Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Woods could be disqualified from the Masters

  • 13-04-2013 11:17am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 252 ✭✭


    Masters breakfast broke the news that Tiger may be disqualified today due to breaking the rules on the 15th after taking a penalty drop 2 yards back from where he played his last shot.

    Rule 26 states 2 options, Tiger chose to play the ball from where he played his last shot after it went into the water as a result of hitting the flag pole.
    The problem was he said after in the interview that he moved back 2 yards and took a little off the shot.

    Had he chose to go back in line from where the water last crossed the hazard he would be playing from the gallery.

    If they can penalize a 14 yo for slow play surely the rules of golf should be applied here also.
    So lets see what will happen this morning at the masters as theres an awful stench around.

    What should have happened? 82 votes

    Committee rules 2 shot penalty before Woods finishes
    0%
    Committee rules no penalty
    28%
    slave1GreeBoDr_ColossusRikandKOJAK_1trishasaffronthe lawmanHowjoe1AdpRocunavalosciaeimFor PawsolaguopaPudsy33Freemount09kylemanAlmavivasaintasticTRS30SnowDrifts 23 votes
    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods DQ'd
    2%
    Wombatmanlevitronix 2 votes
    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods continues with penalty (what happened)
    54%
    dougalhubertomagaubreymonlyfinewinefullstopMushyMr. LarsonPaddy1234Holy DiverImhof TankstockdamBoskowskiBigChap1759highgiant1985Mat the trasherdownthemiddleMorrisseeeeG1032lettuce97 45 votes
    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods withdraws
    14%
    Johnny_FontaneL.O.F.TDolph StarbeamnujeebabyOrmusghosttownSpeak NowMungoManChris Martingoodgolfer64whitefootPappa Charlie 12 votes


«13456710

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 252 ✭✭Gin77


    Masters breakfast broke the news that Tiger may be disqualified today due to breaking the rules on the 15th after taking a penalty drop incorrectly. He dropped the ball 2 yards back from where he played his last shot.

    Rule 26 water hazards states 2 options, Tiger chose to play the ball from where he played his last shot. See his ball went into the water as a result of hitting the flag pole.
    The problem is that in the interview after the round he said that he moved back 2 yards and took a little off the shot.

    Had he chose to go back in line from where the ball last crossed the hazard he would be playing from the gallery.

    If they can penalize a 14 yo for slow play surely the rules of golf should be applied here also.
    So lets see what will happen this morning at the masters as theres an awful stench around.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭gordongekko


    Gin77 wrote: »
    Masters breakfast broke the news that Tiger may be disqualified today due to breaking the rules on the 15th after taking a penalty drop 2 yards back from where he played his last shot.

    Rule 26 states 2 options, Tiger chose to play the ball from where he played his last shot after it went into the water as a result of hitting the flag pole.
    The problem was he said after in the interview that he moved back 2 yards and took a little off the shot.

    Had he chose to go back in line from where the water last crossed the hazard he would be playing from the gallery.

    If they can penalize a 14 yo for slow play surely the rules of golf should be applied here also.
    So lets see what will happen this morning at the masters as theres an awful stench around.

    pretty misleading thread title. It could badly do with a question mark


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,695 ✭✭✭ForeRight


    In other breaking news 2 planes just hit the twin towers


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Anyone


    pretty misleading thread title. It could badly do with a question mark

    Its being discussed in the Masters thread already, but yeah the thread title is way off. He hasnt been disqualified.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 444 ✭✭Rippeditup


    I thought the ruling was you could go back as far as you want but you need to keep the point of entry between you an the flag?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,698 ✭✭✭✭fullstop


    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods continues with penalty (what happened)
    Rippeditup wrote: »
    I thought the ruling was you could go back as far as you want but you need to keep the point of entry between you an the flag?

    Yes. He didn't keep the point of entry between him and the flag though, did he. By the way, nice misleading thread title OP


  • Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    Can a mod edit the thread title.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭Gringo180


    Will he be disqualified tho? Does the rules state that he should be disqualified?? Surely a 1 shot penalty would be the best thing to do.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭Daithio12


    Gin77 wrote: »
    Masters breakfast broke the news that Tiger may be disqualified today due to breaking the rules on the 15th after taking a penalty drop 2 yards back from where he played his last shot.

