What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Tiger Woods (4 Viewers)

Abraham said:
Apple Jack said:
Abraham said:
Rick Reilly is a moron.
Click to expand...
What did he say?
Click to expand...
Talking about how tiger should have withdrawn and on and on until SVP reminded him of the new reassessment rule. At that point "well that's what I meant. Without the rule change he should have withdrawn." North and Strange are sitting there quietly burning holes in him with dirty looks (they both think its a fair penalty).
Click to expand...
Wow -on the Golf Channel, Brad Faxon is really giving it to him and telling him he should pack it in. Cook said he would drop out as well.

 
renesauz said:
Some of these talking heads are just nuts. More interested in tradition than equity.
Click to expand...
But again...in their need to whine about tradition...they forget that they never had the scrutiny on them that today's top players face as far as amount of cameras and viewers calling in to report any little thing.

Parabolic mics every picking up every little thing they say.

 
renesauz said:
Some of these talking heads are just nuts. More interested in tradition than equity.
Click to expand...
It really is ridiculous. The rule has been enforced as required. End of story. Some of these guys saying he should drop out are taking that position because its contrarian and makes them louder. A lot of the pros playing in the tourney have tweeted that it was done correctly and everyone should move on.
 
If he makes a push and wins this, he's definitely back. He's looking like just another one of the guys so far this weekend, though.

 
Competitive?

#1 in tje world is just competitive.

And without the 4 stroke turn on 15 he would have been in the final group...maybe you see fear then...but not from that far back.

Instead...he sucked most of the front 9 today anyway.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reginald Cornsilks said:
Apple Jack said:
dparker713 said:
Sinn Fein said:
Worst weekend player ever?
Click to expand...
Exactly how I'd classify a guy with 77 wins and 14 majors.
Click to expand...
Not to mention, save for hitting a shot that was too good into 15 on Friday, he'd be winning the tournament by two right now.
Click to expand...
If Tiger had 2 wheels, he'd be a bicycle.Breaks like that happen all the time. Your golf knowledge sucks
Click to expand...
How about this: If Eldrick holes par 3's he wins the green jacket.

 
Hey, I don't even think he should have played the weekend. Just pointing out the freakish nature of the game. And no, that does not happen all the time, in spite of what Corky here thinks.

 
Apple Jack said:
Hey, I don't even think he should have played the weekend. Just pointing out the freakish nature of the game. And no, that does not happen all the time, in spite of what Corky here thinks.
Click to expand...
I agree that he shouldn't have played, as you know. I also think he wins the tournament if he doesn't hit the stick. He was taking it over at that point.However, the streak continues. He'll be the favorite at the US Open, but not an overwhelming one like he was here. Given how short that course is, a ton of guys will have a chance.
 
zoonation said:
Apple Jack said:
Hey, I don't even think he should have played the weekend. Just pointing out the freakish nature of the game. And no, that does not happen all the time, in spite of what Corky here thinks.
Click to expand...
I agree that he shouldn't have played, as you know. I also think he wins the tournament if he doesn't hit the stick. He was taking it over at that point.However, the streak continues. He'll be the favorite at the US Open, but not an overwhelming one like he was here. Given how short that course is, a ton of guys will have a chance.
Click to expand...
Short course means he doesn't even put his driver in his bag, which is still his worst club. US Open setups are great for Tiger when he's grinding pars.

 
dparker713 said:
zoonation said:
Apple Jack said:
Hey, I don't even think he should have played the weekend. Just pointing out the freakish nature of the game. And no, that does not happen all the time, in spite of what Corky here thinks.
Click to expand...
I agree that he shouldn't have played, as you know. I also think he wins the tournament if he doesn't hit the stick. He was taking it over at that point.However, the streak continues. He'll be the favorite at the US Open, but not an overwhelming one like he was here. Given how short that course is, a ton of guys will have a chance.
Click to expand...
Short course means he doesn't even put his driver in his bag, which is still his worst club. US Open setups are great for Tiger when he's grinding pars.
Click to expand...
The US Open is always a ball striking test above all else. There are a lot of great ball strikers on tour. Tiger is 79th in ball striking this year. That tournament will be wide open.
 
zoonation said:
It really was a bad break. I bet he would have made a serious run if he didn't take that meatball penalty too.
Click to expand...
Agree. Crazy turn for him. The fact that he held in there relatively close today after that circus is still pretty impressive. Would have to have seen him shatter the course today though.

 
Otis said:
zoonation said:
It really was a bad break. I bet he would have made a serious run if he didn't take that meatball penalty too.
Click to expand...
Agree. Crazy turn for him. The fact that he held in there relatively close today after that circus is still pretty impressive. Would have to have seen him shatter the course today though.
Click to expand...
Nothing impressive about it. After 9 holes, Tiger was out of the running for all intents and purposes (i.e. he choked the first 9 holes). Sugarcoat it all you like, but that fact remains, when it counted, Tiger showed that he was not up to the task once again.

