Forums

Thoughts on Tiger's situation...

    • 155 points
    • Posts: 1
     

    This is just a "standard operating procedure" for the ***-up PGA & USGA officials to protect tiger woods.  He has gotten every favorable ruling from the so-called "rules officials" starting with a tournament a number of years ago where he drove into a waste area and his ball landed behind a huge boulder.  With no way to advance the ball but sideways, he called a "rules official" over and asked if this was considered a LOOSE IMPEDIMENT.  Of course the rules official agreed with tiger, who then proceeded to get about 6 guys from the gallery to come over and move the LOOSE IMPEDIMENT.  Ken Venturi was the announcer and I thought he was going to explode at the audacity of the "rules official" allowing him to move the boulder (not to mention the assistance tiger got from an "outside agency" to move the boulder).  Then there was the wild approach shot tiger made to the 18th green in a tournament where his shot sailed long and right, hit the club house roof and landed in the parking lot.  Of course the "rules officials" were again summoned and they deemed that tiger should receive a free drop (no penalty) back onto the 18th, in the rough, short of the green and with no obstructions to the pin.  Now this shameful display of tiger-pandering by the "rules commitee"  at the masters, that determined that even though tiger took it upon himself to interpret the rules incorrectly, they could not to be without tiger in the tournament, so they could not bring themselves to do the right thing and DQ him.  I WANT TO KNOW WHEN THE USGA IS GOING TO PUBLISH A REVISED "tiger RULES BOOK" SO THAT WE ALL CAN ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF THESE RULINGS"!!!!

    • 575 points
    • Posts: 21
     

    No, I don't call or try to call courses, TV conglomerates, announcers, etc. I really think those who do, (call) should have a video camera follow them around from Thursday thru Sunday and call their mother or their boss (if they are not the same person) and "taddle" on them.

    I was going to say "fans", but instead, "TV viewers" should not call or be allowed to call in rules infractions they see happen on TV. I was being  facetious when I said "what number do you call?"

    Here is a question for everyone...."What if Adam Scott and Angel Cabrera (along with Jason Day) had tied at -7. Now that 2 stroke penalty just got HUGE for Tiger!

  •  

    Keith Smith

    No, I don't call or try to call courses, TV conglomerates, announcers, etc. I really think those who do, (call) should have a video camera follow them around from Thursday thru Sunday and call their mother or their boss (if they are not the same person) and "taddle" on them.

    I was going to say "fans", but instead, "TV viewers" should not call or be allowed to call in rules infractions they see happen on TV. I was being  facetious when I said "what number do you call?"

    Here is a question for everyone...."What if Adam Scott and Angel Cabrera (along with Jason Day) had tied at -7. Now that 2 stroke penalty just got HUGE for Tiger!

    Yup, it would have been HUGE. But Tiger EARNED those two shots because of his bad drop. Tiger is lucky that circumstances occurred as they did or he probably would have been DQ'ed. Of course, he did get one of the worst breaks ever after hitting the flag-stick. Who knows, maybe if he does not hit the flag-stick and gets a birdie instead, he might have gone on to win by five with that extra momentum on his side. Or maybe not. Maybe it's cosmic karma biting him back.

    • 2180 points
    • Posts: 344
     

    Tiger who???

  •  

    No that was an ABSOLUTE JOKE !!!

    And despite whatever warnings he may have had, chastise him after the round rather than penalise the Kid.

    The ANGC should be ashamed of themselves and believing he was the only one guilty of slow play this week ..... PLEASE !

    • 575 points
    • Posts: 21
     

    IMO- the keys to this whole event is

    #1- the rules officials reviewed the tapes and concluded the drop was legal.

    #2- the rules officials should have discussed the review with Tiger before his press conference.

    As for the photos in this thread, they look suspicious. (Photo Shop??)

    But, it's made good for discussion, just like Dustin's "bunker" shot.

