Will Tiger Woods withdraw from the Masters?

[lonewolf]

Originally Posted by recycled sixtie

I can just picture the conversation when Lindsay Vonn calls her mum and dad and says:
"hi I just got a new boyfriend". Mum and Dad reply who? She tells them .....
Silence. Then "that's nice dear". A father's worst nightmare. There are worse I suppose....

Lindsay Vonn confessed to being a sex addict herself. In an interview she said "wow if him and I ever got together......" I'm sure they are having a good time.

Both champions on the course,Both champions in the bedroom

[javadog]

Originally Posted by mattdavis11

What about "as near as possible" do you not understand?

How close is that, exactly? Got a measurement I can use? Does a ball stop exactly where you drop it?

When is it not close enough, and you have to redo the drop?

He's getting penalized for his intent. I'm not in his head, so I don't know what he was thinking at the time. I have a hard time thinking he would knowingly do something that might jeopardize his continued participation in the event. I'm thinking, if anything, that he might have mixed two rules together in his head, like many of us did at the time.

JR

[G50]

Well, that's the rule they used to get him off the hook and not DQ Tiger.

But that doesn't mean it was properly applied.

I guess that (unlike the 2 stroke penalty) is subject to interpretation/debate, but it seems to me that the rule does not apply. I'd like to hear a focused argument for why it does.

[BE911SC]

Decision 33-7/4.5 is the loophole that saved Tiger. Like it or not. Apparently, in listening to the tour guy explain it to Jim Nance just now, the other global governing bodies agreed with the ruling and so Tiger stayed in the tournament.

[lonewolf]

The 14 year old kid got penalized yesterday as well.
When asked if he had a problem with it ,He said no. A rules a rule. He's 14

[G50]

Originally Posted by javadog

How close is that, exactly? Got a measurement I can use? Does a ball stop exactly where you drop it?

When is it not close enough, and you have to redo the drop?

He's getting penalized for his intent. I'm not in his head, so I don't know what he was thinking at the time. I have a hard time thinking he would knowingly do something that might jeopardize his continued participation in the event. I'm thinking, if anything, that he might have mixed two rules together in his head, like many of us did at the time.

JR

In golf, you get penalized for intent all the time.

For example, a swing is not counted as a swing unless you *intended* to make a strike at the ball. So a non-contact duff is a swing or not, completely depending on what the golfer says his intent was. If you stand directly down someone's line while they are putting, with the intent to get a read of the green, that's a penalty (if you do the same action without the intent, it's "inadvertent" and not a penalty).

So, no problem getting penalized for intent in golf.

How can you say you don't know what he was thinking??? He told us exactly what he was thinking. He admitted he purposely dropped the ball somewhere other than "as near as possible" to the original spot.

Of course he didn't knowingly jeopardize his continued participation (nor did he intentionally try to cheat). He absolutely, positively mixed 2 rules in his head, just like you say.

Problem is, that doesn't matter a whit. With his admission as to his intent, it's a penalty, period.

(If in his interview he would have said "I tried to drop it as close as possible to the original spot" there's no question there would be no penalty, even though his physical action and the drop remain unchanged! He killed himself with his mixup of the rules and his inadvertently honest admission).

[javadog]

Originally Posted by G50

In golf, you get penalized for intent all the time.

For example, a swing is not counted as a swing unless you *intended* to make a strike at the ball. So a non-contact duff is a swing or not, completely depending on what the golfer says his intent was.

So, no problem getting penalized for intent.

More often than not, you get penalized for what you do, not the intent. Examples would include making accidental contact with a ball, as on a green. Or, accidently grounding a club in a sand trap. Etc....

We can argue this all day. None of us are participants in the event and none of us have any direct knowledge of what took place. Tiger will get convicted in the court of public opinion, regardless of what he did. Doesn't matter to me, as I am not Tiger.

I'm rooting for Freddy, anyway.

JR

[Joe Bob]

Y! SPORTS

[mattdavis11]

I think you are incorrect, he was not penalized adequately for his intent. He cheated, he knew it, and should have either been kicked out or done the right thing and withdrawn from competition.

I sincerely hope that the Masters, and other governing bodies will remove him from further admission and return the integrity to golf. As of now, it's gone.

Again, for Javadog.

[G50]

Originally Posted by javadog

More often than not, you get penalized for what you do, not the intent. Examples would include making accidental contact with a ball, as on a green. Or, accidently grounding a club in a sand trap. Etc....

We can argue this all day. None of us are participants in the event and none of us have any direct knowledge of what took place. Tiger will get convicted in the court of public opinion, regardless of what he did. Doesn't matter to me, as I am not Tiger.

I'm rooting for Freddy, anyway.

JR

We have direct knowledge of what took place, unless what they showed on TV was altered, or that was a fake Tiger Woods who gave that interview. For purposes of the penalty, that's all the knowledge needed (well, that and knowledge of this particular rule of golf).

Everyone's rooting for Freddy! That would be so awesome.

(For your next round, keep in mind that subject to a couple very specific exceptions, such as doing it to stop from falling down/for safety, grounding a club in a sand trap is a penalty even if it was accidental, there's no intent requirement. In fact, almost all illegal grounding of clubs in hazards are accidental)

[G50]

Originally Posted by mattdavis11

I think you are incorrect, he was not penalized adequately for his intent. He cheated, he knew it, and should have either been kicked out or done the right thing and withdrawn from competition.

How do you figure he knowingly cheated?

If he did, why would he admit that he didn't drop as close as possible to the original spot??

It seems clear he just had the rules mixed up.

[lonewolf]

If Tiger wins the controversy will never end.

Have to say I've always been a big Freddy Couples fan too. Hope his back holds out.
Be awesome to see him win.

[mattdavis11]

Ignorance of the rules is no defense. Much the same as it is with laws.

[G50]

Tiger doesn't dispute that the 2 stroke penalty is proper.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by G50

grounding a club in a sand trap is a penalty even if it was accidental, there's no intent requirement.

Yes, that was the whole point of my statement; glad you got it...

JR

[craigster59]

So, let me get this straight. If I whack the ball so hard it bounces off the Windmill and goes back to the last hole, I have to hit it through the Clown's mouth again?






Just kidding, I play golf, but lost interest in pro ever since Payne Stewart passed, now THAT was a swing.

[G50]

Quote de G50

grounding a club in a sand trap is a penalty even if it was accidental, there's no intent requirement.

Yes, that was the whole point of my statement; glad you got it...



JR

I misread what you wrote. But I get it now, you're correct.
(Hey, that wasn't so hard to say, give it a try!)

[tevake]

Sure can see why they play at Augusta, what a challenging course. The greens look diabolical!
Some really strange putters being used.

[G50]

Tiger today:

"Was the two stroke penalty fair?"

"Absolutely, I made a mistake."

[gassy]

It sure has been nice to see Freddy get some air time. I feel like it's 1988 again. Love it.