Brandel Gives Tiger an F/ Tiger's Agent Hints at Legal Action Against Chamblee

[Golfingdad]

For whatever it is worth Brandel didn't say "Tiger was a Cavalier" he said he "was cavalier with the rules".  The un-capitalized word cavalier means showing disregard or acting with disregard for something that is important or serious.

Well, first of all, I wasn't trying to be too technical there, I was just trying to be smart-alecky and funny.  Intentionally going with the wrong definition WAS precisely the point of my silly joke.  Misdirection, if you will.  (Whether or not you find it funny ... well that's a whole different story)

However, since you're nit-picking ...

According to dictionary.com, what I quoted was the first definition of the un-capitalized version of the word.  The capitalized version, Cavalier, apparently means one thing and one thing only: "a supporter of Charles I during the English Civil War."

[jamo]

So what was the point of Brandel's cheating story?

He just needed to get it off his chest. It was eating him up inside!

[ghalfaire]

Well, first of all, I wasn't trying to be too technical there, I was just trying to be smart-alecky and funny.  Intentionally going with the wrong definition WAS precisely the point of my silly joke.  Misdirection, if you will.  (Whether or not you find it funny ... well that's a whole different story)

However, since you're nit-picking   ...

According to dictionary.com, what I quoted was the first definition of the un-capitalized version of the word.  The capitalized version, Cavalier, apparently means one thing and one thing only: "a supporter of Charles I during the English Civil War."

You're probably correct.  I was just going from memory and didn't look it up.  I suspect I was probably off topic in any case and am normally not a grammar Nazi as I'm not an English major and not even sure one could call English my first language.  I guess one of my first however so I should have known better than to comment without looking at a dictionary.

But on topic I'd say from the volume of comments on this thread Brandel did his job and likely get a raise for increasing readership. I don't think he will get sued and if Tiger did sue him he would probably lose (at least in court, not sure about public opinion).  Having said all of that I'll repeat that I don't personally believe Brandel should have implied Tiger cheated, but I doubt (I don't know for sure) Brandel has any personal animosity with Tiger.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

"Your honor, I object to this entire case and believe it should be withdrawn.  Not only did my client not slander the plaintiff, but the plaintiff is clearly a horseman, a mounted soldier, a knight, if you will."

For whatever it is worth Brandel didn't say "Tiger was a Cavalier" he said he "was cavalier with the rules".  The un-capitalized word cavalier means showing disregard or acting with disregard for something that is important or serious.

Which he didn't necessarily do.  Tiger screwed up, he made a mistake, he didn't know the rules as well as maybe he should have, all of the preceding?  None of those indicates being cavalier, just being human.  Calling someone "cavalier" indicates that here was a certain amount of intent behind his negligence.  Chamblee flat out called him a cheater, but put it in a such a cowardly way that many people will actually defend what he wrote, just as a few are trying to do here.  Chamblee said exactly what he wanted to say, but he wordsmithed himself out of harms way, or so he hopes.

[phan52]

OK.  I'll bite ... what do you infer from his comments?

That Tiger was cavalier with the rules.

[phan52]

Well, first of all, I wasn't trying to be too technical there, I was just trying to be smart-alecky and funny.  Intentionally going with the wrong definition WAS precisely the point of my silly joke.  Misdirection, if you will.  (Whether or not you find it funny ... well that's a whole different story) However, since you're nit-picking ;-)   ... According to dictionary.com, what I quoted was the first definition of the un-capitalized version of the word.  The capitalized version, Cavalier, apparently means one thing and one thing only: "a supporter of Charles I during the English Civil War."

Merriam Webster also says that it is a breed of dog. Maybe he is inferring that Tiger is a dog? ;-)

[k-troop]

@phan52 seriously just admit that you're trolling now. You want us to believe that YOU truly believe that Chamblee's story didn't accuse Tiger of cheating. That the monologue of Chamblee's cheating was meaningless, an that he didn't intend anything more than the strict meaning of only six words of the story. And that it's more reasonable to conclude that Chamblee was calling Tiger a dog than a cheater. You're backed into a logical corner. You can't escape it by digging a hole.

[phan52]

@phan52@ seriously just admit that you're trolling now. You want us to believe that YOU truly believe that Chamblee's story didn't accuse Tiger of cheating. That the monologue of Chamblee's cheating was meaningless, an that he didn't intend anything more than the strict meaning of only six words of the story. And that it's more reasonable to conclude that Chamblee was calling Tiger a dog than a cheater. You're backed into a logical corner. You can't escape it by digging a hole.

Lol! What, you want me to admit that you are right about what I am thinking? Seriously? Show me the ironclad logic of that when you show me a quote where Chamblee called Tiger a cheater. It is my opinion that he is disappointed in Tiger for being careless about the rules and this is his way of saying it. That is what I think, not what you say I think. Chamblee appears to be more focused on what Tiger did at the BMW where he argued his position even after he saw that the ball obviously moved. I personally would have focused on what he did at the Masters because there, he was truly cavalier. He pretty much avoided being DQed on a technicality. THAT is my opinion on the matter.

[RonTheSavage]

Hopefully nobody posted this yet but Chamblee apologized on twitter. Im paraphasing but he said he went to far and no golf channel didnt make him apologize. He hopes to apologize to Tiger to his face at some point.

[Valleygolfer]

[quote name="k-troop" url="/t/70622/brandel-gives-tiger-an-f-tigers-agent-hints-at-legal-action-against-chamblee/120#post_911459"]@phan52@ seriously just admit that you're trolling now. You want us to believe that YOU truly believe that Chamblee's story didn't accuse Tiger of cheating. That the monologue of Chamblee's cheating was meaningless, an that he didn't intend anything more than the strict meaning of only six words of the story. And that it's more reasonable to conclude that Chamblee was calling Tiger a dog than a cheater. You're backed into a logical corner. You can't escape it by digging a hole.

