Tiger penalized for bad drop. Should he have withdrawn.

[nickagneta]

Not sure how many are following the Masters but to summarize here is what happened to Tiger yesterday.

Tiger is leading the Masters at -5 on the 15th hole when he hits a perfect 3rd shot into the par five that hits the flag which causes the ball to deflect to far towards the front of the green and rolls into the water. He goes back and takes a drop and hits almost the exact same shot but a little farther and so puts the ball within 6 feet and hits the bogey 6. He lost another stroke on 18 and finished 3 back of the leader at -3.

Then last night, as people are reviewing the highlights, someone notices Tiger dropped his ball 3 feet farther from the hole which is illegal. The rule states you have to drop the ball where you hit it or in the drop zone.

Normally, if you sign an incorrect scorecard, it disqualifies you from a tournament. If you do something incorrectly and don't assess the correct penalty, it disqualifies you from the tournament. Gentleman's game and all.

But a new rule put in this year allows for a review of the scorecard if there are problems of this type. Tiger was given a two stroke penalty and now starts today at -1 instead of -3.

Should he have done the gentlemanly thing and withdrawn? If television wasn't involved and a million replays seen all over the world, this would never have happened, so I guess the new rule helps but golf tradition says Tiger should perhaps withdraw.

Honestly, I don't think he tried to purposely cheat, he got a rule mixed up with another, but golf is a different game and I think he probably should have withdrawn but understand if he doesn't because it is now within the rules not to withdraw because you are allowed a review of the scorecard if special events occur.

Strange though. Tiger hit a PERFECT shot. Should have had a 4 and instead has an 8. Hitting the flag cost him 4 strokes and maybe the Masters. Gold is a strange game.

[The Rondo Show]

if it was anyone else thy would have been disqualified

[saltlover]

if it was anyone else thy would have been disqualified

I highly disagree.  They made the new rule in reaction to Padraig Harrington being disqualified two years ago, meaning that they would have preferred to not disqualify him back then.  Two years ago, Tiger would have been dq'd, and today, Harrington wouldn't have.

Frankly, golf is stupid in this respect. They have your opponent keep your score, make you responsible for it, and all the while keep track in case you're wrong.  Everyone knows what every player shoots every hole -- the scorecard ritual is nonsense.

They should have a rules official with every group, not with some groups, and let the officials be officials.  If they want to review rulings in between rounds and make adjustments, then fine, but right now you've got 10 million officials watching a few players, and one or zero officials watching the rest.  It's dumb.

[CelticConcourse]

Lol, game over.

[Atzar]

This rule is like letting NBA players call their own fouls.  Then, after the game is over, they dock you two points for not calling a charge on yourself in the second quarter. 

How about we have the officials actually officiate like every other major sport?  Better to correct mistakes before they're made, rather than creating scenarios like this (and like the one involving Guan).  I doubt very much that either of these men intended to cheat, and a simple notification by an official could have nipped both issues in the bud.

Instead, this crap is overshadowing the entire tournament.

[BballTim]

  I saw a few minutes about it this morning. Apparently the rule change came about because of better viewing technology. People will re-watch shots on their hdtvs, often in slow motion, and call the tournament when they notice an uncalled violation. This is inherently unfair because the better players spend more time on tv, thus are under more scrutiny than other golfers and it's unfair to them. This makes perfect sense as it tries to level the playing field.

  Ironically, Woods was saved by this rule when he really shouldn't have been (in terms of the spirit of the change). While it was probably because of a misunderstanding of the rules Tiger deliberately did something that was against the rules and signed an incorrect scorecard because of it.

[Bahku]

I actually think they made the right decision with the penalization, and I don't believe it was just a "Tiger" thing ... the ruling would've been the same for anyone else, IMO.

Now, whether he should DQ himself? I guess that's his call, but I also have no problem with him not doing it. A decision was made by the powers that be ... play on.

Of course all of this will be much more important if he actually wins, and we'll be hearing about it for months, so maybe it would be best if he did leave.

It's a very complicated situation, but again, I think they made the right call, and he certainly wasn't trying to hide anything. Didn't know we had many other golfers on here ... I often wondered why there was no golf forum.

Conversely, I would absolutely love to see Freddy Couples win this thang ... my main man for many years, is Fred.