    Rule 26 states 2 options, Tiger chose to play the ball from where he played his last shot after it went into the water as a result of hitting the flag pole.
    The problem was he said after in the interview that he moved back 2 yards and took a little off the shot.

    Had he chose to go back in line from where the water last crossed the hazard he would be playing from the gallery.

    If they can penalize a 14 yo for slow play surely the rules of golf should be applied here also.
    So lets see what will happen this morning at the masters as theres an awful stench around.

    Dude seriously read the rules before you start acting like an expert, you have more than 2 options, it's 4 options if memory serves correctly.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,554 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    What a rubbish thread title. Can you not see why it was a bit silly OP?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,477 ✭✭✭weemcd


    ****in stupid thread title that, considering he hasn't been disqualified yet. .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,968 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Dropping balls in the wrong place, fancy that! :p

    Presumably if he has done so he will be disqualified. No special cases.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 47,365 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    Will he be disqualified tho? Does the rules state that he should be disqualified?? Surely a 1 shot penalty would be the best thing to do.

    If he was given a 1 shot penalty presumably the disqualification would then be for signing for an incorrect score.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 252 ✭✭Gin77


    What a rubbish thread title. Can you not see why it was a bit silly OP?

    Its called sensationalizing do ya want me to stick in a question mark? lighten up stiffs!


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 15,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭rebel girl 15


    Dropping the ball in the wrong spot carries a 2 stroke penalty, but as Zaph said, the disqualification would come from signing for a wrong score on his card.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,554 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Gin77 wrote: »
    Its called sensationalizing do ya want me to stick in a question mark? lighten up stiffs!

    Yes.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 47,365 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    Gin77 wrote: »
    Its called sensationalizing do ya want me to stick in a question mark? lighten up stiffs!

    It's called being deliberately misleading. I've merged your two threads and given this a proper title as the forum mods aren't around at the moment.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,821 ✭✭✭blockic


    Gin77 wrote: »
    Its called sensationalizing do ya want me to stick in a question mark? lighten up stiffs!

    Not only one thread, but two with the misleading title! :rolleyes:

    Question mark is essential yes . Otherwise you have everyone clicking in here thinking it has been confirmed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    Zaph wrote: »
    If he was given a 1 shot penalty presumably the disqualification would then be for signing for an incorrect score.

    Thats exactly right. If they officials rule that there should have been a penalty then he's out. As if going into the water from a great shot wasn't bad enough luck.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Does anyone know how consistently 'as near as possible' has been applied on the regular tour. I can see a fairly convincing argument being made amongst the green jackets that, in practice, 'as near as possible' means within a few yards rather using a strictly literal interpretation


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,968 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    2 shot deduction I think I just heard

    edit yep.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    Yeh just listening to it on the radio.. Apparently it is in line with the rule that was brought in when Harrington was DQ'd in Abu Dabi because somebody rang in after seeing his ball move on their HD TV. I wonder if it had been that young Japanese amateur that had made the mistake would they have pulled out all the stops to keep him in ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 751 ✭✭✭BiffoGooner


    So he's been giving a 2 shot penalty but not DQ'd for the incorrect scorecard?

    That's not really right, is it? Saw Lowry just call it a joke on twitter. Said anyone else would have been DQ'd.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,968 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Yeh just listening to it on the radio.. Apparently it is in line with the rule that was brought in when Harrington was DQ'd in Abu Dabi because somebody rang in after seeing his ball move on their HD TV. I wonder if it had been that young Japanese amateur that had made the mistake would they have pulled out all the stops to keep him in ?

    I take it that's a rhetorical question? :p


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 751 ✭✭✭BiffoGooner


    Have a feeling the Sky guys will go to town on this later, and rightly so to be honest. Rules are rules, except when it's Tiger apparently.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,554 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    I think it's a bad decision, and I say that as a big fan of Tiger.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭Daithio12


    drkpower wrote: »
    Does anyone know how consistently 'as near as possible to the pin' has been applied on the regular tour. I can see a fairly convincing argument being made amongst the green jackets that, in practice, 'as near as possible' means within a few yards rather using a strictly literal interpretation
    It's as near as possible to where the original ball was played not the pin, and it's very strict hence why he got the two shot penalty, the problem lies with signing for a lower score.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Daithio12 wrote: »
    It's as near as possible to where the original ball was played not the pin, and it's very strict hence why he got the two shot penalty, the problem lies with signing for a lower score.

