Us Masters

[Forethat]

For those of you who has never attended a rules training course with the intention to become a referee: There's an important concept in the rules of golf referred to as "players intention". In this case, it was pretty obvious that the players intention was to improve the conditions for his shot. For this reason, he should have incurred penalty. He didn't. Therefore, he signed for an incorrect score. This means disqualification.

I am really looking forward to the explanation for the ruling. As I said, I'm not surprised because Tiger is Tiger.

I agree that the 'player's intention' aspect of it is obvious in this situation.

Possibly would go down in golfing folklore as the most costly hit flagstick shot in golf if the end result it is a DQ. From just about jarring it to hit the lead in the Masters to being DQ'd is epic.

I wonder if the 'dark side of the force' the Megabucks Augusta National won't want him to be DQ'd as it will have an impact on broadcasting money - ie - ratings... so the next time a TV deal comes along they can up the price even more based on the ratings going through the roof. Tiger on a Sunday at Augusta hunting for the lead only spells dollar signs.

Love the event (golf tournament with top field), but the Augusta committee of old elitist slave money give me the xxxxx. They actually commented the other day that they don't want to increase the coverage because they want to keep it 'special' or something along those lines. British Open is telecast for 16 hours a day for the first 2 rounds. Masters... on no we will only allow telecast from 3pm. Bunch of silver spoon snobs. This was in the same press conference when they were stroking themselves about promoting the game with a chipping and putting competition for juniors because they realise that the younger generation aren't taking up golf. duh - so broadcast the whole event to the masses if you want to promote the game!

The club is probably so rich they could buy every kid in America a set of golf clubs if they wanted to!

lol, if anything this only adds to the notion that Masters is a spectacle rather than a golf major. It should be stripped of it's status as a major as it's an invitational.

I wouldn't be too surprised if Tiger withdraws with the comment: "I broke the rule, and rules are rules".

[Dorkers]

Just saw an explanation that he didn't get DQ'd because of a change in the laws from 2011. So 2 shot penalty is a fair cop there. I think he will still contend, will fire him up to get in the mix, however, I just hope he doesn't fall short by 2 shots because the actual winner will be under a 'what if' cloud.

Love my Tiger, I think he has a good personality. He does suffer from white line fever, from the outside the course stuff I see on him I think he has a good sense of humour and is a nice enough bloke. Certainly doesn't have a Phil Mickelson painted on smile. Tom Watson esque - always smiling... just hit the ball OB, still smiling - as if.... but portrays a good image for the viewers. Vent proof - no chance.. just all tucked away behind my smiling mask. Fake, fake, fake.

Edited April 13, 2013 by Dorkers

[metisdead]

As reported at Golf.com:

1. Play [the] ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played; or

2. Drop a ball behind the water hazard, keeping the point at which the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard directly between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped, with no limit to how far behind the water hazard the ball may be dropped.

Woods chose the first option, but admitted that he did not to drop as close as possible to the original spot.

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

The ensuing shot “worked out perfectly," Woods said.

When I saw it on tv, it didn't think it was a bad decision by him. That is simply my opinion as a golfer, not as a moderator.

[Forethat]

Just saw an explanation that he didn't get DQ'd because of a change in the laws from 2011. So 2 shot penalty is a fair cop there. I think he will still contend, will fire him up to get in the mix, however, I just hope he doesn't fall short by 2 shots because the actual winner will be under a 'what if' cloud.

I will have to disagree. In my opinion this rule cannot be applied here. Tigers intention was to improve the conditions for his shot. Rule 33-7 says:

33-7. Disqualification Penalty; Committee Discretion

A penalty of disqualification may in exceptional individual cases be waived, modified or imposed if the Committee considers such action warranted.

What is the exceptional here?

Comedy.

[Forethat]

[tigerfish]

loving it !

Peter Alliss putting the world to right on the BBCs coverage.

it will be a truly sad day when he switches off his commentary mic and retires.