  •  

    Joe57

    This is just a "standard operating procedure" for the ***-up PGA & USGA officials to protect tiger woods.  He has gotten every favorable ruling from the so-called "rules officials" starting with a tournament a number of years ago where he drove into a waste area and his ball landed behind a huge boulder.  With no way to advance the ball but sideways, he called a "rules official" over and asked if this was considered a LOOSE IMPEDIMENT.  Of course the rules official agreed with tiger, who then proceeded to get about 6 guys from the gallery to come over and move the LOOSE IMPEDIMENT.  Ken Venturi was the announcer and I thought he was going to explode at the audacity of the "rules official" allowing him to move the boulder (not to mention the assistance tiger got from an "outside agency" to move the boulder).  Then there was the wild approach shot tiger made to the 18th green in a tournament where his shot sailed long and right, hit the club house roof and landed in the parking lot.  Of course the "rules officials" were again summoned and they deemed that tiger should receive a free drop (no penalty) back onto the 18th, in the rough, short of the green and with no obstructions to the pin.  Now this shameful display of tiger-pandering by the "rules commitee"  at the masters, that determined that even though tiger took it upon himself to interpret the rules incorrectly, they could not to be without tiger in the tournament, so they could not bring themselves to do the right thing and DQ him.  I WANT TO KNOW WHEN THE USGA IS GOING TO PUBLISH A REVISED "tiger RULES BOOK" SO THAT WE ALL CAN ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF THESE RULINGS"!!!!

    Hi Joe, welcome to our Community.

    As for your Tiger hating diatribe, kind of hardcore hating for your first post here. Tiger did not get a favorable ruling in the boulder situation. He just took advantage of a rule that was available to him. Anyone could have done the same thing. The rule has since been changed because of that event. As for the Club House situation, it was not marked out of bounds, so there was no reason he should not get a drop since special rules are in place because of grandstands and such in place just for the PGA Tour. Maybe you should read the rules so you'll understand how you too can take advantage of rules that help you. And while you're at it, go to GolfWRX.com and read the 53 page, 1,576 posts about the issue at the Masters. If you read them all you might understand why things turned out as they did.

    Thanks for joining in. Just remember we're not all about slamming people on this Community board. This is the nicest board you'll ever find and we want to keep it that way.

    P.S. I am not a Tiger lover, just don't like to see ANYBODY abused incorrectly.

  •  

    Ty Webb
    He should have been DQ'd, or at least have DQ'd himself.  I guess everything in America's for sale.  (integrity included)

    good point Ty but we only do the best for tiger

  •  

    Rule 26-1 provides two options: Drop near as possible to original spot where ball was played or behind the water hazard on the extension of the line from the hole through the point where the ballast crossed the margin of the hazard.

    -There are no specifications as to the distance allowed from either the original ball location nor "behind the water hazard".

    The issue from the rules committee perspective is there was a misinterpretation of the rule 26-1 and this is likely where Tiger made his error in judgment. The rules are finite for some circumstances and left to "reasonable" interpretation for other scenarios, hence there is a 700+ page Rulings book. The original ruling was accurate (IMHO) and the secondary re-ruling was to instill the "integrity" of the 26-1 rule.

    For most of us, an advantage is less risk based on the circumstances (closer to the hole; not in the rough or not behind obstacles). The integrity of the game is not enhanced by a video recording of an event but, by knowing, understanding and acting on the event as it takes place.  

    -ICON  for All

  •  

    bholley
    Lets face it the only reason he hit the flag was he mistakenly thought it was a fireplug

    WOW...TAKING THE CHEAP SHOT WHEN YOU CAN....

  •  

    I've tried to read every comment in this thread...the one thing I have not seen anyone mention is that fact that the rule was changed a couple of years ago that eliminates the DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard for a penalty assessed after a round...that being said the DQ option should stop being bantered about...

  •  

    There was a report on the radio today that the R & A and USGA has release a *** page report confirming that they supported the recent ANGC ruling on Tiger.

    It has been truling amazing to see/hear the passionate and enthusiastic responses and discussions this whole argument has raised.