[Roy H.]

What would the penalty have been if a golfer intentionally chose to shoot from that spot?  Do the rules call for a specific penalty?

[saltlover]

What would the penalty have been if a golfer intentionally chose to shoot from that spot?  Do the rules call for a specific penalty?

2 strokes for taking a shot from the wrong place and that place is further from the hole than the correct place -- it is a larger penalty if you take a shot from closer to the hole incorrectly.  He dropped from the wrong place, which meant his ball was not where it should have been, and he was further from the hole.  Intention matters in this case in that if Tiger had done it unintentionally, the rule about the drop is vague enough that his drop would have been legal, and thus he would have played from the correct place, and no penalty would have been assessed.

[TAllen]

What would the penalty have been if a golfer intentionally chose to shoot from that spot?  Do the rules call for a specific penalty?

He would have received the same two shot penalty.  The ruling was correct and fair.

[KGs Knee]

I found it kind of ironic that Tiger would have never been penalized at all had he not said anything.  His own words did him in.

I have waffled a bit in whether or not he should have been disqualified.  The video review wasn't what was used to ultimately determine him being guilty of a rules violation, his own words were.  Therefore, the rule that saved him would seem to not really have any bearing, and therefore lead to Tiger being disqualified.  But, had there never been an initial review, prompted by a TV viewer calling Tiger out (which is freakin' absurd by the way), nobody would have ever been the wiser.  The media likely wouldn't hve questioned Tiger about the drop, never giving him the opportunity to incriminate himself.

So yeah, I think in the end, the officials made the right call.

[Cman]

I'm not a huge golf follower, but this isn't a big deal to me. He was appropriately penalized for the bad drop. Same thing would have happened to any other golfer. Should he have voluntarily withdrawn? No. This is pro sports, not a parlour game.

[csfansince60s]

Didn't know we had many other golfers on here ... I often wondered why there was no golf forum.
.

I LOVE this thread. +1 nick for starting it and everyone for commenting in it.

Bahku, it would be great to have a golf forum, and with high profile veterans like you and Roy and nick in this
 thread, maybe you guys could make it happen.

Now, to the topic at hand.

I strongly believe that AFTER the committee made their ruling (and they are the sole interpreters and arbiters on the Rules of Golf here), Tiger HAD to respect that decision
and not DQ himself.

The time to DQ himself would have been prior to the decision by the Committee.

As to the breach of the rules question that Roy had posed earlier regarding knowledge/intent. Neither has any bearing on this particular rule. Tiger didn't know the rule and broke it. He did not play his ball from "as near as possible" to where he played his approach. Most rules officials on the Golf Channel interpret the rule and the spot to be dropped as as near as the original divot as possible (but not necessarily in the divot itself) and no nearer the hole.

To make a legal analogy, and Roy, you will appreciate this as you posed the question, some rules of golf like this one are strict liability rules (i.e the mere act of committing them incurs a penalty, irrespective of intent) and ignorance is NOT a defense.

Other rules of golf depend entirely on intent. The most common example  is teeing off. If a player ACCIDENTALLY knocks his ball off the tee, there is NO PENALTY, because he didn't intend to strike the ball. A swing and a whiff, however, is counted as a stroke,even if the ball doesn't move. In this case, intent is everything.

[pearljammer10]

I'm not a huge golf follower, but this isn't a big deal to me. He was appropriately penalized for the bad drop. Same thing would have happened to any other golfer. Should he have voluntarily withdrawn? No. This is pro sports, not a parlour game.

I agree with this. Why would he withdraw? He aint crazy.

[BballTim]

I'm not a huge golf follower, but this isn't a big deal to me. He was appropriately penalized for the bad drop. Same thing would have happened to any other golfer. Should he have voluntarily withdrawn? No. This is pro sports, not a parlour game.

  I'm not a huge golf follower either but I think the "big deal" is that it's a newish rule that I've never seen come into play before. Traditionally someone who did what Woods did would have been disqualified from the tournament, in fact it's not unheard of for golfers to disqualify themselves when they discover that they've inadvertently broken a rule.

  It's somewhat like the nba changing a rule, nobody noticing the change, and the first time the rule was enforced it saved LeBron from a suspension.