Hello Friends...The 2013 Masters Thread

[MMP]

This is a classic example of saying less being the better option. He should have shut the fuck up. DQ is the only honorable thing here. If he is unwilling to admit that he made a mistake and withdraw he is knowingly admitting to breaking the rule. In which case fuck him. Actually, fuck him either way.

[guroo270]

Sometimes that can be really funny.

I was watching a golf tournament once and a guy kept on yelling banana, and it was quite funny.

The dumbing down of America continues, at a rapid pace, still.

"Yeah, guys! Did you hear that "REDONKULOUS!" after every one of those shots? That was totally me, man."

[iceman]

Personally I think there should be a lot more cheating in golf.

[guroo270]

/\/\/\ I laughed.

This is a classic example of saying less being the better option. He should have shut the fuck up. DQ is the only honorable thing here. If he is unwilling to admit that he made a mistake and withdraw he is knowingly admitting to breaking the rule. In which case fuck him. Actually, fuck him either way.

So, you think he shouldn't have been forthcoming about the drop, he should have shut the fuck up, and fuck him because he is unwilling to admit he made a mistake? That's odd.

Not to mention, will someone please show me where he is denying making a mistake? He outright said he made a mistake and has been completely honest this hole time.

[MMP]

Is that what I said? He admitted he moved the ball back. If he had not acknowledged that moving it back was a decision he made in furtherance of hitting the same shot with a better overall result, he would be within the spirit of the rule allowing him to sign in improper scorecard and not be immediately DQ'd. Fuck him because he isn't doing what he knows is right. What would Earl do?

In other words, he has no plausible deniability. He admitted he broke the rule. Had he not admitted it, he would have plausible deniability.

[iceman]

Wait, he told the truth so he's a dick but if he lied it would be cool?

[MMP]

no he told the truth and should DQ himself because the truth is that he broke the rule with intent, even if he misunderstood the rule.

Had he not admitted it, only he would know his intent. If he said he had no intention of improving his result by moving back he would be lying, but within the interpretation of the new rule in remaining in the tournament.



Is it cool to know that he should withdraw and not?

[concretejungle]

Please Jeebus let this be true or if not I don't want to know. Hilarious.

http://deadspin.com/lindsey-vonns-ex...eets-472858106

[systemoverblow'd]

[Tye 1on]

no he told the truth and should DQ himself because the truth is that he broke the rule with intent, even if he misunderstood the rule.

Had he not admitted it, only he would know his intent. If he said he had no intention of improving his result by moving back he would be lying, but within the interpretation of the new rule in remaining in the tournament.

This is what I'm saying.
It's like adjusting his driver for a particular drive.
The intent of the new rule is to protect from 100,000 TV judges, not from deliberate infractions.

[jfost]

This is what I'm saying.
It's like adjusting his driver for a particular drive.
The intent of the new rule is to protect from 100,000 TV judges, not from deliberate infractions.

you guys are right, BUT the best part of this new rule is that he DID get the penalty, and didn't have to be DQ'd for a retarded thing like "signing an incorrect scorecard"... that is a dumb rule and should be done away with. Yes I know it is "tradition" and how it has been in the past, but let's update things every now & then eh?

I've NO idea why they didn't just talk with him before he signed his card. If they had, he would have taken his 2 strokes and we'd be right back where we are today. What he was given is a fair & just penalty for a rules infraction. It wouldn't have been fair if he got NO penalty, and it wouldn't have been fair if he were DQ'd.

edit: also, think how great it is for the fans that you can watch real close and call in and affect the outcome!!! That would help out the fan base in lots of sports, of course only golf is slow enough to allow for that process to fully develop during a round...

[jfost]

...
So, you think he shouldn't have been forthcoming about the drop, he should have shut the fuck up, and fuck him because he is unwilling to admit he made a mistake? That's odd.

Not to mention, will someone please show me where he is denying making a mistake? He outright said he made a mistake and has been completely honest this hole time.

yeah, if he'd said nothing, he WOULDN'T have any penalty, and WOULD be a cheater... as it stands, he got what he deserved (you could say he got a really really really bad "gift" from the golf gods - maybe payback for the lucky breaks of yore?!?)

[milton]

Looks like some rain moving in later today. Quite a large band on radar.

[DasBlunt]

Tiger could win it with some weather.

[philth]

I've NO idea why they didn't just talk with him before he signed his card. If they had, he would have taken his 2 strokes and we'd be right back where we are today. What he was given is a fair & just penalty for a rules infraction. It wouldn't have been fair if he got NO penalty, and it wouldn't have been fair if he were DQ'd.

Because they ruled that his drop was within the "As close to the previous lie as possible" rule(a stretch but applicable). But when tiger opened his mouth AFTER the round and said he improved his lie by 2 yards intentionally is when the shitstorm started. They realized Tiger was confused and applying the facts of one rule to the facts of another. He unintentionaly but undeniably BROKE THE RULES of golf. They where caught holding their dicks.

[Tye 1on]

you guys are right, BUT the best part of this new rule is that he DID get the penalty, and didn't have to be DQ'd for a retarded thing like "signing an incorrect scorecard"... that is a dumb rule and should be done away with. Yes I know it is "tradition" and how it has been in the past, but let's update things every now & then eh?

I've NO idea why they didn't just talk with him before he signed his card. If they had, he would have taken his 2 strokes and we'd be right back where we are today. What he was given is a fair & just penalty for a rules infraction. It wouldn't have been fair if he got NO penalty, and it wouldn't have been fair if he were DQ'd.

nah, the DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard is often the right rule.

k, finally, my last post on this, it's time to watch some good golf!!

What should have happened: before signing his card, rules dudes talk with him, which they say happened. But a clear discussion would have led to Tiger saying what he said on TV, he made an honest mistake, mixing up the options in Rule 26. He would have added two, signed the card, it would have been a non-issue.

Instead, the tournament folks forgot to ask him which option he was using. Then, when it came up on TV, they crumpled, pulling out the new Rule 33-7. Which allowed them to not DQ him.

Unless you actually read the Rule: "However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d." Aw crap, he had known and discovered the facts on his bad drop! He knew them from the second he stepped back two yards.

Direct from USGA: "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 recognizing that there may be some rare situations where it is reasonable that a player is unaware of the factual circumstances of a breach."

Tiger broke Rule 26, the Masters royalty broke Rule 33, and if Tiger wanted to show, at least and maybe only to me, that he cares about the integrity of the game more than his personal fortunes, he should have withdrawn.

now...let's go Kuch!!!!

[philth]

nah, the DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard is often the right rule.

k, finally, my last post on this, it's time to watch some good golf!!

What should have happened: before signing his card, rules dudes talk with him, which they say happened. But a clear discussion would have led to Tiger saying what he said on TV, he made an honest mistake, mixing up the options in Rule 26. He would have added two, signed the card, it would have been a non-issue.

Instead, the tournament folks forgot to ask him which option he was using. Then, when it came up on TV, they crumpled, pulling out the new Rule 33-7. Which allowed them to not DQ him.

Unless you actually read the Rule: "However, if the Committee is satisfied that the competitor could not reasonably have known or discovered the facts resulting in his breach of the Rules, it would be justified under Rule 33-7 in waiving the disqualification penalty prescribed by Rule 6-6d." Aw crap, he had known and discovered the facts on his bad drop! He knew them from the second he stepped back two yards.

Tiger broke Rule 26, the Masters royalty broke Rule 33, and if Tiger wanted to show, at least and maybe only to me, that he cares about the integrity of the game more than his personal fortunes, he should have withdrawn.

now...let's go Kuch!!!!

Perfectly said.

[4matic]

Tiger obviously knows the rules and how to use them for an advantage:

[DasBlunt]

Hey Tye, but if Tiger intentionally broke a rule, yeah, he should have withdrawn, but he did not, he applied the wrong rule. Both the committee and he himself thought he was ok BEFORE he signed the card, when they heard him explain it later, they realized he was not explaining correctly ( not on purpose), and then the 2 shot penalty was assessed ( which would have been assessed had someone realized it on the course).

Nothing he did before he signed the scorecard would have DQ'd him, so why should he face that penalty?

[Tye 1on]

Hey Tye, but if Tiger intentionally broke a rule, yeah, he should have withdrawn, but he did not, he applied the wrong rule.

that's the same thing. He intentionally did not follow the correct rule in the drop. Using wrong rule=breaking correct rule.

[DasBlunt]

that's the same thing. He intentionally did not follow the correct rule in the drop. Using wrong rule=breaking correct rule.

OK, but he applied the wrong rule thinking it was the right one, unless intentionally means, he knew he was taking the wrong drop.

[guroo270]

Hey Tye, but if Tiger intentionally broke a rule, yeah, he should have withdrawn, but he did not, he applied the wrong rule. Both the committee and he himself thought he was ok BEFORE he signed the card, when they heard him explain it later, they realized he was not explaining correctly ( not on purpose), and then the 2 shot penalty was assessed ( which would have been assessed had someone realized it on the course).

Nothing he did before he signed the scorecard would have DQ'd him, so why should he face that penalty?

OK, but he applied the wrong rule thinking it was the right one, unless intentionally means, he knew he was taking the wrong drop.

On point, right there.

[BmillsSkier]

Benny Profane, white guy from Connecticut, voice of black people everywhere.

(Shows a weak mind when you're so incapable of seeing an opposing point of view that the only reason your head can comprehend is racism)

Back in reality, looking forward to a great round today; Boom Boom let me down so time to get behind Kuch. Hope Tiger and a few others like Ricky can make a push and keep it interesting.

[spook]

that's the same thing. He intentionally did not follow the correct rule in the drop. Using wrong rule=breaking correct rule.

he intentionally did not follow the correct rule? that's not what i hear. he intentionally followed the rule he mistakenly chose or mixed. that's not the same thing as intentionally choosing the rule that gains him the best advantage.

[Tye 1on]

he intentionally did not follow the correct rule? that's not what i hear. he intentionally followed the rule he mistakenly chose or mixed. that's not the same thing as intentionally choosing the rule that gains him the best advantage.

True but it doesn't matter. If you don't take the time (or hire a bright enough caddy) to know and use the right rule, you are subject to penalty. Read the USGA language I quoted above.