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

[boston blackie]

This BS has ruined the Masters for me.  All you armchair quarterbacks, as well as all the windbags on the Golf Channel should take a lesson from a 14 year old, and respect the decision of the rules committee.

[eich41]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Freddie who? Couples? That makes no sense ... Tiger was playing with Scott piercy and Luke Donald.

I've been wondering that as well.  But I'm just ****ing blind so what do I know.

[HOT IRISH]

It was an honest mistake at the time but if Woods doesn't withdraw it's heading into the territory of cheating by knowingly gaining an unfair advantage over your competitors. The masters commitee have made a right mess out of this with that stupid decision. If Woods plays on it could be the worst masters ever & if he wins it will taint the tournament & his beloved major record forever. It's time for him to do the decent thing for once....

[onephenom]

Do they have a rules official with every group?  If not, why not?

There is one available to ask for. A rules official's job is not to walk around and say "hey, you're about to break this rule!" "Hey, make sure you remember how to drop!"

[trh98]

How many times has Rule 33-7 been used? Anyone know? Not saying this about Tiger in particular but I don't remember anyone who would normally be DQ'd getting a pass under "exceptional circumstances."

[Zeph]

So basically we should erase all of Lebron Jame's career stats because every time he drives to the basket, he travels; right? Even though the refs rarely call him on it. But if you look at the footage, he travels; almost every time. Its Lebron's fault right?

It would help if your analogy involved golf. Everyone jumps in race walking, does that mean Tiger shouldn't be DQ'd? More TV-time, higher definition and viewers calling in is obviously hurting the players. Perhaps more than any, the players in the spotlight. 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.

[LeftyTrevor]

How many times has Rule 33-7 been used? Anyone know? Not saying this about Tiger in particular but I don't remember anyone who would normally be DQ'd getting a pass under "exceptional circumstances."

This is the first time they will use the rule.

[laconic517]

Originally Posted by trh98

How many times has Rule 33-7 been used? Anyone know?

Not saying this about Tiger in particular but I don't remember anyone who would normally be DQ'd getting a pass under "exceptional circumstances."

Brandel told a story about Bobby Locke a while ago.  Moving his coin because it was in someones line and then forgetting to move it back to tap in to win the british open.

His argument was that he gained no advantage because hed make the putt anyway.  IMO thats a cop out and if a rule is truly a rule it should be enforced no matter what.  I feel like theres definitely precedence for this ruling based on the Bobby Locke example.

[Stretch]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

The committee had already ruled that he had proceeded correctly. He then signed and returned his card. The committee then reviewed the ruling and determined that he had dropped incorrectly after all.

I just don't believe this. Full stop.

[MyrtleBeachGolf]

How many times has Rule 33-7 been used? Anyone know? Not saying this about Tiger in particular but I don't remember anyone who would normally be DQ'd getting a pass under "exceptional circumstances."

They showed examples with both Camillo Vejagas and Padraig Harrington.

[clarkeycats]

The official statement: Today's pin positions:

[Mordan]

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.

[MyrtleBeachGolf]

The penalty of Disqualification was waived by the Committee under rule 33 as the Committee had previously reviewed the information and made its initial determination prior to the finish of the players round. That is the important part of this ruling.

[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.

[onephenom]

Anyone else notice they replaced brandel in the discussion with nobility and Lerner? :)

[clarkeycats]

Looks like Tiger will be playing then.

[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.