On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 10:45 AM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > My understanding is that a viewer did call this in. Someone saw that Tiger > had placed the ball I think a couple of yards behind his original mark. The > Masters officials reviewed the tape while Tiger was playing the 18th hole, > and determined that Tiger had not broken any rule. Based on this Tiger > signed his card. After the initial ruling and signing of the card, Tiger > said in ESPN post interview that he had decided to move the ball back from > the original mark. Nobody on the telecast (including Nick Faldo) commented > on a rules violation after the interview. But the Masters people did notice > it, re-investigated, and this morning decided that it was a violation. The > new rule, changed 2 years ago, was designed specifically for this situation > - when a player signs a card that is later determined to have been > inaccurate, and it is also determined that he did not and could not have > reasonably known that it was inaccurate.
(I apologize for briefly turning this into a sports board to the rest of the panel) The problem is that the Rule 33 interpretation is designed for situations where a golfer could not have reasonably known that the rule had been violated. Woods deliberately dropped that ball in that location. And once Woods opened his cake hole after the round, it changes from a "I didn't know how fast I was going, officer" to "I was going 50, but I thought the speed limit was 55, not 35." Here is my guess as to what happened: the Rules Committee got the call and did nothing about it. They did not notify Woods about what was happening (which should have happened because, if they really think there's something there, the golfer should be allowed the opportunity to withhold signing a scorecard). Once Woods admitted it, the Rules Committee actually went back and reviewed the tape and discovered they had cocked up and he did violate the rule. But now they're stuck, because if they DQ him at this point, they have to admit they didn't do a good job of reviewing the evidence originally (because the video evidence is *really* obvious). So they split the baby and gave him the penalty but not the DQ and hid behind the Rule 33 interpretation. The catch is that golf, at its core, is about the honesty of the contestants. For Woods to admit that he broke the rule even indirectly flies in the face of the sport (you can call it ridiculous or silly, but it is what it is). There's a reason Faldo (and a lot of other golfers) went nuts about this. His comments this morning on Golf Channel cut to that core: that you have to be honest, even when you're the only one who know about it. I don't believe for a second Woods didn't know his drop was that bad, especially when the damn divot *was still right there.* Neither, I'm willing to wager grandma's china, does any golfer on that tour. And I'm not surprised he's not going to withdraw, because that would imply he gives a shit about anything that's not himself, including the sport he rides the gravy train on. He's gonna regret it now. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