Lol! What, you want me to admit that you are right about what I am thinking? Seriously? Show me the ironclad logic of that when you show me a quote where Chamblee called Tiger a cheater. It is my opinion that he is disappointed in Tiger for being careless about the rules and this is his way of saying it. That is what I think, not what you say I think. Chamblee appears to be more focused on what Tiger did at the BMW where he argued his position even after he saw that the ball obviously moved. I personally would have focused on what he did at the Masters because there, he was truly cavalier. He pretty much avoided being DQed on a technicality. THAT is my opinion on the matter.[/quote] Which was not his decision... maybe you should just admit you hate tiger and tell us why... Racist? Jealous? Beats your favorite player?

[Golfingdad]

OK.  I'll bite ... what do you infer from his comments?

That Tiger was cavalier with the rules.

No, that's not what I asked.  He flat out said that Tiger was cavalier with the rules ... with the last 6 or 7 words of a pair of paragraphs that totaled 175-ish words.  What I want to know is what you honestly think he inferred with the other 165-168 words?  What do you think Brandel means when he explains precisely how the teacher graded his test that they both knew he cheated on (100 crossed out with a F beneath it), and then he graded Tiger with a 100 crossed out with a F beneath.  Nowhere in his story did he mention the word cavalier, but he did mention the word cheat twice (and 'deceive' once as well).

Or, if you don't want to answer for yourself, let's play a game instead.  The Family Feud.

100 random people were polled on whether or not Brandel Chamblee inferred that Tiger was a cheater, and the top 2 answers are on the board.  Survey says!?!?!?!  (How many of those 100 would you think would actually say that he did NOT infer that Tiger cheated?)  I'm gonna say that the number is under 5, and I wouldn't be surprised if (assuming you weren't polled) that the number would be under 1.

[phan52]

No, that's not what I asked.  He flat out said that Tiger was cavalier with the rules ... with the last 6 or 7 words of a pair of paragraphs that totaled 175-ish words.  What I want to know is what you honestly think he inferred with the other 165-168 words?  What do you think Brandel means when he explains precisely how the teacher graded his test that they both knew he cheated on (100 crossed out with a F beneath it), and then he graded Tiger with a 100 crossed out with a F beneath.  Nowhere in his story did he mention the word cavalier, but he did mention the word cheat twice (and 'deceive' once as well). Or, if you don't want to answer for yourself, let's play a game instead.  The Family Feud. 100 random people were polled on whether or not Brandel Chamblee inferred that Tiger was a cheater, and the top 2 answers are on the board.  Survey says!?!?!?!  (How many of those 100 would you think would actually say that he did NOT infer that Tiger cheated?)  I'm gonna say that the number is under 5, and I wouldn't be surprised if (assuming you weren't polled) that the number would be under 1.

Whatever you are trying to do, you can stop now. I didn't even bother reading that. I answered the question. Give up already. We disagree.

[iacas]

Could we stop using the word infer to mean imply? Brandel implied, readers are the ones who infer (or don't).

And phan, you didn't answer the question. He asked you what was implied, and you repeated only what was outright said.

[mvmac]

I answered the question. Give up already. We disagree.

No you didn't.  Why would Brandel include the story about him cheating on a test?  What else could he have been trying to imply?

[Lihu]

Merriam Webster also says that it is a breed of dog. Maybe he is inferring that Tiger is a dog?

This is a Spaniel Cavalier? Don't let your daughters see it, or they might have a cavalier attitude

[mchepp]

Hopefully nobody posted this yet but Chamblee apologized on twitter. Im paraphasing but he said he went to far and no golf channel didnt make him apologize. He hopes to apologize to Tiger to his face at some point.

Yes, he did post an apology.

This one went over the line. I fully expect Brandel to apologize for crossing the line calling him a cheater. GC may demand it after the firestorm this will start.

Good news for Brandel after he apologizes, the results will have been the GC gets a bunch of coverage and Tiger gets his apology, everybody is happy.

Like this smart guy said he would.

GC and Golf Magazine got the buzz they wanted and now Brandel must apologize and we can resume our regularly scheduled programming.

[birlyshirly]

Could we stop using the word infer to mean imply? Brandel implied, readers are the ones who infer (or don't).

Actually, Brandel did both.

And for everyone accusing Brandel of a lack of stones, you must think it would have been braver of him to say nothing. I'm not saying he wasn't perhaps cynical in airing his views, but hardly cowardly, compared to the other commentators who think Tiger took a few liberties this year but kept quiet.

As for how clearly Brandel stated his conclusion - you don't think his media outlets vetted and dictated just how close to an outright accusation of cheating he could go? That's just naive.

[misty_mountainhop]

That Tiger was cavalier with the rules.

You make a big mistake then. If that's what he'd wanted everyone to infer, he would have simply (and only) said "Tiger was cavalier with the rules". There is/was no need for the weasel words and story about his own cheating. In fact, if Chamblee had simply said Woods was cavalier he would have achieved exactly what he was after without any of the fallout he's now getting - in fact, the more I think of that, the more I think Chamblee has been really, really stupid here. He wanted everyone to think Woods is a cheat. The story of his own cheating in only an anecdote to make that connection.

TBH, I think I'll simply infer that Chamblee is, in point of fact, a cheat. I'll also infer he cheated at golf as well. As for Woods, again, there is nowhere near enough actual evidence that he cheated i.e deliberately contravened the rules.