    Sorry, mis-speak. Is it really strictly applied? I have no idea, I just have never heard of anyone being stung by it and when most people drop in those circumstances, I don't recall them making any real effort to see precisely where their old divot was or giving any real attention to where precisely they are dropping the ball. In any case, seems moot now.

    Anyone got the wording of the rule that has no been applied to hit him with a two stroke penalty.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    Here's the rule that kept him in the competition. I don't think it's a good ruling because Tiger knew exactly what he was doing when he dropped in a different spot. He should be disqualified and if he wins he'll be on 15* majors imo.

    BHvG5QwCAAAGOLB.jpg:large


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,929 ✭✭✭Panrich


    The difference in Harringtons case in Dubai was that everyone was unaware of the infringement at the time and he couldn't therefore have posted a correct score. In this case, the fault was that Woods did not follow the rules correctly. If he knew the rule (it is his job to know them), he could have avoided the infringement, or realised his mistake and taken his two shot penalty before posting his score.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,581 ✭✭✭uberwolf


    drkpower wrote: »

    Anyone got the wording of the rule that has no been applied to hit him with a two stroke penalty.

    I've seen some reference to the new rule to prevent DQ's on the basis of tv viewers ringing in.

    I think this is baloney.

    He deliberately did not drop where he had last played a shot in order to give himself a shot he was more comfortable with. I expect that he did not realise that he was breaking the rule but I don't think absent mindedness is what the new rule was intended to provide escape from.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭Daithio12


    drkpower wrote: »
    Sorry, mis-speak. Is it really strictly applied? I have no idea, I just have never heard of anyone being stung by it and when most people drop in those circumstances, I don't recall them making any real effort to see precisely where their old divot was or giving any real attention to where precisely they are dropping the ball. In any case, seems moot now.

    Anyone got the wording of the rule that has no been applied to hit him with a two stroke penalty.
    It's rule 20-7c, playing from wrong place.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    uberwolf wrote: »
    I've seen some reference to the new rule to prevent DQ's on the basis of tv viewers ringing in.

    I think this is baloney.

    He did deliberately did not drop where he had last played a shot in order to give himself a shot he was more comfortable with. I expect that he did not realise that he was breaking the rule but I don't think absent mindedness is what the new rule was intended to provide escape from.

    Just read the rule.... Wow, can't believe they have used that. The only reason tiger can claim not to have known about the rule was through ignorance of the rule. I can't see how that is within the spirit or even the letter of the rule they are using here.

    Could be an interesting 48 hours!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    Faldo saying that "Tiger Woods need to sit down over the next few hours and consider how this will affect his legacy"..

    Shur why doesnt he just play on and have another press conference with his ma saying sorry in a couple of weeks, then everything will be alright again..


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,596 ✭✭✭RedorDead


    Woods knowingly dropped his ball two feet back from his previous divot to stop the same result happening again. How can he not know he played from the wrong place? Rules are rules FFS. Cop out of a decision.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,539 ✭✭✭ghostdancer


    danthefan wrote: »
    Here's the rule that kept him in the competition. I don't think it's a good ruling because Tiger knew exactly what he was doing when he dropped in a different spot. He should be disqualified and if he wins he'll be on 15* majors imo.

    BHvG5QwCAAAGOLB.jpg:large

    the very first line of it quite clearly shows that this doesn't apply to him. he knew the fact, he admitted it himself. ignorance of the rule he broke is something he should quite clearly have "reasonably known".

    no surprise though, rules being twisted/desperately clutched at to keep him in it was the likely outcome from the start.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,929 ✭✭✭Panrich


    danthefan wrote: »
    Here's the rule that kept him in the competition. I don't think it's a good ruling because Tiger knew exactly what he was doing when he dropped in a different spot. He should be disqualified and if he wins he'll be on 15* majors imo.

    BHvG5QwCAAAGOLB.jpg:large

    This rule is being used as a loophole to keep Tiger in the tournament. Nothing has come to light that was not available to Tiger at the time of the infringement.
    If Tiger knew post round that he moved the ball two yards back, then he knew it also standing there on the 15th fairway.
    It has been ruled that his ball placing contravened the rules (hence the two stroke penalty) and nothing in that rule allows Tiger an out clause.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46 Not Easy


    Come on Tiger!! Hope he wins!!!

