Posted on 04/13/2013 10:20:07 AM PDT by Perdogg
If he signed the card with the wrong score, the rule is clear. It is a DQ.
If Tiger goes on to have the lowest score, there could be one interesting lawsuit filed by the “runner-up.”
Both players unknowingly signed an incorrect scorecard. So please explain to me with your vast knowledge of the game how these situations are different?
13-2. Improving Lie, Area of Intended Stance or Swing, or Line of Play
A player must not improve or allow to be improved:
the position or lie of his ball,
the area of his intended stance or swing,
After Tiger made his drop, he not only was improving the area of swing, he also was using his club to do it. One interpretation says his ball was in the water hazard, prohibiting the action. A more forgiving interpretation is that his already suffered the stroke and distance penalty and was improving the swing area of his new ball lie.
Yes, the NEW rule this year IS clear - that a wrongful scorecard is NO LONGER an automatic DQ. Let me repeat, a wrong scorecard is NO LONGER an automatic DQ. When is it NOT a DQ? It is not a DQ in just this kind of situation, when a ruling is not known by the golfer when he signs his card. In other words, for JUST THIS EXACT SITUATION!!!!!!!!!
This scorecard signing is an outdated rule anyway, going back way before golfers were observed during competition.
Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test either.
Too many clubs, in your bag, for all 18 holes, is not something that is depdendent on a rules review. It is far more cut and dried rule. Having a 15th club can be a huge advantage, though I have no idea if this kid used all 15 or not.
As for the drop, Tiger did get an additional 2 stroke penalty for that. But he was under the impression that the rules committee had okayed his drop interpretation. They ruled differently about the time he finished his round, but had not told him yet when he signed his card. It is not incumbent on players to know that the rules committee have ruled against them.
In fact, the new rule, 33-7, was put in place this year for just this situation, to soften the outdated signing rule under certain circumstances....like THIS one.
Which, actually, is not either of the rules they cited. This was ruled under section 26, and the card mitigated under 33.
It’s a shame I have no respect I could lose for Tiger.
This is a simple isssue. He broke a rule. It was well-documented by videotape and by his own admission when in a post round interview he stated he moved the ball back by 2 yds. His ignorance of his breaking the rule at the time of the transgression and when he signed his card is irrelevant. He should be DQ’d. But he cheats in all aspects of his life, so his remaining in the tournament is par for the course. Pun intended.
http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Rule-06/
From USGA.org
6-6. Scoring In Stroke Play
a. Recording Scores
After each hole the marker should check the score with the competitor and record it. On completion of the round the marker must sign the score card and hand it to the competitor. If more than one marker records the scores, each must sign for the part for which he is responsible.
b. Signing and Returning Score Card
After completion of the round, the competitor should check his score for each hole and settle any doubtful points with the Committee. He must ensure that the marker or markers have signed the score card, sign the score card himself and return it to the Committee as soon as possible.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 6-6b:
Disqualification.
c. Alteration of Score Card
No alteration may be made on a score card after the competitor has returned it to the Committee.
d. Wrong Score for Hole
The competitor is responsible for the correctness of the score recorded for each hole on his score card. If he returns a score for any hole lower than actually taken, he is disqualified. If he returns a score for any hole higher than actually taken, the score as returned stands.
Note 1: The Committee is responsible for the addition of scores and application of the handicap recorded on the score card – see Rule 33-5.
Note 2: In four-ball stroke play, see also Rules 31-3 and 31-7a.
That’s just cherry-pickin’ and you know it.
The scorecard rule was quoted as 33-7 in the presser. And I’m not toally sure on jurisdiction, but Masters play may not be 100% consistent with USGA rules - which is the body that runs the US Open but not typically PGA events. I mean, there’s some commonality among all golf bodies, but not 100%. It was, apparently, a Masters Committee that ruled on it, so they may be Masters rules.
As for the scorecard rule in the first place, it’s outdated and no longer necessary.
Looking at Rule 20-1-b addressing dropping the ball, it must be redropped if...
(vi) rolls and comes to rest more than two club-lengths from where it first struck a part of the course; or
(vii) rolls and comes to rest nearer the hole than:
(a) its original position or estimated position (see Rule 20-2b) unless otherwise permitted by the Rules; or
After reviewing this, and looking at the slope of the ground towards the pin and the water hazard, I don’t think he did anything wrong regarding where he dropped the ball.
Next it is an issue of how many strokes he took by replaying the ball in the water hazard by dropping from his last known lie.
Amazing. Jim Nantz makes the right points and questions in an on-air interview with rules committee chair named Greg Ridley. Ridley is completely unconvincing about why Woods wasn’t DQ’d.
Then any rules transgression can be explained away by the player saying “he didn’t know” after the fact. There’s too much slack there and it opens the door for subjective and inconsistent rulings.
You may be right - and for sure, I don’t think he did anything wrong on the drop intentioanlly. I mean, he knew the entire world was watching....he knew that given the bizarre bounce, all who were not watching would surely see the replay. Golf rules are not always that easy to understand, and they do change somewhat from course to course.
I think he made a mistake, and I think 4 shot penalty is punishment enough. I just don’t buy the intentional cheat argument from an intellectual standpoint. It makes no sense.
Then Jim Nantz should read post 54 on this thread....and get up to speed. (I like Nantz, but the ruling is damned correct NOT to DQ).
maybe you can go to jail when an IRS agent gives you bad advice on your next tax return.....(analogy FITS your logic).
I’m not a Tiger Groupie, nor am I a Tiger Hater.
Just caught the initial broadcast of the Master’s at 300pm and of course, this was the first thing on the show. That moron, Nance, was talking about the rules regarding his drop and the subsequent decisions made to allow him to play.
What got me was the rule that says that, when it pertains to an offense that would disqualify a player, the rules committee has the right to assess a penalty and allow the player to finish. The rule is only 2 years old, apparently. I guess it was put in place to make sure the marquis players are allowed to stay in the tournament, if they want them to.
If I’m reading this right, then I wonder what decision would’ve been made if it wasn’t Tiger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.