So the Woods fiasco appears to hinge on one thing...

i think if he was consulted before he signed card its ok for him to stay, if it came to light after and then first ruling was he was in the wrong then DQ is applicable

He wasnt consulted before signing the card. The officials say that they were made aware of the problem by a tv viewer before tiger played the 18th. They reviewed the footage and decided there was no case to answer. They subsequently reviewed it again after the round finished and changed their minds.

Tiger met with them this morning and it was decided that a 2 shot penalty was in order.

He says he was not consulted.

I called them

hmm well in that case it seems a bit more dodgy to me....

If after the round it was reviewed and the committee said that there was no infringement and subsequently woods signed his card then it would be harsh to dq him. Infact he probably has a case for claiming their should be no penalty either.

Why they didn't pick up it i dont understand it is pretty straightforward.

If Woods just signed for his round presuming he had done nothing wrong then he should have been DQ.

The review for Tv is a non starter for me as it wasn't an unknown e.g. double hit, it was a rules infraction.

again MW spot on

What it really hinges on is his admission that he moved the ball to gain an advantage.

If he had said nothing there would have been no problem.

The whole thing is a bit of a fiasco and it's overshadowed the whole tournamnet. Pity.

I think it would be different IF Tiger had consulted an official and said "look, I may have broken the rules on 15, can you check for me"?  And the official said no penalty and he signed his card under that assumption.

But that didn't happen, some viewer phoned in and they watched the footage and negated to consult Tiger.  For me that's equivalent to nobody having phoned in the first place.  Tiger signed his card thinking it was a correct score, it wasn't because he broke the rules to gain an advantage.  DQ.

Woods states that he was only told they had reviewed it and deemed it ok when he met with them today.

i.e. they had a look yesterday but didn't tell him.

So he did not sign it in the knowledge they had deemed no infringement.

If they didn't speak to him and he just signed i agree Knigh Rider is a DQ

The rules committee here have had a nightmare. Either they didn't know the rules or they reviewed it and wrongly thought it was ok.

Subsequently they have bottled the big decision.

yep should be DQ if thats the case. bottled it

Cant believe this is even being debated. However harsh it seems its a clear disqualification.

He should do the decent thing and walk.

had tiger not stated he took it back two yards then i doubt there would be a penalty at all

therefore its a dq isnt it





i dont think he did much wrong to be honest, nothing we all havnt done, well perhaps within a clublength, but you dont want the ball falling into the divot , do you

Im not really sure on this Tv ruling but had the TV viewer not phoned in then it would have never been brought up as neither his playing partner nor anyone around 15 seem to have noticed nor did the tv or radio crews yesterday.

Whether this is what the rule covers im not sure.

I presume Woods has taken what he thought was a line of sight drop forgetting in the confusion that his ball came back off the flag changing the line of sight drop.

I think TW thought he was entitled to go back as far as he liked and has in essence got the rules confused. That's not sufficient to avoid a DQ.....very lucky man but not surpised.

Some players would drop it close to the divot knowing it would run forward twice and get to place it, I have always claimed that the ball is closer to the hole if it finishes in the divot because the divot should be ahead of where the ball was.

MW2008 i still think that he must be disqualified

he deliberately gained an advantage by not complying with the rules it is immaterial whether he knew what he was doing or not-he broke the rules and signed for a wrong score

I agree sewter.

Technically it comes down to whether this Tv rule gives im a get out jail card.

It is a mess and leaves a sour taste.

no mighty whites he didnt  take line of sight as the ball span back at an angle and entered the hazard on a different
line, so he went back to replay the shot

line of sight would have put him more or less in the crowd, and he didnt fancy the drop zone ( as reported)

I wonder whether he just forgot it had rebounded of the flag. His head must have been scrambled after what happened and he paced around a little.

I don't think he was deliberately breaking the rule to gain an advantage. If he had why would he have said what he did in the press conference.

he should have been dqd

wrecked tournament now - if he wins it will be tainted (i suspect he will struggle to play well now) and if someon else wins, their victory will be less that it would have been without all this.

If he had why would he have said what he did in the press conference.

Sounded like a deliberate attempt to plead ignorance of the rule to me as he knew he was in trouble.

Can't the rest of the professional tour do something about this then?  You know, the (laughable) 'honour of the game' and all that stuff?

How about if they all threaten to walk out of the event ?

