The Golf Blog: Tiger Woods tweets his response to improper drop and 2 shot penalty, but no DQ
At hole #15, I took a drop that I thought was correct and in accordance with the rules. I was unaware at that time I had violated any rules.
— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013
I didn’t know I had taken an incorrect drop prior to signing my scorecard. Subsequently, I met with the Masters Committee Saturday morning..
— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013
and was advised they had reviewed the incident prior to the completion of my round. Their initial determination…
— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013
was that there was no violation, butthey had additional concerns based on my post-round interview. After discussing the situation…
— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013
…with them this morning, I was assessed a two-shot penalty. I understand and accept the penalty and respect the Committees’ decision.
— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013
Tiger’s story matches the Rules Commmittee’s ruling:
“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 [dubious finding if the standard of Rule 26-1 is "as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played"] 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 had complied with the Rules. [obvious mistake given the standard of Rule 26-1, and why didn't the Committee ask Tiger before he signed his scorecard?]
“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 [this was obvious from the video, why wasn't it checked?]. 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
The Golf Blog: Tiger Woods given 2 stroke penalty, no DQ, for improper ball drop and signing wrong scorecard
The Golf Blog says: Wow, Tiger Woods escaped a disqualification for signing the wrong scorecard (by not taking a penalty for an improper ball drop). The Rules Officials invoked the PGA Tour’s new “high definition TV” rule that minimizes the penalty from the use of the high definition TV to question a stroke, acccordingly to Golf Channel. The rule doesn’t seem to apply here. Tiger Woods admitted in his interview that he took a drop 2 yards behind the spot of his original shot. It wasn’t HDTV that raised the issue. The other explanation from Golf Channel is that the Rules Official exercised discretion under Rule 33-7, which allows the Official to impose a penalty instead of the normal DQ.
The Rule is not supposed to be applied for mere ignorance of the golfer (commentary):
“A Committee would not be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving or modifying the disqualification penalty prescribed in Rule 6-6d if the player’s failure to include the penalty stroke(s) was a result of either ignorance of the Rules or of facts that the player could have reasonably discovered prior to signing and returning his score card.”
Brandel Chamblee says this incident will mar Tiger Woods’ career and believes Tiger should have declared the infraction and DQd himself.
Nick Faldo agrees with Brandel.
Both Chamblee, Faldo, and Steve Flesch think that Tiger Woods should do the right thing and disqualify himself.
Here’s the official ruling:
Here’s the official statement on Tiger Woods’ drop at 15 and the penalty. twitter.com/AUG_Masters/st…
— Augusta.com (@AUG_Masters) April 13, 2013
The Golf Blog: Will Tiger Woods be DQ’d for alleged improper drop on 15th hole at Masters?
The Golf Blog says: We were just about ready to put things to bed, but then our Twitter exploded with a new controversy. Tiger Woods may have taken an improper drop after his ball ricocheted off the flag into the water on 15. During his interview after the round, Tiger said he dropped the ball 2 yards back from the original spot. “Well, I went down to the drop area, that wasn’t going to be a good spot, because obviously it’s into the grain, it’s really grainy there. And it was a little bit wet. So it was muddy and not a good spot to drop. So I went back to where I played it from, but I went two yards further back and I took, tried to take two yards off the shot of what I felt I hit. And that should land me short of the flag and not have it either hit the flag or skip over the back. I felt that that was going to be the right decision to take off four right there. And I did. It worked out perfectly.”
Photo of Tiger Woods’ ball drop he said was 2 yards behind spot of 1st shot (circled in red)
Pro golfers Bob Estes and Keith Nolan are suggesting on Twitter the drop was improper.
@bobestespga No doubt he took an illegal drop.Now it is up to Tiger to make this right.
— keith nolan (@Keith_Nolan) April 13, 2013
@jasonsobelgc CBS is talking about it now. Ferehty says it was ILLEGAL DROP while showing the tape. He combined option 2 And Option 3.
— Ron Mintz (@PGATOURNEWS) April 13, 2013
Rule 26-1 is the relevant rule:
26-1. Relief For Ball In Water Hazard
It is a question of fact whether a ball that has not been found after having been struck toward a water hazard is in the hazard. In the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty that a ball struck toward a water hazard, but not found, is in the hazard, the player must proceed under Rule 27-1.
If a ball is found in a water hazard or if it is known or virtually certain that a ball that has not been found is in the water hazard (whether the ball lies in water or not), the player may under penalty of one stroke:
a. Proceed under the stroke and distance provision of Rule 27-1 by playing a ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played (see Rule 20-5); or
b. Drop a ball behind the water hazard, keeping the point at which the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard directly between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped, with no limit to how far behind the water hazard the ball may be dropped; or ***
So what did Tiger do wrong?
