Tiger Woods

[ATWizJr]

Tiger, do the right thing.  DQ yourself, or the taint will follow you forever.

[MU B2002]

Disagree.

[reinko]

Tiger, do the right thing.  DQ yourself, or the taint will follow you forever.

No.

[NavinRJohnson]

Tiger, do the right thing.  DQ yourself, or the taint will follow you forever.

Ridiculous. Attitudes like this and the other jokers spewing the same noise on TV right now is a huge reason why no one would be watching on Sunday if he did what you suggest.

[ATWizJr]

He signed an incorrect score card.  Rule must be applied uniformly to all regardless of World Ranking or possible loss of viewership this weekend.

[NavinRJohnson]

He signed an incorrect score card.  Rule must be applied uniformly to all regardless of World Ranking or possible loss of viewership this weekend.

Review was conducted before he signed (while still on the course) with conclusion being he had not violated a rule. Not on him after that.

[reinko]

Review was conducted before he signed (while still on the course) with conclusion being he had not violated a rule. Not on him after that.

Stupid facts.

[injuryBug]

what is considered close proximity to the original shot?

[tower912]

He said in one of his post round interviews yesterday that he had taken his drop 2 yards farther back and then hit the shot.   There are rules to cover all of the minutae of golf and he inadvertently chose the wrong rule and the wrong interpretation.   I can argue this one every which way but loose.    Instead, lets ask this.   If it was a no-name, what would the ruling be?   

[ATWizJr]

It clearly was not in closest possible proximity to the shot and if it were a no name the integrity of the game would have been upheld and he would have been disqualified.  I hope Tiger takes it upon himself to call the penalty and withdraw.

[NavinRJohnson]

Instead, lets ask this.   If it was a no-name, what would the ruling be?   

It wasn't, so we'll never know. Therefore, irrelevant.

[NavinRJohnson]

It clearly was not in closest possible proximity to the shot and if it were a no name the integrity of the game would have been upheld and he would have been disqualified.  I hope Tiger takes it upon himself to call the penalty and withdraw.

And if it was a no name, nobody would give a rip about the so called integrity of the game. Lets call it what it is.

[ATWizJr]

And if it was a no name, nobody would give a rip about the so called integrity of the game. Lets call it what it is.

actually, if it was a no name, everyone would be singing his praises for doing the right thing and protecting the integrity of the game.  So, to you, the fact that it is Tiger matters, I guess.

[NavinRJohnson]

actually, if it was a no name, everyone would be singing his praises for doing the right thing and protecting the integrity of the game.

LOL!

Whats the penalty for signing an incorrect card? DQ. Was he shot in question reviewed and ruled on the course before Tiger signed his card? Yes.

What's the penalty for dropping two yards back, which is and should be the only thing still in question given the above? 2 shots. This was handled correctly.

You don't like Tiger. I get it.

[ATWizJr]

LOL!

Whats the penalty for signing an incorrect card? DQ. Was he shot in question reviewed and ruled on the course before Tiger signed his card? Yes.

What's the penalty for dropping two yards back, which is and should be the only thing still in question given the above? 2 shots. This was handled correctly.

LOL!

Nah.  The shot in question was not reviewed and ruled on the course.  No marshall or rules expert was called over to rule on where the correct drop should take place.  The infraction came to light when Woods himself mentioned that he had dropped 2 yards back.  It os his obligation to know the rule and if in doubt ask for a ruling on the course.  Clearly, he did not drop on the correct spot, failed to take a penalty, and then signed an incorrect scorecard.  Should be out.  What do you think his fellow competitors will feel about it?

[NavinRJohnson]

LOL!

Nah.  The shot in question was not reviewed and ruled on the course.  No marshall or rules expert was called over to rule on where the correct drop should take place.  The infraction came to light when Woods himself mentioned that he had dropped 2 yards back.  It os his obligation to know the rule and if in doubt ask for a ruling on the course.  Clearly, he did not drop on the correct spot, failed to take a penalty, and then signed an incorrect scorecard.  Should be out.  What do you think his fellow competitors will feel about it?

