[golfugh]

Letitroll98

Actually a portion of your last paragraph is incorrect.  "Whatever his intent was is immaterial.  He dropped within two club lengths not nearer the hole, not matter that he thought it was two yards, no matter that he thought he could drop it on a line behind the spot."

He actually had to drop as near as possible to the spot where he last hit the previous shot, no nearer the whole.  Not within 2 club lengths.  Nor could he go back behind the spot and drop. 

He could drop under option 2 above as far back as he wanted.

Mark

[golfugh]

So, is it reasonable to think that Tiger did not know he had breached rule 26? I've been playing golf for 50 years and I know that knowingly dropping 2 yds behind where you played the shot that went into the hazzard is not "playing the next shot as close to where you hit the initial shot."

Quite a debate going on about whether Tiger should withdraw. A lot of current players support the ruling. Nick Faldo disagrees.

IMO he knew and admitted as such in his post round interview (oops).  I'm in agreement with Nick Faldo and Brandel Chamblee.

The Masters Competition Committee news conference was the largest fumbling job I've ever heard from Augusta National.

Mark

[vinyl_lady]

IMO he knew and admitted as such in his post round interview (oops).  I'm in agreement with Nick Faldo and Brandel Chamblee.

Mark

Me too. I don't buy that the #1 ranked player in the world didn't know he was violating rule 26 when he dropped two yards back. I admire his game, maybe the best ever; but I don't buy for one minute that it was an innocent mistake as the CBS commentators are saying.

[golfugh]

Totally agree with ya!

[fredgarvin]

Augusta didn't show any hesitation in penalizing the 14 yo Chinese player for 'slow play'. Tiger should have been disqualified.

[vinyl_lady]

IMO, Tiger should have DQ'd himself.

[medium jim]

No Tiger shouldn't have DQ'd himself, it was his honesty that ultimately led to the two stroke penalty.  Rule 33 was enacted to keep the game fair. 

Jim

[golfugh]

Nothing personal, but no honesty involved.  He didn't declare it on himself.

[medium jim]

Nothing personal, but no honesty involved.  He didn't declare it on himself.

When he was questioned this morning by the rules committee, he didn't recant.  He was penalized two strokes, lets move on as the integrity of the game of golf hasn't been violated. 

It's stupid little people who call the shit in from their couches that hurt the game in their zeal to feel important.

Jim

[rodge827]

Great third round!

El Pato is looking to add some green to his closet and Snedeker looking at his first major. 

There is a host of talent on their heels, and this looks to be a good final round. 

Some lip for Tiger today and Freddy still has an outside chance? 

It'll be fun to see how it all unfolds tomorrow. 

[vinyl_lady]

From a spectator's standpoint, Sunday at the Masters is as good as it gets.

I'm glad my upgrade went through tomorrow afternoon so I can watch the final holes on Direct TV on the flight to Denver.

[Letitroll98]

Letitroll98

Actually a portion of your last paragraph is incorrect.  "Whatever his intent was is immaterial.  He dropped within two club lengths not nearer the hole, not matter that he thought it was two yards, no matter that he thought he could drop it on a line behind the spot."

He actually had to drop as near as possible to the spot where he last hit the previous shot, no nearer the whole.  Not within 2 club lengths.  Nor could he go back behind the spot and drop. 

He could drop under option 2 above as far back as he wanted.

Mark

Actually this was a major part of the issue for me.  What exactly is "near as possible"?  There's no definition in the rules of what that is.  In absence of any clear definition, I inserted two club lengths as the standard we all use for relief in a drop that includes a penalty.  Sorry if I didn't make it clear that I was making a judgment, not quoting a rule.  Obviously the rules committee agrees because they determined it to be a legal drop until after the round when they decided to take his intent into consideration.  As I stated previously I disagree with using intent for the reasons I brought up. 

In any case, I think it's all moot now as Tiger doesn't look like he's playing well enough to have won even without the penalty.  But if he does turn it on and loses by less than two, it would bring up a lot of what if's.

Great third round!

El Pato is looking to add some green to his closet and Snedeker looking at his first major.

There is a host of talent on their heels, and this looks to be a good final round.

Some lip for Tiger today and Freddy still has an outside chance?

It'll be fun to see how it all unfolds tomorrow.

I agree that it was a fabulous third round and will be a great final round with all of the players in sight of the lead.  I disagree that Couples has a chance, he played his way out of it on the last few holes.  I don't have a horse in the race now that Tiger looks out of it, but I wouldn't mind seeing Jason Day win, nice kid.  Mostly I'm rooting for a great contest, looks like we'll get that.

I watched Cabrera win the Open from about 20' away in 2007, I was standing next to the 18th green at Oakmont, he hammers the ball an unbelievable distance.  I just have never warmed up to him though, dunno why.  I had a three word exchange with Tiger that day.  He walked past me on his way to the 12th fairway from the tee and I said, "Nice drive".  He turned to me and tipped his cap, "Thanks".  He had hit the ball 390 yards, albeit downhill onto a downslope, still amazing to see.

[JLM]

IMO this is the most screwed up Masters I've seen:

Why/how did a 14 year old from China get in?  (To sell ads and make the "grown-ups" look more pathetic.)

Slow play (like Fredie implied, why start enforcing after 76 years)?  Again to turn it into a soap opera that can sell more ads.

How can Tiger and his caddie not know the rules???  (I wondered about the drop as soon as he made it.)  Obviously giving him a DQ would have cut into profits while relieving him of the on course stress (and a source for our entertainment as we watch him struggle).

Crazy expensive tickets (most expensive in all of sports) to be in the gallery (turns it into even more of an elitist exercise to watch this sadistic mental event than a game to enjoy).  The real "Masters" are the people in charge and those making money from it, not the players.  The whole thing has taken golf to an excessive degree of demented insanity (just a "civilized" version of the Roman "games" played in the Coliseum with the players being the slaves).