Edited April 13, 2013 by tigerfish

[Forethat]

loving it !

Peter Alliss putting the world to right on the BBCs coverage.

it will be a truly sad day when he switches off his commentary mic and retires.

What did Peter say about it?

[dogpoo]

Am I right in saying, signing an incorrect card would lead to disqualification!! I don't understand if Tiger is still in the competition!!

[Dorkers]

Am I right in saying, signing an incorrect card would lead to disqualification!! I don't understand if Tiger is still in the competition!!

The rule was changed in 2011, that if officials add a penalty after the card has been signed then it is ok.

The issue is that Tiger actually didn't play the shot in the same spot. He improved his position. Deliberately. That is the grey area - some say DQ others say penalty. Faldo = DQ , USPGA = $$$$ no DQ

Oh, I have worked out the finish to the Masters, it's as easy as ABC

Adam, Brandt, Cabrera, Day..... Ernie Els is how far back? .... I think I have too much time on my hands...

[chuckd]

The following article pretty wells sums up the dispute.

The rules committee looked at the incident while Tiger's round was still going on and decided they could see no infraction of the rules. After he completed his round the viewer phoned it in, the rules committee re-opened the investigation and, after listening to Tiger's statement that he dropped the ball some two yards from the original shot divot, decided he had indeed violated the rule of "nearest possible point".

The rule on DQ's on the PGA tour was changed in 2011 that IF an investigation was begun during a round and a decision was made not to inform the player upon completion of his round that he had committed an infraction, it was up to the committee to either DQ him or assess a two stroke penalty after his round is complete and he signs a, later determined to be, incorrect scorecard.

From the article...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should Tiger have been disqualified? After all, he signed for a score that was incorrect.

The committee could have imposed a DQ -- the equivalent of a death sentence -- but chose to commute it to a two-stroke penalty. The committee is empowered to do this under the sweeping authority of Rule 33-7, under which penalties can be modified or even rescinded completely. It's an enormous power, but one we suppose the committee felt was appropriate because it could have intervened and saved Tiger while the episode on Friday unfolded, but did not. In a sense -- and this is opinion -- the committee was covering for its failure to police the incident properly. It is saying, "It's our fault, too."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/tiger-fiasco-understanding-went-wrong-212100583--golf.html

[Forethat]

Am I right in saying, signing an incorrect card would lead to disqualification!! I don't understand if Tiger is still in the competition!!

The rule was changed in 2011, that if officials add a penalty after the card has been signed then it is ok.

The problem is that the Committee is using a rule that actually can't be applied in this case. The rule can only be applied if the player is unaware - and could not have been aware- of breaking a rule. Tiger is in breach of rule 26 and should have been fully aware of this. It wasn't as if high definition camera imagery was required to show that he dropped in an incorrect position, he even gave an explanation to exactly why he backed up two yards from the original position. If Tiger didn't do anything wrong, he should not be given a two shot penalty. If he did, he should be disqualified.

The Committee has fabricated a pathetic excuse to keep Tiger in the competition. I agree with Sir Faldo, if Tiger want to maintain some sort of honour, he should withdraw.

[keemapoot]

Am I right in saying, signing an incorrect card would lead to disqualification!! I don't understand if Tiger is still in the competition!!

The rule was changed in 2011, that if officials add a penalty after the card has been signed then it is ok.

The problem is that the Committee is using a rule that actually can't be applied in this case. The rule can only be applied if the player is unaware - and could not have been aware- of breaking a rule. Tiger is in breach of rule 26 and should have been fully aware of this. It wasn't as if high definition camera imagery was required to show that he dropped in an incorrect position, he even gave an explanation to exactly why he backed up two yards from the original position. If Tiger didn't do anything wrong, he should not be given a two shot penalty. If he did, he should be disqualified.

The Committee has fabricated a pathetic excuse to keep Tiger in the competition. I agree with Sir Faldo, if Tiger want to maintain some sort of honour, he should withdraw.

He played very sheepishly on Friday, and I think he feels bad about this himself.