 
This rule was completely mis-applied to Tiger. This is worse than the tuck rule. People who think that there was justification for Tiger playing this weekend really need to re-read the actual rule. Tiger is a cheat and so is the group that allowed him to continue. 99% of golfers would have withdrawn.

Abraham said:
renesauz said:
Some of these talking heads are just nuts. More interested in tradition than equity.
Click to expand...
It really is ridiculous. The rule has been enforced as required. End of story. Some of these guys saying he should drop out are taking that position because its contrarian and makes them louder. A lot of the pros playing in the tourney have tweeted that it was done correctly and everyone should move on.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.

 
Chaz McNulty said:
This rule was completely mis-applied to Tiger. This is worse than the tuck rule. People who think that there was justification for Tiger playing this weekend really need to re-read the actual rule. Tiger is a cheat and so is the group that allowed him to continue. 99% of golfers would have withdrawn.

Abraham said:
renesauz said:
Some of these talking heads are just nuts. More interested in tradition than equity.
Click to expand...
It really is ridiculous. The rule has been enforced as required. End of story. Some of these guys saying he should drop out are taking that position because its contrarian and makes them louder. A lot of the pros playing in the tourney have tweeted that it was done correctly and everyone should move on.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
33-7. Disqualification Penalty; Committee DiscretionA penalty of disqualification may in exceptional individual cases be waived, modified or imposed if the Committee considers such action warranted.

Any penalty less than disqualification must not be waived or modified.

If a Committee considers that a player is guilty of a serious breach of etiquette, it may impose a penalty of disqualification under this Rule.

You might want to re-read the rule yourself. It allows for committee discretion. The notes for this rule did not offer an example of a case similar to Tiger's, but since its written to be open ended, that was unnecessary. A rules committee changing its decision within hours very easily fits into "exceptional individual cases" You may not like it, but there was nothing about this that was improper. Oh, and as ####ty as it was, the Tuck Rule was not mis-applied.

 
Chaz McNulty said:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.
Click to expand...
That is not the rule HTH.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Would you nerds stop fighting about the rules. If you want to waste pixels and argue about mundane crap just for aegiment's sake, go to law school, you'll fit right in.

 
Chaz McNulty said:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.
Click to expand...
So again...you think you know this rule and all that has to do with it better than those making the decisions right?

BTW..interesting

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/golf--photos-show-tiger-woods-may-not-have-deserved-a-two-stroke-penalty-204353354.html

 
dparker713 said:
Chaz McNulty said:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.
Click to expand...
That is not the rule HTH.
Click to expand...
OK???

http://www.randa.org/en/RandA/News/News/2011/April/Rule-Change.aspx

 
Chaz McNulty said:
dparker713 said:
Chaz McNulty said:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.
Click to expand...
That is not the rule HTH.
Click to expand...
OK???

http://www.randa.org/en/RandA/News/News/2011/April/Rule-Change.aspx
Click to expand...
That still isn't the rule.

 
sho nuff said:
Chaz McNulty said:
Below is the rule. Noticed the part about ignorance of the rule not being an excuse. The actual rule was meant for a golfer that didn't notice that a leaf fell off the tree while he was making a shot from under the tree, or if he imperceptably grounded his club in the sand and didn't know that he did this. It is not meant for ignorance of an actual rule. It is meant for when the golfer was unaware that he commited an infraction. The whole purpose of this rule was for when a viewer phoned in and 'tattled' on a player because the TV replay shows a leaf falling off that tree in the right corner of the screen (that the golfer was completely unaware of). The only reason Tiger got to continue was because it's Tiger.

This revision to Decision 33-7/4.5 addresses the situation where a player is not aware he has breached a Rule because of facts that he did not know and could not reasonably have discovered prior to returning his score card. Under this revised decision and at the discretion of the Committee, the player still receives the penalty associated with the breach of the underlying Rule, but is not disqualified.

In revising the decision, The R&A and the USGA confirm that the disqualification penalty still applies for score card breaches that arise from ignorance of the Rules of Golf. As such, this decision reinforces that it is still the responsibility of the player to know the Rules, while recognising that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach.
Click to expand...
So again...you think you know this rule and all that has to do with it better than those making the decisions right?

BTW..interesting

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/golf--photos-show-tiger-woods-may-not-have-deserved-a-two-stroke-penalty-204353354.html
Click to expand...
I am only arguing that the rule was incorrectly applied to Tiger in this case (because it's Tiger). And I am not a Tiger hater (before this). I think Tiger had a chance to show alot of class and DQ himself Saturday morning and missed a great chance to look honorable in alot of peoples eyes. Most golfers would have DQ'd themselves.

I am not arguing that he was 2 yards back from where he should have taken the shot. I am only going by what Tiger said and what some viewers pointed out.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Neighbor dumping his grass clippings
2
Replies
80
Views
2K
Zow
Zow
Deepster
Attending the Ryder Cup - Tips or advice?
Replies
6
Views
323
TLEF316
TLEF316
Judge Smails
Official 2025 Kentucky Derby thread - Sovereignty 1, Journalism 1 - on to the Belmont!
6 7 8
Replies
396
Views
12K
Cowboysfan8
Cowboysfan8

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top