I think Monty should refuse to do any analysis for the rest of the tournament in protest.

i think hes used to dropping it in the general area, and not to the millimeter


itll be interesting to see if somebody else takes half an hour to get it absolutely as close as possible
and gets a penalty for slow play


surely he isnt expected to play it from the edge of he divot hole, which would be a literal interpretation
of the rule

That would be fine if he didn't say he deliberately went two yards back to get a better shot at it.

Montys got form

Monty can explain how he cheated and then focused on the rest of the event. Might be the first time he can make a useful contribution.

dont be silly donny. He was a full 2 yards behind his divot. The way i always play this rule is to hold the ball directly above the divot, if it goes closer or lands in the divot then its a re-drop.

thing is Donny he dropped it where he did so that he didn't risk hiting the flag again.

that comment indicates he was incorrectly taking line of sight christy

thats my point too, captain, dq or forget it


it would be nice if they stated what is acceptable under the as close as possible rule

as i stated above i assumed one club length would be acceptable, but perhaps ive been cheeting too

Seems like a right royal fudge to me.

A 2 stroke penalty obviously implies a severe breach of the playing regs. So he's guilty.

Is he guilty enough to be DQ? According to what is written I'd say so.

Puts the Chinese kid's punishment in perspective. They fussed over Tiger for hours but pulled the trigger on the lad.

sorry MW cant have that "Monty" and "useful contribution" in the same sentence

why would you re drop if it lands in the divot, thats not on !

Donny the infringement of the rules is not even up for debate now.  He broke the rules, 2 shot penalty.

The only question is whether his disqualification for signing an incorrect scorecard should be waived or not.  The committee decided it should, apparently because of a viewer having phoned in.  Ironically a guy who was trying to get Tiger in trouble has probably kept him in the tournament!

Donny I don't know if you play golf, but a divot starts just in front of the ball.  The entire divot will be closer to the hole than the ball was (unless you hit one extremely fat!).

thats why i said on the edge of the divot


ball in water often indicates youve hit it fat, unless we all spin back like tiger !

If i was a betting man which i am ...i bet there was no one who called in ..He called the penalty on his own via his interview.They have somehow managed to invent the story about the viewer phoning in to keep him in the tournament...At the end of the day it all comes down to money....In this case TV along with the Masters ...wanted him in.So the CHEAT tees it up and takes his chances...disgrace.!

Seen a ball end up under the divot.....not relevant but funny...

Knight Rider is correct. The divot starts infront of the ball (just) so you have to assume that a ball in the divot is closer to the hole than the origanol ball. Given the advantage of a slow motion camera reply which is unlikely on your local course then its a more than fair assumption to make.

A few of us quiereid this with a rules official who was doing a talk at my club and he confirmed that the practice is the correct thing to do (and smart!!).

so am guessing you all layed tiger , as for some cryer say n if he wins it will be taint the master's . grow up it's like this he's still in it deal with it and yes i backed him so i hope he wins , but had rory done it i wouldnt have wanted him kicked out , i think it's just more impressive if the tiger wins form here ,plus the master's need tiger golf needs tiger ,hate him or love him had tiger been dq the 2013 master's would be remember for the dq and would probable had over shadowed who won it

to me the whole thing hinges on the fact that he said in an interview that he went two yards back to take six foot of of the shot.

THAT WAS AN ILLEGAL DROP.

it didn't come to light because of tv evidence,

it was a willful act on his part.

he unknowingly broke the rule.

then went on to sign for a score that was wrong.

therefore disqualification is the only option for that tournament committe.

they've fudged it by bringing in this new tv rule.

BUT.
the fact is the illegal drop didn't come to light because of the tv rule. it was done because he thought he was entitled to drop it there, and did so willfully, because that's where he thought he had the best chance from.

HE WAS WRONG.
he made an illegal drop.

signed for the wrong score.

therefore they have no option but to dq him.

it seems to me that they followed the rules to their draconian limit in order to penalise the chinese kid a shot, but they're going out on a limb and finding the worst possible fudge to keep tiger in the tournament.

It was a carefully worded statement that took hours to put together.

They want (need? Surely not!) the favourite to stay in the tourny.

If he wins it will be staggering and controversial. That will attract even more publicity which the sponsors love.

Monty...useful contribution in same sentence, try a sentence about him playing in the Ryder Cup

Yep, agree with Mex's post.

Thought it strange that this wansn't sorted last night as well, did they provide a reason for this?