[isawasnake]

For those of you who has never attended a rules training course with the intention to become a referee: There's an important concept in the rules of golf referred to as "players intention". In this case, it was pretty obvious that the players intention was to improve the conditions for his shot. For this reason, he should have incurred penalty. He didn't. Therefore, he signed for an incorrect score. This means disqualification.

I am really looking forward to the explanation for the ruling. As I said, I'm not surprised because Tiger is Tiger.

And advertising dollars are advertising dollars.

[Forethat]

The rule on DQ's on the PGA tour was changed in 2011 that IF an investigation was begun during a round and a decision was made not to inform the player upon completion of his round that he had committed an infraction, it was up to the committee to either DQ him or assess a two stroke penalty after his round is complete and he signs a, later determined to be, incorrect scorecard.

No. That's not at all what the rule says. Here's the rule:

33-7/4.5. Competitor Unaware of Penalty Returns Wrong Score; Whether Waiving or Modifying Disqualification Penalty Justified

The rule was instated to allow a player who COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AWARE of breaking the rule. The reason for this rule was that high definition imagery has made it possible to discover tiny errors that the PLAYER COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AWARE OF at the time.

In this case Tiger should have been aware of breaking the rule.

He should withdraw, just like many players have commented (as well as previous Masters winners).

[isawasnake]

I personally don't think people should be able to call in and referee, it favors people who get less tv coverage, which is just kind of preposterous. Anyway, I'm happy to leave the golfing rules up to golfers though, I do like watching however

[Forethat]

I discussed the Tiger drop with a referee on the European Tour a couple of hours ago and I'm pretty sure this matter will cause all sorts of changes.

Masters Tournament has opened a can of dangerous worms here, this is the first time (that I know of) where the rules have been neglected by a tournament in favour of a home-made decision.

[rijb]

Under normal circumstances, he would have been disqualified for signing an incorrect card. Officials took the blame for not alerting Woods to a potential problem — they found nothing wrong at first glance before he signed — and kept him in the tournament with two shots added to his score. Woods was covered under a 2-year-old rule that prevents DQs when a violation is reported by television viewers.

http://news.yahoo.com/snedeker-cabrera-tied-lead-masters-232455720--spt.html

[valrhona]

TW= The <deleted>

[Forethat]

Here's another "sums it up"

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/golf-masters/2013-04/golf-masters-tiger-woods-kindred

[Forethat]

Woods was covered under a 2-year-old rule that prevents DQs when a violation is reported by television viewers.

No, that's not at all what the rule is about.

[isawasnake]

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

[Forethat]

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

I'm sorry, but I dont find your analogy "great", I find it very poor and almost amusing.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent the spirit in which the game of golf is played.

Part of that spirit sits beneath the term, ‘etiquette’ and part of it relates to the Rules of Golf. But the Spirit of the Game goes much deeper than just those two tangible terms.

It is something that every golfer should develop an innate sense of, something that is born of golf’s unparalleled history, and something which lifts golf, one could argue, above other sports.

Whether it’s through divot and pitch-mark repair, or simply through silence on the tee, the spirit of the game dictates that players make sure they give others on the course, often opponents, a fair chance to play the best shot they can.

For most of us, the game of golf is self-regulating. There is seldom a referee present so we are reliant upon our own honest adherence to the Rules in order to enjoy the game. As a result we are all occasionally forced to call a penalty on ourselves for infringements which, often, will go unnoticed by everyone else.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent...the game of golf.

It is this dependency upon honesty and courtesy that has elevated ‘integrity’ to sacrosanct status. Without them, we may as well hang up our clubs.

He should withdraw.

[isawasnake]

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

I'm sorry, but I dont find your analogy "great", I find it very poor and almost amusing.

>>>Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent the spirit in which the game of golf is played.

Part of that spirit sits beneath the term, ‘etiquette’ and part of it relates to the Rules of Golf. But the Spirit of the Game goes much deeper than just those two tangible terms.

