Fore please! Running Masters thread

Rule was changed two years ago that avoids the DQ.

So while it might SEEM this is a Tiger Rule, it's not.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/golf/2013/04/13/tiger-woods-assessed-2-shot-penalty-from-masters/2079725/

 

Fascinating debate on Golf Channel. Brandel Chamblee says Tiger should DQ himself.

Others saying: If Tiger wins, it comes with an asterisk. There was a misinterpretation of the rule. Tiger can set a precedent if he doesn't play.

 

He's five shots back. He's by no means out of the tournament and absolutely could still come back to win the thing.

That said ...

I'm with those who think he needs to withdraw. He gained an advantage by dropping where he did. This wouldn't have been a problem had he not said post-round that he PURPOSELY dropped two yards back -- to gain an advantage. Three minutes earlier, he drilled a perfect shot that took a bad break when it hit the stick and went into the pond. So he goes two yards back and sticks the shot again. He knew what he was doing when he dropped where he did. He gained an advantage by dropping where he did and the committee is going on a rule but is misinterpreting it. There was no ignorance of the rule on Tiger's part which is what the committee is going off of.

 

Augusta National statement:

Yesterday afternoon, the Rules Committee was made aware of a possible rules violation that involved a drop by Tiger Woods on the 15th hole.

In preparation for his fifth shot, the player dropped his ball in close proximity to where he had played his third shot in apparent conformance with Rule 26. After being prompted by a television viewer, the Rules Committee reviewed a video of the shot while he was playing the 18th hole. At that moment and based on that evidence the committee determined he has complied with the rules.

After he signed his scorecard, and in a television interview subsequent to the round, the player stated that he played further from the point than where he had played his third shot. Such action would constitute playing from the wrong place.

The subsequent information provided by the player's interview after he had completed play warranted further review and discussion with him this morning. After meeting with the player, it was determined that he had violated Rule 26, and he was assessed a two-stroke penalty. The penalty of disqualification was waived by the committee under Rule 33 as the committee had previously reviewed the information and made its initial determination prior to the finish of the player's round.

- Fred Ridley, Chairman, Competition Committees