OT - Tiger/Masters Talk | The Boneyard

OT - Tiger/Masters Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.
zls44

zls44

Your #icebus Tour Director
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
9,300
Reaction Score
25,217
Lets start with the non-DQ. I'm 50/50 on it, but I could really do without the people trying to argue about how WD would reclaim the honor he lost from cheating on his wife.
 
He should have been DQ'ed.

Any other player would be DQ'ed.

The rules committee legally determined there was a loophole in rule 33. The onus is on the player to know the rules.

Chamblee is correctly grilling Tiger on the Golf Channel.
 
RT @WhitlockJason Golf survived racism and sexism. The "integrity" of the game will survive a bad drop and scorecard.
 
.-.
Tiger cheated?
AND
Many people have forgiven him because he's the greatest golfer on earth and he's great for TV ratings?
This is unprecedented!
I don't believe it!!
 
Leebo said:
Kinda hard to suggest it's cheating.
Expand ...

Also tough to say he did anything but intentionally break a rule to gain a competitive advantage. Ignorance of a rule by a player hasn't ever been an acceptable excuse in any sport.
 
Chin Diesel said:
Also tough to say he did anything but intentionally break a rule to gain a competitive advantage. Ignorance of a rule by a player hasn't ever been an acceptable excuse in any sport.
Expand ...

If it was malicious, why would he have said anything? Even if you think he had some kind of absurd confidence to think he wouldn't be disqualified, clearly he wouldn't have wanted the 2 stroke penalty, right?
 
Leebo said:
If it was malicious, why would he have said anything? Even if you think he had some kind of absurd confidence to think he wouldn't be disqualified, clearly he wouldn't have wanted the 2 stroke penalty, right?
Expand ...

He wrongly assumed he could do what he did. Ignorant or willful, either way he was wrong.

Golf has always the burden on the player to know the rules and suffer the consequences if they are wrong.

One saving grace for Tiger is that the rules official on the course told him he was good to go. Players should always be allowed for interpretation on the course.
 
You said it was intentional. In my book, it has to be intentional to be cheating. If it's unintentional, it's obviously not good, but it's not something to get into a furor over.

Especially since he did suffer consequences. He'd be within striking distance of the lead if this hadn't transpired this way.
 
.-.
Leebo said:
You said it was intentional. In my book, it has to be intentional to be cheating. If it's unintentional, it's obviously not good, but it's not something to get into a furor over.

Especially since he did suffer consequences. He'd be within striking distance of the lead if this hadn't transpired this way.
Expand ...

I said he intentionally made the choice to drop where he did.

No different than intentionally driving 20 mph over the speed limit or just not knowing what is the posted limit. Either way you are driving the same speed.

As for suffering consequences, anyone else would be DQed.
 
Nice try with the word-smithing, but you realize the post is still there right?

"intentionally break a rule to gain a competitive advantage"

And it's obviously not a normal situation, because they could have easily confronted him at the end of his round, assessed the 2 strokes at that time, and none of this would have happened. But the rules committee reviewed it and found there to be no violation.
 
Tiger is in 3rd place right now. Oops tied for 8th after the deduction. That will cost him. Jason Day finished 2nd in 2011 with a closing round -4 on The Big Stage. Age 25 he's going to be one to watch after some injuries last year.
 
He intentionally dropped in the place that he dropped...he didn't intend to break a rule. I have no problem with the decision. Seems like it is in line with the recently adopted rule that was put in place for this very reason.
 
Chin Diesel said:
I said he intentionally made the choice to drop where he did.

No different than intentionally driving 20 mph over the speed limit or just not knowing what is the posted limit. Either way you are driving the same speed.

As for suffering consequences, anyone else would be DQed.
Expand ...
You're wrong.
 
Tiger is not relevant in majors on weekends. Parts of his game are lousy. Go watch his 16, 17, 18. His driving game is awful. He scrambles around, gives himself way too few birdie opportunities to stay with the leaders.

He may win multiple more Honda Classics and other ones with lousy fields, but I doubt he gets a major or more than 1.

W/o penalty he would be -5, but his game looks bad. His putting actually looks decent this week, but little else.
 
.-.
Leebo said:
Nice try with the word-smithing, but you realize the post is still there right?