It is something that every golfer should develop an innate sense of, something that is born of golf’s unparalleled history, and something which lifts golf, one could argue, above other sports.

Whether it’s through divot and pitch-mark repair, or simply through silence on the tee, the spirit of the game dictates that players make sure they give others on the course, often opponents, a fair chance to play the best shot they can.

For most of us, the game of golf is self-regulating. There is seldom a referee present so we are reliant upon our own honest adherence to the Rules in order to enjoy the game. As a result we are all occasionally forced to call a penalty on ourselves for infringements which, often, will go unnoticed by everyone else.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent...the game of golf.

It is this dependency upon honesty and courtesy that has elevated ‘integrity’ to sacrosanct status. Without them, we may as well hang up our clubs.

He should withdraw.

Why on earth should he withdrawal. Why is the analogy amusing? That is what you want; a player to go against the official ruling. Ha. You find your own stance amusing?

There is really no arguing this point, other points sure. Here is the bottom line.... people have a problem with the ruling and the officiating. Ok, direct your frustrations toward them. Tiger has absolutely, 100% nothing to do with it. Out of his hands. Anyway, I'm arguing with somebody that can't even put 2 sentences together to support himself anyway.

Edited April 14, 2013 by isawasnake

[Forethat]

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

I'm sorry, but I dont find your analogy "great", I find it very poor and almost amusing.

>>>Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent the spirit in which the game of golf is played.

Part of that spirit sits beneath the term, ‘etiquette’ and part of it relates to the Rules of Golf. But the Spirit of the Game goes much deeper than just those two tangible terms.

It is something that every golfer should develop an innate sense of, something that is born of golf’s unparalleled history, and something which lifts golf, one could argue, above other sports.

Whether it’s through divot and pitch-mark repair, or simply through silence on the tee, the spirit of the game dictates that players make sure they give others on the course, often opponents, a fair chance to play the best shot they can.

For most of us, the game of golf is self-regulating. There is seldom a referee present so we are reliant upon our own honest adherence to the Rules in order to enjoy the game. As a result we are all occasionally forced to call a penalty on ourselves for infringements which, often, will go unnoticed by everyone else.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent...the game of golf.

It is this dependency upon honesty and courtesy that has elevated ‘integrity’ to sacrosanct status. Without them, we may as well hang up our

clubs.

He should withdraw.

Why on earth should he withdrawal. Why is the analogy amusing? That is what you want; a player to go against the official ruling. Ha. You find your own stance amusing?

There is really no arguing this point, other points sure. Here is the bottom line.... people have a problem with the ruling and the officiating. Ok, direct your frustrations toward them. Tiger has absolutely, 100% nothing to do with it. Out of his hands. Anyway, I'm arguing with somebody that can't even put 2 sentences together to support himself anyway.

He should withdraw because he's in breach of rule 6-6d

Rule 33 cannot be applied in this case.

You see, the funny thing with golf is that just because you didn't realised you <deleted> up doesn't mean you get a different ruling. In addition, in golf you are FORCED to play by the rules at the time of play. It's not something you can scrutinise and correct retrospectively. And you dont cheat like in baseball.

Sorry. He should withdraw.

Edited April 14, 2013 by Forethat

[isawasnake]

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

I'm sorry, but I dont find your analogy "great", I find it very poor and almost amusing.

>>>Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent the spirit in which the game of golf is played.

Part of that spirit sits beneath the term, ‘etiquette’ and part of it relates to the Rules of Golf. But the Spirit of the Game goes much deeper than just those two tangible terms.

It is something that every golfer should develop an innate sense of, something that is born of golf’s unparalleled history, and something which lifts golf, one could argue, above other sports.

Whether it’s through divot and pitch-mark repair, or simply through silence on the tee, the spirit of the game dictates that players make sure they give others on the course, often opponents, a fair chance to play the best shot they can.