Tiger didn’t elect option (a) because he dropped the ball a couple yards behind his divot, so it wouldn’t be “as nearly as possible at the spot” of the original shot.
Tiger may have thought he was complying with option (b), but it appears that he may have been mistaken about the last line the ball crossed the water hazard. As John Lynch’s Dad blog explained, the point at which Tiger’s ball last crossed the water hazard may have been different from the line that it took when it first sailed over the water hazard onto the green. It last crossed the water hazard on the ricochet–which may have been a different line than the first. Here’s the video. The ball clearly bounces to the left of the original line of the shot. If it was a different line, then it does seem highly doubtful that Tiger could just go back 2 yards simply from his divot under Rule 26-1. The drop wouldn’t be on the last line the ball entered the hazard after the ricochet off the flag. Click here for the USGA’s explanation of “last crossed,” which explains how to determine the last line the ball crossed the water hazard if it did so several times. And here for more explanation.
Rough estimate of line in which Tiger’s ball last crossed water hazard after ricochet
If it was an improper drop, as it appears it was, Tiger would be disqualified for signing an improper or erroneous scorecard (he should have assessed himself a penalty for the improper drop). We think the issue will be raised Saturday morning, given how Twitter is exploding with it. We hope, and pray, no rules infractions were committed–but, by all indications, it looks like Tiger did. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Hank Haney said on Twitter he thinks Tiger Woods may have committed a rules infraction.
When he said he dropped 2 yards back i thought he had a problemRT @stevieo1974:there’s a lot of talk about Tiger’s drop on 15 being illegal?
— Hank Haney (@HankDHaney) April 13, 2013
I’m worried, i think he was confused by the rule RT @brianmeise: Gut feeling – is Tiger ok or no?
— Hank Haney (@HankDHaney) April 13, 2013
UPDATE: Tiger Woods escaped disqualification by a controversial ruling excusing him and imposing only a 2 shot penalty. Click here.
The Golf Blog: Does Rules Official John Paramor need to retire from golf after Guan penalty?
The Golf Blog says: Enough is enough. European Tour Rules Official John Paramor has refereed one too many golf tournaments. He’s been in golf for over 30 years, and he’s built up a reputation of making controversial–if not inane–slow play rulings. Tiger Woods has even criticized Paramor for interfering with a tournament showdown between Padraig Harrington and him.
Well, today, Paramor penalized only 1 golfer of the entire field, even though it was taking many groups well over 5 hours to finish their rounds in gusty conditions. That one person was the 14-year-old amateur–and 8th grader–from China, Tianlang Guan.
Why was Guan the only player penalized? Are we seriously to believe that Guan was the only out of the entire field to be playing slowly? Keep in mind, Guan’s playing partners Matteo Manassero (+5) and Ben Crenshaw (+20) didn’t get penalized and they played worse than Guan. Crenshaw shot an 80 and 84–that’s got to eat up some time, playing 10 more shots than Guan. Something doesn’t smell right, Mr. Paramor. Luckily for Paramor, Guan still made the cut on the number (+4). Had Guan missed the cut because of the penalty, Paramor would have been on the hot seat.
Quite right Mr. Paramor, that lad needed to be disciplined. Remarkable. twitter.com/TweeterAlliss/…
— Tweeter Alliss (@TweeterAlliss) April 12, 2013
The Golf Blog: Video 14-year-old amateur Tianlang Guan gets 1 stroke penalty for slow play; may miss cut because of it
The Golf Blog says: 14 year old amateur Tianlang Guan got a rude welcome to the Masters. He was given a 1 stroke penalty for slow play on the 17th hole, converting his par into a bogey. Because of the penalty, Guan may miss the cut.
The Golf Blog: Tiger Woods shares lead (-5) at Masters, as Dustin Johnson, Sergio Garcia implode
The Golf Blog says: After shooting 6-under 66 yesterday, Sergio Garcia faltered with a 76 today. Same thing for Dustin Johnson, who shot a 76. We’ve seen this kind of performance from both before at the majors.
Tiger Woods (on 14 right now), Marc Leishman (first round leader), and 50-year old wunderkind Fred Couples are tied at -5.
The Golf Blog: Photo of Caroline Wozniacki caddying for Rory McIlroy at Masters Par 3 contest
The Golf Blog says: Rory McIlroy tweeted this photo of his girlfriend Caroline Wozniacki caddying for him yesterday at the Masters Par 3 contest. The only thing that could have topped this is Lindsay Vonn caddying for Tiger Woods. Maybe next year!
Awesome having @carowozniacki as my caddie today in the par 3 contest! Here’s a pic I like from earlier
twitter.com/McIlroyRory/st…
— Rory Mcilroy (@McIlroyRory) April 10, 2013
