What a ridiculous post.

Of course they are not expected to drop the ball into a divot. They are expected to drop it as near as possible to where they originally played from.

The point that you are missing, firstimevisor, is that Tiger openly admitted that he deliberately DID NOT drop as near as possible.

A terrific thread with,in the main,really well thought out points of view and respect for others views. I have really enjoyed reading the thread over the weekend. My view for whats it worth is this ruling to allow Tiger Woods to remain in the tournament will not do the game of golf any good in the long term . Golf is a game where players of all ability from Pro's to high handicapers respect the rules of the game and abide by them even calling fouls on themselves. Tiger Woods slipped up on Friday and clearly as per the rules of the game should have been DQ. What also disturbs me is the the modern day best player in the world did not DQ himself. This does not provide good example and Woods has gone down in my estimation as a result. I think the bulk of the field would have DQ themselves in that situation.

sorry sentry, not sentry.

it's a diff story USA TV

calling him a hero for being only a few shots back after penalty

Well the Yanks have to close ranks with Tiger , he was the only one of theirs who did not fold .

In this case though  , my sympathy is with Tiger . Cost him 4 shots largely because his approach was on the money and hit the flagstick , never mind the psychological minus and the hassle with rules officials / media questions / slurs .

Tiger was a victim in the circumstances , not the role he plays best , but fair is fair , and golf is supposed to be a "fair" game .

The overall concept of the rules of golf is that they supposedly are designed to be fair .

If Tiger gained any advantage from his drop on the 15th , I am a monkeys uncle . Dont forget he just suffered stroke and distance from hitting the flagstick , dont think I have ever seen that before .

So to be fair , which the current rules are obviously not given that nearly everybody accepts Tiger broke the "rules" , Tiger has to have our sympathy , not that he needs it , he is tough enough to put this behind him and draw from it .

Its the rules and their application which are under scrutiny in this incident , and reflect badly on them rather than Tiger .  The fact that the rules are so complicated and sometimes devoid of common sense and natural justice is a lifetime complaint of mine .  This is just another example , where anyone with a bit of common sense would say  " OK tough , stroke and distance , replay  , not nearer the hole ,and points of entry etc are of no consequence in the general scheme of things " .

If officialdom and TV and people around the world are going to sit on judgement on every shot anybody plays anywhere on the course , the players are going to react by sending for an official if they sneeze while addressing the ball and have to clarify it with everybody in case someone says his sneeze affected the ball position .  That is a reductio ad absurdum , but sometimes you have to apply dumb propositions to get people to see sense . In the situation that now pertains on the pro golf circuit , I know if I were playing on it I would be bringing out a seat with me , knowing I was going to insist on a ruling every time there was even a 1 % chance I might get penalised even though I thought I knew the rules .

The rules of golf booklet which sits in front of my computer screen has 208 pages in it , most of it fairly small print . Very few people know all the rules , particularly for the unforeseen circumstances .  And dont forget , very few golfers have the luxury of being able to send for a ruling in their normal day to day play .

If you want to visit a situation where a player has benefitted from a fairly obvious malpractice and not done the right thing , suggest you dial into Sir Nicks match against Graham Marsh at Wentworth many years back . That was a real ugly scar on the spirit of the game of golf .

It was Tiger himself who first mentioned the two yards and how he had done that deliberately to help him rectify the small error he made with the first shot, so yes, he sought to gain an adavantage, and as far as he's concerned he got an advantage.
I agree with Kelly though that the rules aren't fair. Tiger made an honest mistake and gained a very small (imo) advantage. A two-shot penalty was plenty stiff enough. Why go around disqualifying people who have made honest mistakes when you can mete out a more than adequate punishment by adding a shot or two ?
But that's for the future. For now, he should have been DQ'd, and when he wasn't, I think he should have walked.

