Really?
He definitely made a statement in an interview that showed he didn’t know the rule (and probably violated it). But did he later actually call a penalty on himself?
Too late to edit, but in case anyone is wondering about the official not telling Dustin Johnson he was in a bunker at the 2011 PGA, remember that DJ was not DQd, he just was penalized, exactly like Janzen and Tiger. The penalty strokes knocked him out of the playoff.
I gave a more detailed analysis of Tiger’s case, based on speculation but IMO now confirmed, in my post yesterday evening.
Yes. Not in the TV interview, when he was still mistaken about the rule, but the next morning, when he met with the rules officials. They had already said that the drop was OK, and IMO the videos and photos show that Tiger was mistaken when he said he went back two yards. IMO he was in a daze after the best shot he hit all week clanked off the flagstick and into the creek, so he was confused about what type of hazard it was, and he was confused about where he dropped it.
The officials showed him the tape, and maybe photos, and said it looks OK to us. Tiger could have said, “I thought I was farther back than that, but I guess you’re right.” Instead, he said, “I don’t care how it looks on video, I know I went back two yards.” Exactly like Bobby Jones.
This may still lead to controversy: millions of home viewers (many with recorders) are likely to catch more than one official. For an analogy, consider that NFL official video reviews have by no means eliminated controversial calls.
It’s normal that the best receive more scrutiny.
Apples and Oranges.
The committee “allegedly” reviewed the incident after a viewer call and determine that there was no penalty.
=========
FTR, I am calling shenanigans on ANGC (and Rules Committee) and not Tiger Woods.
I said allegedly, because I just don’t see how a viewer could see the improper drop on TV. It just does not pass the proverbial sniff test
There was no up close of Tiger’s two divots on the ESPN or Web coverage (we would have seen it with endless replays if there was).
And if a viewer did see and the ANGC-RC did review it, how can they not see the improper drop when they were specifically looking for it? With most likely more video tape to review.
Tiger completed his round about 7:30 pm et Friday, and presumably gave his TV and Media pressers shortly thereafter. Lets call it 8 pm.
The firestorm of the improper drop did not start hitting social media until at least 11 pm. There was no smoke on twitter until 11 pm, and no flames until CBS did their Friday night recap.
I just don’t see how a viewer can see an improper drop while ANGC rules officials cannot even see anything that might make them talk to Tiger after the round (and before signing his scorecard) when they specifically looking for that infraction, with increased scrutiny.
Not one of the ESPN media/experts saw it.
Not one of the GC media/experts including Brandel Chamblee
It was only after Tiger’s presser that people starting reviewing it.
And the way I read rule 33-7 and decision 33-7/4.5, the only reason why TW was not DQed is because ANGC-RC was ‘allegedly’ notified of the infraction before Tiger signed his scorecard.
I have an even better solution-Don’t accept phone calls from Joe Schmo on his couch! How do peopel get the #, and more importantly, WHY do officials take the calls?
Maybe not millions. It only takes one:
What other sports do players get help from spectators and outside influences?
Like moving a 2 ton rock? (Phoenix 1997)
Like identifying a ball in a tree? (Doral 2013)
Well, exactly. Tiger was mistaken about where he dropped it. He dropped it close enough to the original spot to comply with the rule, in the opinion of the officials who reviewed the tape. But he insisted on calling the penalty on himself anyway.
But that has nothing to do with a viewer calling it in. If you don’t mind my saying so, I find it very, very difficult to believe that you can’t imagine someone biased enough against Tiger to call it in, if he thought there was any doubt at all about the drop.
So which do you think is more likely — that everyone on the ANGC rules committe is lying, or that there was one viewer out of the millions watching the Masters who thought he saw a chance to keep Tiger from winning?
Jeez, you can do better than that. There are dozens of shots every tournament that spectators deflect back onto the fairway, or otherwise keep from being a lot worse than they should have been. Why cite examples of playing by the rules?
And I’ll never forget Phil Mickelson bawling out a spectator for finding his ball, when he wanted to keep playing his provisional.
On a golf blog at Golf Channel, a professional photographer (a Tiger fan) has done some calculations and his confident that Tiger dropped was between 4.5 and 6.5 feet behind the original spot.
Yes there are dozens of shots deflected, but most all of them are unintentional.
Moving a 1 ton boulder is an intentional act and the reason why I pointed it out is that golf is a different sport than football and baseball. There is no reason why they should not accept viewer call ins.
BTW, I sent you a PM, but unsuccessful because you do not accept PMs. If you want more information on the photographer analysis about telephoto compression, the photographer in the background and pixel counting I will be glad to send you the information. The guy knows his stuff and has been employed as golf photographer in golf industry for years and years.
Impressive credentials indeed. But I hope he’s right, because then justice was done. But in the photos published in the Augusta Chronicle, it looks more like a few inches to me.
But two shots wouldn’t have made Tiger win anyway; sometimes, it’s just not your week. The guy who the golf gods really stuck it to was Cabrera. His second shot to 13 on Sunday was about a foot worse than Scott’s. Cabrera’s rolled back into the creek and resulted in a 6, while Scott’s somehow stopped rolling halfway down the bank and resulted in a 4. And that turned out to be the ball game.
Thanks, but why not just post the url for everyone?
I thought this was fundamentally about everybody playing on the same field?
I don’t know the provenance but on the Hang Up and Listen podcast (and they’re view on the hole thing is one that I pretty much agree with, though it adds nothing to whether this is an accurate fact) they mentioned it was someone who knew one of the rules officials at Augusta.
If you know some way that bottom-level players can receive the same attention as those at the top, share it.
Until then we must accept the reality that in a competition to determine who is best, the best get disproportionate attention. It has been ever thus.
For one thing, I do not think everyone on the Rules Committee is lying. It only takes one person to say that they had a phone call and investigated it.
They already had the PR nightmare of giving a stroke penalty to a 14 yr old amateur from China which almost cost him making the cut. They didn’t want another one by DQing Tiger Woods.
If the officials believed the video, then there should have been no 2 shot penalty. Or if the officials believed that Tiger dropped 2 yards back (or did anything other than drop as close as practical to the original spot), it should have been a DQ. It cannot be both!!!
The Janzen example with the towel is not on point. An official noticed Janzen mopping the fairway with a towel and said nothing. That is a safe harbor. No official knew that Tiger was taking a more favorable spot; they assumed he was following the “near as practical” rule. There is not a safe harbor in that if Tiger was not following that rule, even if the official didn’t see it.
- I don’t want to.
- and it is buried in a 10,000+ post blog and you wouldn’t be able to find it I copied it at the time.
1st Paragraph: Not true with the new 33-7 rule. That rule gives the committee " a Get out of jail free card" for certain instances that they claim existed.
2nd Paragrah: I agree completely.