- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tiger may not have been 2 yards back like he said
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:32 pm to extremetigerfanatic
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:32 pm to extremetigerfanatic
quote:
Well damnit, you ruined by argument with one line. I didn't realize that backwoods college tourney's had replay and videotaped interviews with all the players after each round.
If I was playing in a "backwoods college tournament" and made a comment following a round similar to Tiger's regarding an action that would constitute an illegal drop, I should be penalized.
quote:
And as to intent. Is stating your intention BEFORE striking the ball the same as relaying your intent hours later on something you weren't asked about at the time the same?
Not sure what you're trying to argue here...especially regarding the incident on Friday.
This post was edited on 4/14/13 at 11:33 pm
3
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:42 pm to Golfer
The fact that he dropped his ball in the imaginary "nearest" circle ends the debate...no penalty
Every golfer in the world puts thought into where exactly they drop, so there's always intent to help yourself
Every golfer in the world puts thought into where exactly they drop, so there's always intent to help yourself
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:45 pm to Ford Frenzy
quote:
The fact that he dropped his ball in the imaginary "nearest" circle ends the debate...no penalty
Except for what he said. My understanding of the rules are that if you say you broke a rule, you are penalized for it...no matter if it happened or not.
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:47 pm to Golfer
quote:
If I was playing in a "backwoods college tournament" and made a comment following a round similar to Tiger's regarding an action that would constitute an illegal drop, I should be penalized.
What I am trying to say is how far out does this go? End of the round? that night but before midnight, thru the end of the tourney, maybe we can review everything all year long til the last tourney? When would the tour stop and say, yeah, well it's done we aren't redoing it?
It doesn't really matter what you say, because you have to say it at some point and once you do it's all arbitrary. What's the difference if it's an hour later or a year later? You say, "A rule is a rule." as if there is no grey area, when there is a ton of freaking grey area all the damn time.
So how many opportunities does the PGA get to reassess a broadly applied decision? Leeway is given on drops every week of the tour on every single day of every single tournament. We are talking about the same tour that allowed Tiger to move a boulder right?
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:47 pm to Golfer
I'm not sure about that part, but if that the way it is, I guess I'm wrong on this entire situation
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:49 pm to Golfer
This cameraman never moved the tripod between the two shots, unlike the video cameraman (as you can see, he's in the first shot and not the other). The photographic evidence is startling. Augusta national was right in their initial determination, the tv viewer wrong, and tiger wrong.
Tiger did not drop two yards behind, he dropped 3 inches behind. He was flustered, hence his spatial awareness was off. In the heat of the moment, he instinctively dropped by his last shot.
The resulting spectacle changed everything.
Tiger did not drop two yards behind, he dropped 3 inches behind. He was flustered, hence his spatial awareness was off. In the heat of the moment, he instinctively dropped by his last shot.
The resulting spectacle changed everything.
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:50 pm to extremetigerfanatic
quote:
What I am trying to say is how far out does this go? End of the round? that night but before midnight, thru the end of the tourney, maybe we can review everything all year long til the last tourney? When would the tour stop and say, yeah, well it's done we aren't redoing it?
Likely before the individual tees off for the next round.
quote:
So how many opportunities does the PGA get to reassess a broadly applied decision? Leeway is given on drops every week of the tour on every single day of every single tournament. We are talking about the same tour that allowed Tiger to move a boulder right?
Well this isn't a PGA or USGA sanctioned event...
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:51 pm to Ford Frenzy
quote:
I'm not sure about that part, but if that the way it is, I guess I'm wrong on this entire situation
There have been instances where players have penalized themselves because they tell their opponent that their ball moved during address, even though their playing partner doesn't believe the ball moved.
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:52 pm to Golfer
But if intent to help yourself with regards to exactly where you drop the ball is the penalty, everyone who ever drops is a cheater because it at some point during the drop process crosses their mind as to where to release the ball to give them the best chance at drawing a good lie
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:54 pm to Ford Frenzy
quote:
But if intent to help yourself with regards to exactly where you drop the ball is the penalty, everyone who ever drops is a cheater because it at some point during the drop process crosses their mind as to where to release the ball to give them the best chance at drawing a good lie
I understand what you are saying, but Tiger stated his intent was to play a ball from an incorrect location.
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:55 pm to Golfer
So stating it is the penalty?
