Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-15-2013, 05:38 PM   #21
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by karluk
I disagree with your contention that the only people who think Tiger should have been DQed are "old school guys" who either don't know or don't agree with the new rule 33-7. I support rule 33-7 but also think that it clearly indicates that Tiger should have been DQed. In my opinion the Masters improperly used the discretion to waive the DQ, apparently for the selfish reason to keep a wildly popular superstar in contention on the weekend.

The reason I think 33-7 clearly mandates a DQ for Tiger comes from links such as the following. Tiger was ignorant of one of the rules of golf, or perhaps forgot it in the heat of the moment. Too bad for him, but both the USGA and R&A clearly say that the DQ penalty applies in his situation. The Masters committee chose to ignore this directive from golf's governing bodies and give Tiger a break. It turned out to be a popular decision, both with the general public and professional golfers, but decisions like this shouldn't be made based on popular opinion.

The relevant passage is

The R&A - R&A and USGA announce new Score Card Rules interpretation
I agree with you actually, that there is room for interpretation on whether the committee reached the proper decision. But my contention is the committee had the right to make that decision, thus proper procedures were followed correctly which would allow him to play. Whether you agree with that conclusion or not is certainly a valid point that can be legitimately debated. So I am not actually in disagreement with you. I do not have the incite of the committee members thought process, so I do not know if your opinion is correct or not. I drifted from my original intent from earlier post of defending Tigers honesty in the situation, to appearing to be an "expert" on the rules of golf, and believe me, my playing partners would certainly attest to the fact I am not!
__________________

__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-15-2013, 06:04 PM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
1)
I found the link and here it is below. If you have 6 minutes you will find it very informative explaining better than how I wrote it.

Breaking Down The Tiger Ruling - ESPN Video - ESPN
I've seen this explanation as well as several others and still find no logic or basis to support invoking Rule 33 to prevent DQ. As the ESPN piece says, Rule 33 states DQ may be waived "..if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not have reasonably known (emphasis added) or discovered the facts resulting in his breach.." As in any sport, competitors are responsible for knowing the published rules, thus a golfer would be responsible under 33 to include the appropriate 2 stroke penalty BEFORE signing his incorrect scorecard. The fact that the Committee reviewed an inconclusive tape finding no breach during the round is irrelevant because the golfer (Tiger) was never told there was any Committee decision at that point, and the evidence of Rule breach came later in the golfer's public statements.

IMHO- The golf media is ignoring logic and rules precedent by closing ranks on the present situation out of fear that anyone saying otherwise will be banned by the Almighty Masters (a la announcer Gary McCord a few yrs ago).

BTW- Although from 2000, here's some background on other pro golf DQ's, inc. some with striking similarities to Tiger situation-
http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/year...fications.html
__________________

__________________
ERhoosier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2013, 08:56 PM   #23
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Naples
Posts: 2,161
Interesting thoughts on the ruling. The one thing that confused me is that I heard that The Masters is governed by their own body of rules and not necessarily those of the PGA, the USGA and/or the R & A. I know their rules include those of the three governing bodies but are subject to change by The Masters rules committee. Maybe if this was the US Open, the British Open or the PGA Championship the interpretation might have been different. I don't know. The fact that The Masters has their own rules for this tournament is confusing to me. Did not know realize this until now.

When Tiger mentioned that he dropped two yards back from his original
spot, didn't he know this was wrong? Every golfer has to know this rule regarding proper and improper drops.
__________________
JOHNNIE36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 10:42 AM   #24
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNNIE36 View Post
When Tiger mentioned that he dropped two yards back from his original
spot, didn't he know this was wrong? Every golfer has to know this rule regarding proper and improper drops.
Good point. Does this mean that he has been violating the drop rule over his entire pro career
__________________

__________________
ERhoosier is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:11 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.