Ok, I am going to go ahead and drop out of his since you obviously aren't familiar with the actual facts, but instead, are choosing to believe our own version. From the PGA's own statement...

"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."

Only after his interview was it reviewed further, and here we are. Had they ruled differently at the time, he would have taken the 2 strokes and signed his card, yet at the time that was deemed unnecessary. The correct penalty has been assessed. Those of you who don't like Tiger want to retroactively say he signed an incorrect card and should be DQ'd, under the guise of protecting the integrity of the game. Again, lets just go ahead and call it what it is.

[ATWizJr]

Ok, I am going to go ahead and drop out of his since you obviously aren't familiar with the actual facts, but instead, are choosing to believe our own version. From the PGA's own statement...

"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."

Only after his interview was it reviewed further, and here we are. Had they ruled differently at the time, he would have taken the 2 strokes and signed his card, yet at the time that was deemed unnecessary. The correct penalty has been assessed. Those of you who don't like Tiger want to retroactively say he signed an incorrect card and should be DQ'd, under the guise of protecting the integrity of the game. Again, lets just go ahead and call it what it is.

  In fact, I am a huge Tiger fan which prompts me to hope that he will do the right thing.  Tiger, this is your chance to retain your integrity on the course and avoid being called a cheater on and off the course. It is his responsibility to know and follow the rules, regardless of what the committee rules.  If we play, NJ, I hope you'll let me keep the score.

[injuryBug]

if the rules committee reviewed it and ruled ok it makes no sense to go back cause Tiger says he dropped 2 yards back (it was actually about 4-5 ft).  So after the NBA finals Jordan comes out and says yes I pushed Byron Russell does the NBA go back and take away the points?

According to the rules this was handled correctly but I still do not understand how you can go back after everything was ok'd and reviewed on video.

[mugrack]

Character revealed

[ATWizJr]

Tiger should have known the rule, called the penalty on himself at the time, added the extra stroke to his card and then signed a correct card.  To me, the fact that someone else has said, paraphrasing, "It's ok Tiger, you can have a pass", does not make it right.  It's like if you are given the wrong change after making a purchase.  If you have any integrity, you need to do the right thing.  Tiger, do you have the integrity to do the right thing?  

[NavinRJohnson]

To me, the fact that someone else has said, paraphrasing, "It's ok Tiger, you can have a pass", does not make it right.

Again facts are pesky little buggers. Who exactly said that? All involved at the time, deemed no rule had been broken. Now, after further review, which as someone points out above, is a bit bizarre, the same penalty that would have been assessed had he/they gotten it right at the time, has been assessed.

[ATWizJr]

Again facts are pesky little buggers. Who exactly said that? All involved at the time, deemed no rule had been broken. Now, after further review, which as someone points out above, is a bit bizarre, the same penalty that would have been assessed had he/they gotten it right at the time, has been assessed.

He took an unfair advantage with the drop, signed an incorrect scorecard and should be DQed.  No mystery here. So we'll see if he has the character to do the right thing or whether he will take a second unfair advantage, and continue in the tourney.  To me, this could cause a bigger loss of fans than his personal indiscretions.

[NavinRJohnson]

He took an unfair advantage with the drop, signed an incorrect scorecard and should be DQed.  No mystery here.

You can keep saying that all you want. Actual events, circumstances, and facts involved, indicate you are incorrect (but I suspect you already know that).

[MUEng92]

Football and Baseball geeks spend time between games discussing meaningless stats. Golf snobs spend time between rounds discussing meaningless rule infractions.

[jesmu84]

Uh.. you guys do know they added a new rule (rule 33.7) in 2012 that allows ANY player to continue playing even if they signed an incorrect scorebard, right? The reason he's still playing isn't because he's Tiger, it's because the rules permit him from still playing. All of those guys saying he should DQ himself are dumb. It's a new rule. If they all disagreed with the rule (which it sounds like they do), take it up with the PGA.