    What a disaster hitting that flag was by all accounts.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,554 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    I don't think it makes any sense for Tiger to withdraw. The committee has made it's decision, he should abide by it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,086 ✭✭✭bigtimecharlie


    Presume he will keep his tee time just starting at -1 rather than re-jiggling the rest of the players.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 393 ✭✭Goldenjohn


    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods continues with penalty (what happened)
    Presume he will keep his tee time just starting at -1 rather than re-jiggling the rest of the players.

    Yep confirmed same tee time just starts on 1 under


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    I don't think it makes any sense for Tiger to withdraw. The committee has made it's decision, he should abide by it.

    You're not really allowed withdraw unless you're injured.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    More context to the decision. Apparently masters officials were aware of the issue before the end of tigers round and reviewed video of the incident. They considered that he had dropped the ball on accordance with the rules and confirmed that the signing of his card was all in order.

    After hearing the tv interview, they then interviewed tiger and reconsidered their initial decision. Because of that history, they felt they could invoke the 'Harrington' rule.

    Interesting....I think it provides everyone with a little bit more cover but I'm still not sure it comes within the 'Harrington' rule.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,181 ✭✭✭Davidth88


    I think that's a fudge. Tv ratings are obviously more important than rules of golf . Disgusting if this was a journeyman golfer he would have been dq ed


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭PRAF


    Is there a danger that a precedent has now been set with this Tiger ruling? Ignorance of the rules now a valid excuse fo signing an incorrect scorecard.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 212 ✭✭medic087


    Does anyone think tiger can win from five back now. There's a lot of good players between him and the lead.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 320 ✭✭lostatsea


    drkpower wrote: »
    More context to the decision. Apparently masters officials were aware of the issue before the end of tigers round and reviewed video of the incident. They considered that he had dropped the ball on accordance with the rules and confirmed that the signing of his card was all in order.

    After hearing the tv interview, they then interviewed tiger and reconsidered their initial decision. Because of that history, they felt they could invoke the 'Harrington' rule.

    Interesting....I think it provides everyone with a little bit more cover but I'm still not sure it comes within the 'Harrington' rule.

    The detail of this information is critically important. If this is true Tiger should have been aware of a problem and would not have said what he said in the interview. Obviously the committee had no communication with Tiger on the matter and assumed that he had dropped it close enough to the original position.

    However, they now know that he deliberately dropped it back 2 yards. So it actually makes no difference what their original interpretation was.

    Quote from the Guardian about the Harrington rule:
    ''Now the Royal and Ancient Club and the United States Golf Association have announced a new interpretation to apply "in limited circumstances not previously contemplated" where disqualifications have been caused by scorecard errors identified as the result of recent advances in video technologies.
    It covers 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 before returning his scorecard.
    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. The new ruling will start to be applied in The Masters today.
    The two organisations did confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for scorecard breaches that arise from ignorance of the rules of golf.
    Peter Dawson, the Royal & Ancient chief executive, said: "For some time we have been concerned that, in certain limited circumstances, disproportionate disqualification penalties have been required by the rules. This carefully considered decision reflects our desire to ensure that the rules of golf remain fair and relevant in the changing environment in which the game is played today."

    It is clear that Tiger was ignorant of the rule, signed his card and should have been disqualified.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 320 ✭✭lostatsea


    Tiger may well disqualify himself. I don't think he deliberately cheated but he clearly forgot the rule and has admitted as much. By breaking the rule he got an advantage. Invoking the 'Harrington rule' is wrong as this was not put in place for ignorance of the rules. Faldo is suggesting for legacy reasons he may disqualify himself. I think he is right.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭cornerboy


    This ruling if it stands will change golf forever. This is why the rules of golf never allowed any leeway.......keep committees from making decisions like this.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,123 ✭✭✭Imhof Tank


    Committee rules 2 shot penalty, Woods continues with penalty (what happened)
    lostatsea wrote: »
    . Obviously the committee had no communication with Tiger on the matter and assumed that he had dropped it close enough to the original position.
    .

    Exactly. How can the committee claim to have "reviewed" the incident without speaking to him?

    Unless he told them one thing and told the TV interviewer another version of course. That would be even worse.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement