As I said in my first post on this, when notified by a television spectator of what they thought was a rules violation, the rules committee would assume that Tiger and his caddy knew that he should drop as close as possible to the original spot and assume that was what he did, therefore no penalty. When he later said that he delibrately moved 2 yards (his words), then the games changes.
Can one really expect the rules committee to admit that they made an assumption the player and his caddy knew and followed the rule to the best of their ability; they just misidentified the original location? In fact, were I there watching I would also assume that they made a good faith effort to drop is the same spot from which the original shot was made (which can be easily identified if you place a tee or other marker at the spot when you go to examine your options). When Tiger admitted that he moved back 2 yards to give himself the right distance, he admitted that he does not understand the intent of the rule, to take the penalty shot from the "same" location as the original shot; same distance, same slope angle, same grain and so on. If the drop lands in your divot, that is another penalty.
The real issue is, when this decision was made before the start of play today, the odds that Tiger would be in contention on Sunday were pretty low. Now, should he pull off a win, there will be an asterisk next to this victory that makes Roger Maris's 61 hr's asterisk look like a flea on an elephant in comparison.
well hell par 4, I guess you are right and me, your own USGA buddies, the Masters, Tiger, and his caddy are wrong. Gee whiz, life’s a bitch.
No, it's not, but the ball is not in play either. Your divot is closer to the hole than your original ball placement, so if it settles in the divot, you must redrop. Two more drops closer to the hole and you place the ball as close to the original position as possible, not closer to the hole.
You are not helping your argument with statements like these.