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:56 pm to Golfer
Golf fans I understand your angst.
One time on a survivor series ppv a ref was knocked out and shawn michaels hit marty jannety with a chair. Ref comes to 1, 2, 3. Michaels iintercontinental champ. But then another ref comes out says what happen, match restarts jannetty wins.
Main event comes and mr fuji throws salt in bret harts eyes when ref isn't looking. Bret can't see and yokozuna ends up winning because of it. No ref comes out to tell other ref what happen. Yoko new world champ
This has happen many times throughout wrestling and they sti refuse to go to a universal system. Wwe refs make golf refs seem like competent gods
One time on a survivor series ppv a ref was knocked out and shawn michaels hit marty jannety with a chair. Ref comes to 1, 2, 3. Michaels iintercontinental champ. But then another ref comes out says what happen, match restarts jannetty wins.
Main event comes and mr fuji throws salt in bret harts eyes when ref isn't looking. Bret can't see and yokozuna ends up winning because of it. No ref comes out to tell other ref what happen. Yoko new world champ
This has happen many times throughout wrestling and they sti refuse to go to a universal system. Wwe refs make golf refs seem like competent gods
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:57 pm to Ford Frenzy
Basically, yes.
As I said earlier, if I tell my playing partner that my ball moved during address (no matter what happened) I am supposed to penalize myself.
As I said earlier, if I tell my playing partner that my ball moved during address (no matter what happened) I am supposed to penalize myself.
Posted on 4/14/13 at 11:58 pm to fightingtiger2335
I remember all of thatPosted on 4/15/13 at 2:40 am to threeputt
quote:
Or if on the tee I hit the ball on my practice swing, I do not count the stoke because I did not intend to hit he ball.
wait, what?
Posted on 4/15/13 at 6:29 am to Golfer
That isn't the same. If you tell him it moved...but it really didn't...you SHOULDN'T have a penalty.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 6:36 am to LSUSOBEAST1
quote:
He said it himself.
In listening to Mike and Mike I hadn't realized before that Tiger said he had intended to place the ball behind where the first ball had been played for. That's a movement of the ball for strategic advantage (and something everyone knows is against the rules IMO).
He's very lucky not to be disqualified when he admitted that was his intent (him claiming he didn't know the rule is irrelevant other than being bizarre). And if it were a marginal player who admitted to this type of placement you have to wonder if he would have been DQed instead of just penalized a couple strokes.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 7:10 am to molsusports
I thought he was joking when he said he didn't want to hit the stick again. And it looks like he didn't give himself an advantage. But shite...who knows?
Posted on 4/15/13 at 7:12 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
it looks like he didn't give himself an advantage
I think the rule as it is written doesn't make that the issue. The rule apparently states you have to drop with the intent to putting it as close as possible to the original location.
So pretty much Tiger's description of his own intent is the only damning evidence which can't be debated IMO.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 7:23 am to threeputt
quote:
Or if on the tee I hit the ball on my practice swing, I do not count the stoke because I did not intend to hit he ball.
But that's only on the teebox. If the ball is in the fairway and you take a practice swing and accidentally hit the ball, it's a stroke even though you didn't INTEND to hit it. So you're wrong, it's not just about intent.
quote:
Foe the umpteenth time, That rule was made for replay where TV is needed to determine if a violation has occurred when a player could not possibly known that they broke a rule. IT DOES NOT APPLY HERE ... Not even close .. You do not need a camera to see where that ball bounced off of the pin
Per that Fred WHatshisname dude, it's exactly what the rule was made for. It's not just "for TV." He said that even if there had been no call-in to the committee and they had simply changed their mind and reviewed it and decided to assess the penalty, Tiger still would've been protected (because they had already ruled that he was within the rules).
Also, you brought up intent before...Tiger intended to get a better shot, but he was trying to do that with what he thought was within the rules. That's the kicker...he thought he was within the rules, and so did the committee (until later). So his INTENT was to not break the rules. Once it was brought to his attention, he acknowledged that he had made a mistake and accepted the penalty that he was assessed. According to the rules, he was allowed to stay in the tournament. Even Nick Faldo acknowledged this later on in the coverage and admitted that once the rule (33-7) had been properly explained to him, he agreed that Tiger was rightfully still playing.
Page 5 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News