For most of us, the game of golf is self-regulating. There is seldom a referee present so we are reliant upon our own honest adherence to the Rules in order to enjoy the game. As a result we are all occasionally forced to call a penalty on ourselves for infringements which, often, will go unnoticed by everyone else.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent...the game of golf.

It is this dependency upon honesty and courtesy that has elevated ‘integrity’ to sacrosanct status. Without them, we may as well hang up our

clubs.

He should withdraw.

Why on earth should he withdrawal. Why is the analogy amusing? That is what you want; a player to go against the official ruling. Ha. You find your own stance amusing?

There is really no arguing this point, other points sure. Here is the bottom line.... people have a problem with the ruling and the officiating. Ok, direct your frustrations toward them. Tiger has absolutely, 100% nothing to do with it. Out of his hands. Anyway, I'm arguing with somebody that can't even put 2 sentences together to support himself anyway.

He should withdraw because he's in breach of rule 6-6d

Rule 33 cannot be applied in this case.

You see, the funny thing with golf is that just because you didn't realised you <deleted> up doesn't mean you get a different ruling. In addition, in golf you are FORCED to play by the rules at the time of play. It's not something you can scrutinise and correct retrospectively. And you dont cheat like in baseball.

Sorry. He should withdraw.

Officials are called that for a reason, because their decisions are the official decisions. They decided differently than you. So, there is no reason whatsoever he should withdrawal. If you would withdrawal, or joe schmo would withdrawal, great! Good for you guys. That would be your decision.

So, try again if you want. Why should he withdrawal? Is it because the officials made the wrong decision?? That isn't a good reason to withdrawal!! Maybe you have a better reason, I am all ears.

[Forethat]

Something I find incredibly disturbing is that Tiger CHANGES his statement after the first interview when he's been told that he admitted on Live television that the broke the rules and claims that he was trying to drop as close as possible to the original spot. Whereas in the first interview he gladly described how he actively backed up 2 yards to make the yardage perfect for his wedge.

For those of you who're not that rules savvy, what Tiger SHOULD have done is:

a. Take one penalty for dropping in the wrong place

b. Take one penalty for playing from the wrong place (even 20-7 could be applied here)

He should be disqualified for returning an incorrect scorecard.

[valrhona]

Oh I don't know...maybe because it's the honorable thing to do if you're a real sportsman. Maybe if you cared at all about what your fellow competitor think? This is not boxing or MMA... It's supposed to be a game for gentlemen

Of course to expect Woods to know the meaning of that word is not at all realistic

Edited April 14, 2013 by valrhona

[isawasnake]

Something I find incredibly disturbing is that Tiger CHANGES his statement after the first interview when he's been told that he admitted on Live television that the broke the rules and claims that he was trying to drop as close as possible to the original spot. Whereas in the first interview he gladly described how he actively backed up 2 yards to make the yardage perfect for his wedge.

For those of you who're not that rules savvy, what Tiger SHOULD have done is:

a. Take one penalty for dropping in the wrong place

b. Take one penalty for playing from the wrong place (even 20-7 could be applied here)

He should be disqualified for returning an incorrect scorecard.

But he was not disqualified. What he should have done, or should not have, is totally inconsequential in our discussion. All that matters is what the official ruling was. It is funny they did not teach you about official rulings when you were studying to become an offical.

Edited April 14, 2013 by isawasnake

[isawasnake]

Oh I don't know...maybe because it's the honorable thing to do if you're a real sportsman. Maybe if you cared at all about what your fellow competitor think? This is not boxing or MMA... It's supposed to be a game for gentlemen

Of course to expect Woods to know the meaning of that word is not at all realistic

That is just your opinion, what you would do (perhaps, perhaps not?). Opinions don't matter here.

If my fellow competitors thought i did anything at all wrong by playing the tournament here, I'd not want to be associated with their holier than thou BS anyway.

You should not judge a player for doing something when you are not in his shoes. What you can, and should do, is direct your frustrations at the officials, because essentially they are the ones you have a problem with.