"intentionally break a rule to gain a competitive advantage"

And it's obviously not a normal situation, because they could have easily confronted him at the end of his round, assessed the 2 strokes at that time, and none of this would have happened. But the rules committee reviewed it and found there to be no violation.
Expand ...

Fair enough. To be perfectly clear, he intentionally dropped where he did for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage. He had the choice to drop in three different locations. And the choice he made was against the rules.

And I agree that the on-course decision by the rules official was to his advantage.
 
husky91 said:
Tiger is not relevant in majors on weekends. Parts of his game are lousy.

W/o penalty he would be -5, but his game looks bad. His putting actually looks decent this week, but little else.
Expand ...

Which is exactly why he indeed is relevant and will likely win more majors. He can play poorly and still only be 2 strokes off the lead (if he hadn't been penalized)
 
He couldn't intentionally attempt to break a rule. He knows every shot is broadcast to the world. Of course he intentionally tried to pick the best option, he said as much.

Seems to me the penalty and decision was fair. As opposed to the penalty on the 14 year old that was ridiculous.
 
Chin Diesel said:
Fair enough. To be perfectly clear, he intentionally dropped where he did for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage. He had the choice to drop in three different locations. And the choice he made was against the rules.

And I agree that the on-course decision by the rules official was to his advantage.
Expand ...

So do you agree that it wasn't cheating?

When any player has choices in front of them, they should be choosing the one that is to their advantage. He was clearly wrong to think that what he did was an available choice, but he's not obligated to take the most difficult choice either.
 
Leebo said:
So do you agree that it wasn't cheating?

When any player has choices in front of them, they should be choosing the one that is to their advantage. He was clearly wrong to think that what he did was an available choice, but he's not obligated to take the most difficult choice either.
Expand ...

We have different definitions of "cheating".

Most pro golfers, current and retired, say he should be DQed. Either by the officials or by himself.

Greg Norman at the GHO is a good example of a doing what's right.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
If any other player would have been disqualified, people would have been up in arms. But, because it's Tiger, people are up in arms because he hasn't been disqualified.
Expand ...

Honestly, nobody saw anything. It wasn't until he said in his post round interview that he dropped it a couple yards back that the looked into it. So for most players, who aren't giving those interviews, it wouldn't be noticed.
 
Chin Diesel said:
We have different definitions of "cheating".

Most pro golfers, current and retired, say he should be DQed. Either by the officials or by himself.

Greg Norman at the GHO is a good example of a doing what's right.
Expand ...

I guess we do have different definitions. In your definition, anyone who breaks a rule in golf, and then has the penalty assessed, would be found cheating.

The actual infraction is really not that important in my view, even if you consider it cheating.

The important part of all of this is why the penalty was assessed AFTER he signed his scorecard. The reason? Because they ruled that he had not violated the rule.

You're free to disagree that he should be DQ'd because they made 2 rulings at different times, but I'm not going to call every person who gets penalties assessed to them while golfing a cheater.
 
husky91 said:
Tiger is not relevant in majors on weekends. Parts of his game are lousy. Go watch his 16, 17, 18. His driving game is awful. He scrambles around, gives himself way too few birdie opportunities to stay with the leaders.

He may win multiple more Honda Classics and other ones with lousy fields, but I doubt he gets a major or more than 1.

W/o penalty he would be -5, but his game looks bad. His putting actually looks decent this week, but little else.
Expand ...
Are you new to golf? Nobody shoots under par at Augusta when only their putting looks decent, "and little else". If his approach doesn't hit that pin, he's sitting at -7 going into Sunday (it was a 4 stroke swing). You could even argue the he would be lower because he lost quite a bit of momentum. He's ranked first in the world for a reason. He is the best player in the world, hands down, not up for argument. I'm not a fanboy, it's just a basic fact. The fact that he's even near the leaders after what happened is crazy.
 
superjohn said:
You said anyone else would have been disqualified and that is complete BS.
Expand ...

Can you give an example of a player signing an incorrect scorecard and not being DQed?

For the record I think golf's rule of assessing penalties after a scorecard is signed and then DQing players for it is complete BS. Reeks of "gotcha" and of double jeopardy. But that rule has been uniformly enforced for decades.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,225
Messages
4,558,135
Members
10,443
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom