Re: Eldrick Woods - Cheater

[the_andr...@yahoo.com]

On Apr 13, 5:23 pm, Peter Lawrence <hummb...@aol.com> wrote:
> On 4/13/13 12:04 PM, the_andrew_sm...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > We know he's a liar. We know he's a philanderer.
>
> > He claims to be a changed man, yet he won't disqualify himself when he
> > breaks a rule?
>
> > Other than his enablers, is anyone surprised by this?
>
> > Where are Eldrick's defenders in this time of need?
>
> I'm not a Woods fan.  I always root for Mickelson (yeah, he sucked today).
>
> That said, Woods was assessed the correct penalty (two strokes) all things
> considered.  I'll give Woods the benefit of the doubt that he didn't know
> that he was cheating when he made the incorrect drop.  (It appears that the
> rules committee didn't realize that he had made a mistake too.)
>
> Pretty boneheaded for everyone involved.

But, surely he knows the rules for a drop. That isn't some obscure
rule he's never used.

He even appears to have done to get a better distance on his shot. If
that's the case, why not just back it up to the 150 so you could hit
an even more comfortable swing.

I think we all now the answer...Eldrick means viewers.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

You think wrong. Surely you heard the explanation given by the
Committee, and that the USGA, R&A and the PGA was contacted and agreed
with their ruling. Maybe the PGA thinks about viewers, but not the
USGA and definitely not the R&A.

[Howard Brazee]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 16:47:31 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:

>>
>>I think we all now the answer...Eldrick means viewers.
>
>You think wrong. Surely you heard the explanation given by the
>Committee, and that the USGA, R&A and the PGA was contacted and agreed
>with their ruling. Maybe the PGA thinks about viewers, but not the
>USGA and definitely not the R&A.

And *certainly* not Augusta National.

--
Anybody who agrees with one side all of the time or disagrees with the
other side all of the time is equally guilty of letting others do
their thinking for them.

[KenPitts]

Roberto DeVicenzo was held to an entirely different standard. He made a book keeping error and it cost him a green jacket. This sucks.

Ken

[the_andr...@yahoo.com]

On Apr 13, 8:32 pm, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 16:47:31 -0500, bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> >>I think we all now the answer...Eldrick means viewers.
>
> >You think wrong.  Surely you heard the explanation given by the
> >Committee, and that the USGA, R&A and the PGA was contacted and agreed
> >with their ruling.  Maybe the PGA thinks about viewers, but not the
> >USGA and definitely not the R&A.
>
> And *certainly* not Augusta National.

Wich is why they haven't televised their little soirée for years.

[the_andr...@yahoo.com]

On Apr 13, 5:47 pm, bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:33:33 -0700 (PDT), "the_andrew_sm...@yahoo.com"

Did they check with them on the penalty for the 14yo kid?

[la...@pivotforpower.com]

The guy HIT THE PIN!!! His shot could have gone in had there been no pin in the hole. But he had bad luck and it bounced off the pin into the water.

So he dropped FURTHER BACK and he almost hit the pin again.

Tell me again why this player should be disqualified?

Larry

[pke...@telus.net]

And he gave himself one MORE shot, did he not... not one less...

P

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Disculpa Senora the_andr...@yahoo.com, pero did you really mime the
following on 4/13/2013 9:50 PM???

Heh! He was Chinese or Korean or something, man. I don't follow golf
too closely because it's a dumn "sport" (sic). But I definitely DO know
that these dudes who run the pro golf league are all racisists. Didn't
they also make some weird ruling that screwed that Chinese girl some
years ago - Michelle Woo or something?

--
There lived a sage in days of yore
And he a handsome pigtail wore
He wondered much and sorrowed more
Because it hung behind him

[Alan Baker]

In article <207c93d7-6156-485f...@googlegroups.com>,

Times and rules change, Ken.

Tiger Woods wasn't given special dispensation, he was dealt with
according to PGA Tour rules.

"The R&A and the USGA decided to amend the rules, stating that a player
who is called out for a penalty by a television viewer will no longer be
disqualified, and instead will now be assessed the appropriate penalty
after the round. However, once the tournament is complete, no
adjustments will be made."

<http://bleacherreport.com/articles/684959-pga-tour-rules-change-armchair
-whistleblowers-need-to-get-a-life>

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

[Alan Baker]

In article <pckjm85rb0e78476p...@4ax.com>,

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:33:33 -0700 (PDT), "the_andr...@yahoo.com"
<the_andr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 13, 5:23=A0pm, Peter Lawrence <hummb...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On 4/13/13 12:04 PM, the_andrew_sm...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > We know he's a liar. We know he's a philanderer.
>>
>> > He claims to be a changed man, yet he won't disqualify himself when he
>> > breaks a rule?
>>
>> > Other than his enablers, is anyone surprised by this?
>>
>> > Where are Eldrick's defenders in this time of need?
>>

>> I'm not a Woods fan. =A0I always root for Mickelson (yeah, he sucked toda=
>y).
>>
>> That said, Woods was assessed the correct penalty (two strokes) all thing=
>s
>> considered. =A0I'll give Woods the benefit of the doubt that he didn't kn=
>ow
>> that he was cheating when he made the incorrect drop. =A0(It appears that=

> the
>> rules committee didn't realize that he had made a mistake too.)
>>
>> Pretty boneheaded for everyone involved.
>
>But, surely he knows the rules for a drop. That isn't some obscure
>rule he's never used.
>
>He even appears to have done to get a better distance on his shot. If
>that's the case, why not just back it up to the 150 so you could hit
>an even more comfortable swing.
>
>I think we all now the answer...Eldrick means viewers.

The rule used to be anywhere behind the previous spot. Granted he is
supposed to know the current rules.

The committee first decided to do nothing because they saw no in
fraction. Case closed.

Case reopened - fan called in. Tiger told the committee exactly what
he did. They changed the decision the following day. Even the
International people agree the 2 stroke penalty was proper.

Tiger does mean viewers. If he had been disqualified I would not have
watched anymore. You don't have to appreciate his morals. But golf is
the toughest sport I ever tried. Maybe one has to be halfway decent to
appreciate real talent.

Hugh

[KenPitts]

Because he signed a wrong score card and so many others have been DQ'ed for that very thing.

For instance, Craig Stadler and kneeling on a towel to hit a shot.

Ken

[Alan Baker]

In article <672fe27f-ad31-401c...@googlegroups.com>,

And the rule has changed to recognize the reality that millions of
people are watching with DVRs and can call, email, text, tweet that a
player has broken a rule.

The rule now is that when a rule violation is found like that long after
the fact, the player will be assessed the appropriate strokes penalty.

>
> For instance, Craig Stadler and kneeling on a towel to hit a shot.
>
> Ken

[Alan Baker]

In article <516a1794...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Ummmm... ...no.

When choosing to drop at the spot from where the last stroke was played,
the rule has been "as nearly as possible" to that spot for a very long
time.

>
> The committee first decided to do nothing because they saw no in
> fraction. Case closed.
>
> Case reopened - fan called in. Tiger told the committee exactly what
> he did. They changed the decision the following day. Even the
> International people agree the 2 stroke penalty was proper.
>
> Tiger does mean viewers. If he had been disqualified I would not have
> watched anymore. You don't have to appreciate his morals. But golf is
> the toughest sport I ever tried. Maybe one has to be halfway decent to
> appreciate real talent.
>
> Hugh

[Criminal Drivers Murder 35,000 Americans a Year]

On Apr 13, 9:46 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:

>
> When choosing to drop at the spot from where the last stroke was played,
> the rule has been "as nearly as possible" to that spot for a very long
> time.
>
>

Hey bigtalk. Tiger has 14 majors. How many you got?

[Alan Baker]

In article
<34d47280-f4e6-458b...@d8g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
"Criminal Drivers Murder 35,000 Americans a Year"

What has how many majors Tiger has won got to do with what the rules are?

[KenPitts]

All the more reason he should have known the rule. If he applies the rules correctly this is not an issue.

Ken

[Alan Baker]

In article <deeff90f-6d62-43f9...@googlegroups.com>,

Absolutely. And if he fails to apply the rule correctly...

...and the committee who examined the shot decided there was a rules
violation (they met and decided there was not) and informed him (hence
there was no need to inform him)...

...the penalty would be two strokes.

Which is the penalty that ended up being applied.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 20:46:04 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote:

>When choosing to drop at the spot from where the last stroke was played,
>the rule has been "as nearly as possible" to that spot for a very long
>time.

>Alan Baker
>Vancouver, British Columbia
>"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
>to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
>sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

Yellow Water Hazard
Option 1 - Play it from the hazard
Option 2 - Replay the shot from the orginal position, incurring a
stroke and distance penalty
Option 3 - Draw a line from the hole to where the ball alst crossed
the margin of the hazard and drop anywhere behind that point keeping
the point between you and the hole, incurring a one-shot penalty

Above are the rules I found. Please point out the words, "as nearly as
possible" so I can agree with you.

Hugh

[Wolfie]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote

> Yellow Water Hazard
> Option 1 - Play it from the hazard
> Option 2 - Replay the shot from the orginal position, incurring a
> stroke and distance penalty
> Option 3 - Draw a line from the hole to where the ball alst crossed
> the margin of the hazard and drop anywhere behind that point keeping
> the point between you and the hole, incurring a one-shot penalty

> Above are the rules I found. Please point out the words, "as nearly as
> possible" so I can agree with you.

Who knows where you found those rules?

From the USGA rules (PGA site):

"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...."

[the_andr...@yahoo.com]

On Apr 13, 11:56 pm, "Criminal Drivers Murder 35,000 Americans a Year"

With or without asterisks?

[Howard Brazee]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:09:17 -0700 (PDT), "la...@pivotforpower.com"
<la...@pivotforpower.com> wrote:

>The guy HIT THE PIN!!! His shot could have gone in had there been no pin in the hole. But he had bad luck and it bounced off the pin into the water.
>
>So he dropped FURTHER BACK and he almost hit the pin again.
>
>Tell me again why this player should be disqualified?

That has nothing to do with the rules.

He broke the rules. In the old days, he would have been
disqualified, but a recent rule change meant that he was given a two
stroke penalty.

Rules is rules.

[KenPitts]

Tiger's actions merged #2 and #3. He did not have the option of going back two yards from where he originally played the shot.

Ken

[KenPitts]

Thanks Wolfie.

Ken

[Howard Brazee]

Tiger is not arguing that rule. He admits he made a mistake and took
the penalty given him.

[KenPitts]

The penalty would always have been two shots. The DQ would have been for turning in a wrong scorecard.

Ken

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:30:42 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote this crap:

>
>Yellow Water Hazard
>Option 1 - Play it from the hazard
>Option 2 - Replay the shot from the orginal position, incurring a
>stroke and distance penalty
>Option 3 - Draw a line from the hole to where the ball alst crossed
>the margin of the hazard and drop anywhere behind that point keeping
>the point between you and the hole, incurring a one-shot penalty
>
>Above are the rules I found. Please point out the words, "as nearly as
>possible" so I can agree with you.
>
>Hugh

I stay away from the yellow water. I especially won't step in it or
retrieve my ball.

Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder.

[andrcom]

Had to check in on this one. Recently had a conversation about tigger where he has reinvented himself only to hear its for the good of golf. Personally I believe we all deserve a second chance but, I golfed (long) before tiger and dont believe he did benefit the game one bit. He did benifit many peoples pocket books. If you think money has helped the game, where is the senior tour now? I have not seen a match in years. It used to follow the regular tour on the tube. Personally I do not like what he did for golf and have liked him more since his troubles has shown him to be a mortal like the rest of us. I in fact think he should have been DQ'ed but I also think the powers that be saw this coming and passed the rule (2012) in the nick of time. Could you imaging them and their fear of Sunday at the Masters with out their big draw? Any other time in history you would have been done for putting in a incorrect score card. talk about protecting the field. Problem is they all made more post tigger as well.

[Alan Baker]

In article <516aa0a...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote:

"Rule 26Water Hazards (Including Lateral Water Hazards)

Definitions

All defined terms are in italics and are listed alphabetically in the
Definitions section.

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"

<http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Rule-26/>

--

[Alan Baker]

In article <44a064eb-ef31-4783...@googlegroups.com>,

And the rules have changed, Ken. Deal with it.

[Peter Lawrence]

On 4/14/13 5:55 AM, Wolfie wrote:
> "J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote
>>
>> Yellow Water Hazard
>> Option 1 - Play it from the hazard
>> Option 2 - Replay the shot from the orginal position, incurring a
>> stroke and distance penalty
>> Option 3 - Draw a line from the hole to where the ball alst crossed
>> the margin of the hazard and drop anywhere behind that point keeping
>> the point between you and the hole, incurring a one-shot penalty
>
>> Above are the rules I found. Please point out the words, "as nearly as
>> possible" so I can agree with you.
>
> Who knows where you found those rules?

In Alabama it appears, they play golf a bit differently...

;)


- Peter

[KenPitts]

Alabama?

Ken

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:48:42 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>

Thanks to both responders.

Hugh

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 09:15:54 -0700, Peter Lawrence <humm...@aol.com>
wrote:

>- Peter

Most amateurs I have seen play by winter rules. On bad days I used
Arctic Rules.

Hugh

[andrcom]

> Most amateurs I have seen play by winter rules. On bad days I used
>
> Arctic Rules.
>
>
>
> Hugh

I will play to anybody's rules (for money). For a normal outing I want to have fun.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:10:27 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote this crap:

They're really just suggestions.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

[Howard Brazee]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:10:27 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:

>Most amateurs I have seen play by winter rules. On bad days I used
>Arctic Rules.

What are winter rules and arctic rules?

[Howard Brazee]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:29:33 -0700 (PDT), andrcom <And...@aol.com>
wrote:

>I will play to anybody's rules (for money). For a normal outing I want to have fun.

I will play to anybody's rules. For normal outings (and others), I
want to have fun. To me, having fun means following the rules now
and not being surprised by them later.

I could have a much lower score if I picked up the ball and carried it
to the hole, but that's not golf and it's not fun. Some compromise
between that extreme and the rules has the same handicap to a lesser
degree.

[Eric Ramon]

winter rules: when the ground is wet you can pick up your ball, clean
the mud off it, then place it back down.
arctic rules: after you clean the mud off the ball you "drop" your
ball with more of a toss, so you're 10-15 yards closer to the hole.
Alternatively you can pick up your ball, "absent-mindedly" start
walking towards the hole as you clean the mud off, then drop where you
end up, which might be 30 yards closer to the hole.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:31:13 -0600, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:10:27 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
>Sullivan) wrote:
>
>>Most amateurs I have seen play by winter rules. On bad days I used
>>Arctic Rules.
>
>What are winter rules and arctic rules?

WInter rules are used to improve conditions, withing certain
limitations, when a course is barely playable.

In Arctic rules you never have a lost ball or bad lie in any course
conditions.

The better you play the less you need Arctic rules.

Hugh

[la...@pivotforpower.com]

On Saturday, April 13, 2013 2:33:33 PM UTC-7, the_andr...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Apr 13, 5:23 pm, Peter Lawrence <hummb...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/13/13 12:04 PM, the_andrew_sm...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > We know he's a liar. We know he's a philanderer.
>
> >
>
> > > He claims to be a changed man, yet he won't disqualify himself when he
>
> > > breaks a rule?
>
> >
>
> > > Other than his enablers, is anyone surprised by this?
>
> >
>
> > > Where are Eldrick's defenders in this time of need?
>
> >
>
> > I'm not a Woods fan.  I always root for Mickelson (yeah, he sucked today).
>
> >
>
> > That said, Woods was assessed the correct penalty (two strokes) all things
>
> > considered.  I'll give Woods the benefit of the doubt that he didn't know
>
> > that he was cheating when he made the incorrect drop.  (It appears that the
>
> > rules committee didn't realize that he had made a mistake too.)
>
> >
>
> > Pretty boneheaded for everyone involved.
>
>
>
> But, surely he knows the rules for a drop. That isn't some obscure
>
> rule he's never used.
>
>
>
> He even appears to have done to get a better distance on his shot. If
>
> that's the case, why not just back it up to the 150 so you could hit
>
> an even more comfortable swing.
>
>
>
> I think we all now the answer...Eldrick means viewers.

NBC News video this morning showed that the second ball position was only a few inches from the original, not near 2 yards.

So they were going by what Tiger said in his news conference, NOT what actually happened. His second position was well within the rules for a dropped ball.

Woods HIT THE FLAGSTICK from the fairway and the ball bounced off into the water. If he had missed the flagstick by a fraction of an inch, his ball probably would have spun back into perfect position for a straight in uphill putt, if it didn't go in. He is being punished for a great shot.

I am glad Scott won, but certainly the best player in that field was and is Tiger.

later

[Alan Baker]

In article <b2372d76-fc36-42d1...@googlegroups.com>,

No, actually.

>
> So they were going by what Tiger said in his news conference, NOT what
> actually happened. His second position was well within the rules for a
> dropped ball.
>
> Woods HIT THE FLAGSTICK from the fairway and the ball bounced off into the
> water. If he had missed the flagstick by a fraction of an inch, his ball
> probably would have spun back into perfect position for a straight in uphill
> putt, if it didn't go in. He is being punished for a great shot.
>
> I am glad Scott won, but certainly the best player in that field was and is
> Tiger.
>

You're neglecting (as NBC News and others have neglected) to consider
foreshortening. The position of the various marks on the ground only
vary by a few inches... ...VERTICALLY. But because the camera is only a
few degrees above the plane of the ground, those few inches in the
vertical direction translate into much more horizontal distance.
> later

[Howard Brazee]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:11:18 -0700 (PDT), "la...@pivotforpower.com"
<la...@pivotforpower.com> wrote:

>So they were going by what Tiger said in his news conference, NOT what actually happened. His second position was well within the rules for a dropped ball.

The question isn't where it ended up here. It's whether he dropped
it as near as possible to where that previous shot was taken.

[KenPitts]

This is where integrity comes in. I believe Tiger said that he intended to drop a couple of yards farther from the pin. At the very least, his intended actions were a violation of the rules. He is to be commended for that and for not craw-fishing away from this admission.

Ken

[andrcom]

Howard,
It is a personal choice!