Edited April 14, 2013 by isawasnake

[Forethat]

I'm sorry, but I dont find your analogy "great", I find it very poor and almost amusing.

Forgive the machine gun posts, but I strongly disagree with those that think he should withdrawal.

To me, a great analogy can give us some clarity here. If you slide into second base during the last inning of the world series, and you are clearly out, yet the umpire calls you safe, you simply don't walk off the field and say "no no ump, he got me, I was out". Not only is that not the right thing to do, it is reprehensible. You are not respecting the umpire's ruling, and you are not letting the fans see the game as it perhaps should have been; you would be robbing them as well.

The officials will make calls, it is the players' job to respect them. That's it. Sometimes they will go against you, sometimes for you. It just doesn't matter, you must respect them. I think taking himself out of the tournament would be reprehensible myself. Although I do feel players have the right to do that for whatever reason. In short, I actually take the opposite stand of Faldo's; if he withdrawals, I think it would be a real disservice to the officials, the game and the fans.

>>>Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent the spirit in which the game of golf is played.

Part of that spirit sits beneath the term, ‘etiquette’ and part of it relates to the Rules of Golf. But the Spirit of the Game goes much deeper than just those two tangible terms.

It is something that every golfer should develop an innate sense of, something that is born of golf’s unparalleled history, and something which lifts golf, one could argue, above other sports.

Whether it’s through divot and pitch-mark repair, or simply through silence on the tee, the spirit of the game dictates that players make sure they give others on the course, often opponents, a fair chance to play the best shot they can.

For most of us, the game of golf is self-regulating. There is seldom a referee present so we are reliant upon our own honest adherence to the Rules in order to enjoy the game. As a result we are all occasionally forced to call a penalty on ourselves for infringements which, often, will go unnoticed by everyone else.

Honesty, integrity, courtesy: three words that have come to represent...the game of golf.

It is this dependency upon honesty and courtesy that has elevated ‘integrity’ to sacrosanct status. Without them, we may as well hang up our

clubs.

He should withdraw.

Why on earth should he withdrawal. Why is the analogy amusing? That is what you want; a player to go against the official ruling. Ha. You find your own stance amusing?

There is really no arguing this point, other points sure. Here is the bottom line.... people have a problem with the ruling and the officiating. Ok, direct your frustrations toward them. Tiger has absolutely, 100% nothing to do with it. Out of his hands. Anyway, I'm arguing with somebody that can't even put 2 sentences together to support himself anyway.

He should withdraw because he's in breach of rule 6-6d

Rule 33 cannot be applied in this case.

You see, the funny thing with golf is that just because you didn't realised you <deleted> up doesn't mean you get a different ruling. In addition, in golf you are FORCED to play by the rules at the time of play. It's not something you can scrutinise and correct retrospectively. And you dont cheat like in baseball.

Sorry. He should withdraw.

Officials are called that for a reason, because their decisions are the official decisions. They decided differently than you. So, there is no reason whatsoever he should withdrawal. If you would withdrawal, or joe schmo would withdrawal, great! Good for you guys. That would be your decision.

So, try again if you want. Why should he withdrawal? Is it because the officials made the wrong decision?? That isn't a good reason to withdrawal!! Maybe you have a better reason, I am all ears.

There's a referee with every group in the Masters. Tiger could have asked at the time it happened if he was unsure.

My personal belief is that Tiger mixed up his options and positions. I believe he thought he could back up as long as he wanted to )which he could have if he had opted to drop on a line behind the hazard and kept the point of entry between himself and the flag.

He xxxxxx up one of the simplest and easiest rules in golf. There's nothing exceptional about that which requires high definition footage to discover, and he should have been aware of this and it is his responsibility to be aware of these rules. So rule 33 cannot be applied in this case.

He will forever be branded as a cheat unless he withdraws.

And keep in mind Tiger was the one who commented Guans penalty for slow play by stating "rules are rules".

Tragic.

Edited April 14, 2013 by metisdead
Profanity