The 2013 Masters

[Flabbibulin]

Late night story developing that Tiger could potentially be disqualified for an illegal drop on 15- not so much for the drop itself, but for signing a wrong scorecard as the illegal drop should have resulted in a penalty. Might just be a Golf Channel reporter looking for headlines. Will find out in the morning...

I don't see it happening, but would be a huge story.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

Late night story developing that Tiger could potentially be disqualified for an illegal drop on 15- not so much for the drop itself, but for signing a wrong scorecard as the illegal drop should have resulted in a penalty. Might just be a Golf Channel reporter looking for headlines. Will find out in the morning...

I don't see it happening, but would be a huge story.

15 is the hole where he hit the flag and with the spin it went in the water.

Watching it, it appeared he dropped and hit from virtually the same spot...maybe back a couple yards.

Cant imagine what would have been illegal about all that.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by transplant99

15 is the hole where he hit the flag and with the spin it went in the water.

Watching it, it appeared he dropped and hit from virtually the same spot...maybe back a couple yards.

Cant imagine what would have been illegal about all that.

Basically some twitter experts saying it was slightly off line from the original and something about the 2 years back thing. Some golf channel guy said he doubts anything comes of it

[XxBIGDOGxX1817]

Originally Posted by YYC in LAX

My bets:

Couples: 200-1
Cabrera: 114-1
Scott: 26-1
Rose: 23-1
Bradley: 23-1

not to shabby

[transplant99]

Hmmm....its possible Woods is in trouble I guess....is it illegal to drop further away? I wasnt aware of that and he admits to doing just that.

Rule 26-1 is the rule in question. There are three options.

• Woods could have played the shot from a drop area, which he opted not to do.
“I went down to the drop area, that wasn’t going to be a good spot, because obviously it’s into the grain, it’s really grainy there,” Woods said. “So it was muddy and not a good spot to drop.”

• Woods also opted not to drop the ball, keeping the point where it last crossed the water between the hole and the spot where he dropped. The ball entered the water off the front left portion of the green. Woods’ hit his shot from the middle of the fairway.

• The final option is the return to the original spot where he played, and drop the ball “as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played.”

“I went back to where I played it from,” Woods said, “but I went 2 yards further back and I took, tried to take 2 yards off the shot of what I felt I hit.”

This is the problem in question. If Woods played the shot 2 yards from the original spot, which he said he did, he could be deemed to have taken an illegal drop and be disqualified

I love the game and respect the rules for sure...but this one just seems strange to me. He didnt improve his lie and dint shorten the yardage. Just seems like the spirit of the rule is being trampled here.

i guess we will know more in a couple hours.

[transplant99]

Tiger has been assessed a 2 stroke penalty....brutal.

Stays in the tourney but effectively takes him out of contention.....and he will probably now have to dq himself to avoid the backlash sure to follow.



Tiger Woods got a bad break Friday in the second round of the Masters when his approach shot to the 15th green bounced off the flagstick and into the water.

He also took a bad drop, leading to a two-stroke penalty that was levied on Saturday morning.

Woods was not disqualified because of a relatively recent rule that allows the rules committee discretion when it comes to violations reported after the fact. Masters officials reviewed the drop on Saturday morning, applying the revision to "Decision 33-7/4.5", which, according to the USGA's website, addresses "the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card.

"Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified."

[moon]

Hopefully Tiger DQ's himself as he should, if not hopefully the 2 stroke penalty is enough to ensure that he is not only out of the running for winning but far enough back that we don't have to see everytime he decides to scratch his behind or wipe his nose.

[Flabbibulin]

You are allowed to take the ball back as far as you want if it goes directly into a water hazard. Even Furyk did when he chunked it into the water on 15 (commentators even said so). I think the issue here is Tiger did actually hit the green and spin back into the water, possibly negating his ability to take the ball back 2 yards.

[Flabbibulin]

Edit- maybe the can assess penalty after the fact. Looks like they have. If that is the case, he should be DQ'd according to the rules.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

They cant assess the penalty now. Thats the problem. Scorecard has been signed, which is the the DQ worthy offense. Its not a general 2 stroke penalty, its a 2 stroke penalty on that specific hole.

Haven't they already assessed the two stroke penalty?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

They cant assess the penalty now. Thats the problem. Scorecard has been signed, which is the the DQ worthy offense. Its not a general 2 stroke penalty, its a 2 stroke penalty on that specific hole.

Im confused i think....the penalty has been assessed already...he is now -1 for the tourney, but he will be allowed to play if he so chooses today.

Faldo is waxing on about how he should DQ himself today even though he doesnt have to and if he doesnt...he is ruining the integrity of the game...yet that rule says he doesnt have to.

This is going to turn into a #####storm.

[transplant99]

Looking at this now....he

[Flabbibulin]

Yup, edited my post after i saw that they have.

And a rule change 2 years ago saves him from DQ by the looks of it. Penalties can be assessed after the fact if the player didnt know he broke a rule. 2 years ago though, this would have been a clear DQ.

[transplant99]

Looking at replays etc of the whole sequence....it looks like he literally moved back about 3 feet.

This is where the rule and I have a disconnect....if he knew this was a violation, he simply would have just taken a bit off the same swing from the same spot and at very worst would have at most still bogeyed the hole.

Its now an 8......because of a perfect shot and a really bad break.

[Senator Clay Davis]

David Stern laughs at the golf possibly eliminating its biggest star. No way he'd let that happen if he were PGA commish. Seriously though that might be the worst best shot of all time. Tiiger legit could have holed it for eagle, now in effect made triple bogey. Ouch

[moon]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Looking at replays etc of the whole sequence....it looks like he literally moved back about 3 feet.

This is where the rule and I have a disconnect....if he knew this was a violation, he simply would have just taken a bit off the same swing from the same spot and at very worst would have at most still bogeyed the hole.

Its now an 8......because of a perfect shot and a really bad break.

The guys on Golf Channel (even Tiger apologist Begay) all seem to say that they all know the rule.

I think maybe you can say he was pissed about his shot and not thinking about it but at the very least his caddy should have figured out that was a violation.

[transplant99]

I just dont understand these analysts on the golf channel all calling for Tiger to DQ himself because the rules say he shouldnt have done what he did...yet the rules also say he shouldnt be dq'd becaue of the way things happened. Hell of a double standard you pompous asses.

[moon]

Isn't it because they are saying that he wasn't ignorant of the rule and that while he technically fits under the rule the intent of the rule wasn't designed to bail Tigger out of his mistakes?

Seems like they have a good point.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by moon

Isn't it because they are saying that he wasn't ignorant of the rule and that while he technically fits under the rule the intent of the rule wasn't designed to bail Tigger out of his mistakes?

Seems like they have a good point.

No....he was told before he signed the scorecard by the rules officials that there was no violation ( Augusta just releades a stement saying so).....so he signed that with the understanding he didnt do anything wrong.

No way he can now be expected to fall on the sword because someone else gave him information that long after changed.

[transplant99]

Here is their statement....

"Yesterday afternoon, the Rules Committee was made aware of a possible Rules violation that involved a drop by Tiger Woods on the 15th hole.

"In preparation for his fifth shot, the player dropped his ball in close proximity to where he had played his third shot in apparent conformance with Rule 26. After being prompted by a television viewer, the Rules Committee reviewed a video of the shot while he was playing the 18th hole. At that moment and based on that evidence, the Committee determined he had complied with the Rules.

"After he signed his scorecard, and in a television interview subsequent to the round, the player stated that he played further from the point than where he had played his third shot. Such action would constitute playing from the wrong place.

"The subsequent information provided by the player's interview after he had completed play warranted further review and discussion with him this morning. After meeting with the player, it was determined that he had violated Rule 26, and he was assessed a two stroke penalty. 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 player's round."