actions is made by reference to the situation immediately prior to his stroke. If there is a reasonable possibility that the player's action has created a potential advantage, the player is in breach of Rule 13-2 . (New)