The whole thing stinks of a profit motivated plot.

[Doublej]

I am with JLM on this one. There are few sports left. Most have been transformed into sports entertainment businesses. Controversy is good for business. Profit motivated rules enforcement.

[rodge827]

IMO this is the most screwed up Masters I've seen:

Why/how did a 14 year old from China get in?  (To sell ads and make the "grown-ups" look more pathetic.)

Slow play (like Fredie implied, why start enforcing after 76 years)?  Again to turn it into a soap opera that can sell more ads.

How can Tiger and his caddie not know the rules???  (I wondered about the drop as soon as he made it.)  Obviously giving him a DQ would have cut into profits while relieving him of the on course stress (and a source for our entertainment as we watch him struggle).

Crazy expensive tickets (most expensive in all of sports) to be in the gallery (turns it into even more of an elitist exercise to watch this sadistic mental event than a game to enjoy).  The real "Masters" are the people in charge and those making money from it, not the players.  The whole thing has taken golf to an excessive degree of demented insanity (just a "civilized" version of the Roman "games" played in the Coliseum with the players being the slaves).

The whole thing stinks of a profit motivated plot.

This can be said of all Professional sports,the NCAA, and the Olympics!

The "slaves" are all very well compensated and the "business" around them is flourishing!
The one factor that put's Pro Golf and Tennis above other team sports is that a "slave" has to earn the right to be there.

Guan earned his invitation by winning the Asia-Pacific Amateur!

Rule 33 came about as a result of the technology now available to the TV viewer and fan.

Had there not been a Hi-Def camera on Tiger, the ability for instant replay, and a smart phone for the "whistle blowing" fan, none of this
would have been a conversation. The rules of golf have always been evolving as the game evolves!
Let's not forget that all games are played and officiated by humans, and to err is the most common trait we all share!
This can be said for every blown call by a referee, umpire, and linesman. Golf is not played in a stadium where all players can be
scrutinized every second, and a play can be made good or bad by intense scrutiny on a Jumbo Tron.

Should every player have a camera team follow them around and then have the tape reviewed by committee? Really?   

Tiger screwed-up, no doubt about it, and is continuing to play as per the current rules of golf. I feel that Tiger should have DQ'd himself and it would have gone a long way to repairing his already tarnished image (basically a smart business decision with long term benefits).

[jackman]

I think Tiger is doing exactly what he is obliged to do, no more, no less.  He was penalized under the current rules and is going into the final round with a two stroke penalty.  Even if you are a Tiger hater, as many people in this thread seem to be, you have to admit he brings a lot of attention and $$$ to the sport. 

I also disagree that Tiger should have disqualified himself and a self imposed disqualification would have helped repair his image.  IMO, people who still hate Tiger would still feel the same, regardless of his decision.   

It's funny because Tiger's actions (the ones most people are still holding against him)  had nothing to do with the game of golf.  He cheated on his wife...which puts him in the same category as 99% of all pro athletes including the beloved Michael Jordan (a known cereal philanderer).  The only difference is that Tiger got busted in a really public way. He didn't beat up his wife, rape anyone or have relationships with underage girls.  Also, we are only getting one side of the story, for all we know, his ex wife may have been frigid.  If that's the case, I feel sorry for the poor guy.  The hundreds of millions he gave her to go away must seem like a bargain. 

The young Chinese kid and the poise he has shown on the biggest state is the feel good story of this year's Masters.  I suspect we will be seeing more of him in the future and I hope his game continues to progress. 

[vinyl_lady]

I'd like to offer a different perspective on some of the comments in ITT.

Are Masters' tickets expensive, perhaps insanely expensive? Yes, it is called supply and demand; there is a waiting list 10 miles long. From the very beginning, the Masters was designed to be an elite event. Each year a lot of very good golfers don't qualify. It is the only event on the U.S. pro tour not organized by the PGA or USGA. It is a private enterprise and without profit it will cease to exist. Profit is a good thing.

The Masters is the most watched golf tournament in the world, with or without Tiger or anyone else. Sunday at the Masters will draw high ratings simply because it is Sunday at the Masters. Pin locations will be high risk/high reward and if you hit a great iron shot you have a chance to get close to the pin and have very makeable birdie puts and perhaps an eagle on 13 or 15.

There is no excuse for cheating on your spouse, period! It doesn't matter who else or how many are doing it.

[jackman]

If you are saying the inclusion of Tiger doesn't help the Masters' ratings, I'm going to have to disagree.  The Masters is Pro Golf's premier event but even the Masters benefits from Tiger's participation.  Also, I'm not saying Tiger's actions were acceptable but we only got one side of the story.  Either way, people who hate the guy will never forgive him, no matter what he does.  His penalty was much more severe than other athletes and public figures who have done the same thing (Clinton, Jordan, etc.). 

[mcgsxr]

Tiger did not have to DQ himself.  He could have elected to strategically, and I agree it would have been long term beneficial.  I am neither a fan or detractor of his, but will admit it is good to see him in the mix, it makes it more exciting. 

Guan has done great things already, and has the potential to be a star on the PGA tour in the future.  China also represents a large development opportunity for the sport.  It is wise to include him, and I am very happy he made the cut in spite of his penalty.

I hope Couples mounts a comeback and wins, but for me Jason Day would be a great outcome too.

I will watch it, while prepping dinner for sure. 

[vinyl_lady]

I didn't mean to imply that Tiger's presence doesn't help ratings, it clearly does. So does Phil's, but maybe not as much. I believe that Masters on Sunday will have a large viewing audience with or without the big names, maybe not as big, but likely the largest of any golf tournament.

Forgiveness is a good thing, no matter the offense.