Maggot , if dropping the ball a yard behind your original divot mark is gaining advantage  , I am a monkeys auntie . Tiger obviously wanted to replicate his original shot , minus a yard  , so added a yard .  He still had to hit the shot , it was not as if he could recalibrate the club/ shot like a computer game scenario .  That he hit an inch perfect shot pin high , 3 feet away is a tribute to his accuracy , but I have NEVER ever seen anyone able to hit exactly the same shot with the same degree of spin etc 2 shots in a row from 87 yards , so it was 2 different shots . The mind application to the procedure can be debated .

Tiger got mixed up between the line of entry and the difference in the rules for differing definitions of water hazards . In Tigers minds eye he crossed the hazard exactly in line with the flagstick ( which he hit )  , the ball finished in the hazard , albeit via a circuitous route which he would not have actually seen .  Tiger was dropping back in line with the hole/ flagstick , with no limit on where the ball was dropped  as long as it was in line with the original shot , and not nearer the hole .  He could have walked back to the tee to replay the shot if it fulfilled the "line criteria .

That he was breaking a rule is not in doubt , it is the rule and the subsequent penalty( ies) and the non application of common sense I have issue with . Tigers main error was that he didnt ask for a rules official , he just wanted to get on with the game .

Glad that Adam and Angel finished 4 shots ahead of Tiger , if they had only been 1 ahead the scenario in retrospect might have detracted from Adams triumph .

Whatever about the thinking process which Tiger went through on the 15th , and the subsequent "investigation" , the fact that emerged at the end of the day , whether you call it a fudge or not , the "committee" reached a common sense decision . No one wants to see the world no 1 kicked out of a Major on a technicality . The 2 shot penalty for playing from the wrong spot is correct and a 2 shot penalty a meet punishment  , fits the "crime" .

Mind you if you compare Tigers offence with other sports , its not as if he kicked anyone up in the air or indulged in eye gouging or a spear tackle . He did the equivalent of taking a throw in from the wrong spot .

That people label him a cheat and want him to walk out of a tournament amazes me .  Can you see Wayne Rooney walking off because he was guilty of taking a free kick from the wrong spot when the refs back was turned ? Pro golf is a busines based around a sporting pastime , the general public lose interest very quickly if they see injustice or inconsequential rules dreamed up by those in charge .  And with the already bad publicity associated with penalising a 14 year old kid for slow play already in the headlines , golf did not need another contentious decision , throwing out the best golfer in the world and diminishing interest in the event .  Betfair certainly did not want Tiger out , they know the figures .

The pros play under different rules to most of us , fair enough .  I think they may reach the stage where they reserve the right to interpret the rules to the advantage initially of the players ( who are after all trying to earn a living --some at the bottom of that food chain on various tours do not get it easy financially -- ) , and  then to the advantage of the tour in general , and sponsors who largely pay for the operation .  Where that leaves us all would be problematic , but if we amateurs had simpler rules it should help to speed up play , which is the bane of most golf clubs these days .  When I started playing golf , anything over 3 and a half hours for a round was considered out of order . The courses arent that much longer nowadays , and the older guys have buggies  , but now its a 5 hour job .

Agree Mexicano apropos the rules , needed bending in Tigers case , which they did .  Sensible enough in the overall circumstances in my book .

But the draconian enforcement involving the Chinese 14 year old left a bad taste in a lot of mouths , even the players were tweeting to that effect .  We all see the slow players , one of my countrymen isn't the fastest out there , but he does it with a smile so he gets a bye ball most times . But when Tiger sits on a chair for 30 minutes in the middle of his round and it takes 6 hours to play a round , 10 second over runs are irrelevant in the general scheme of a days play .

I know he was warned , and his english is a heck of a lot better than most of us in mandarin , but assimilating the information and reacting when the world is watching , and playing brilliantly in between , surely he deserved Nelsons blind eye , none of his fellow players were complaining .

Not a shred of doubt in my mind if that ball never hits the pin and spins back Tiger would have won that tournament.

My opinion is that ball would have gone out the back and possibly into the water.