The Tiger Woods Thread

stockdam

Rory hits the front

CalamariFritti

Adrenaline got the better of him and he loses a drive badly when he was pumped. Just when he had closed to within one with a par 5 next and everyone was getting excited. Bit of an anticlimax, but another great week really.

Some stuff from Rory. No matter what, Tiger couldn't have stayed with that 64 anyway. Not from a couple of shots behind. Without the OOB Tiger could have gotten to -13 or -14, -15 with a miracle push. Still 3 shots off Rory in the end.

backspin.

stockdam wrote: »

Played well this week but probably that's the end of his run.

Why would you say that? I strongly disagree. I think he is on the up.

AGC

backspin. wrote: »

Why would you say that? I strongly disagree. I think he is on the up.

Presume he means today, not his career

slave1

Unreal short game, has to be gagging for Augusta

Deeper Blue

Will that finish put him back in the top 100? Only a matter of time before he's back in the top 50 surely

kiers47

NDWC wrote: »

Will that finish put him back in the top 100? Only a matter of time before he's back in the top 50 surely

Just outside. Projected 105

FixdePitchmark

Did anyone see this coming.

I'm normally optimistic about older golfers but had given up any hope on Tiger .

The energy when he is around is just so different .

I'm still very nervous when he goes flat out at a shot.

First Up

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The energy when he is around is just so different .

In what way?

Plenty of hype from TV commentators and louder (and more obnoxious) galleries.

Anything else?

FixdePitchmark

First Up wrote: »

In what way?

Plenty of hype from TV commentators and louder (and more obnoxious) galleries.

Anything else?

yes - the best golfer that ever lived is back.

Enough for me.

ForeRight

First Up wrote: »

In what way?

Plenty of hype from TV commentators and louder (and more obnoxious) galleries.

Anything else?

We get it... you hate him!

You are blinded by that hatred if you don't think things are different with him back at the top level.

FixdePitchmark

To be honest ..This gets people back watching golf too.

Rory has had a few strange years and he hasn't been that interested at times.

looks like this year he will be 100 %.

The modern guys are just too slow and boring , lack energy and purpose.

Rory and Tiger at top head to head would be the best thing for golf in years.

It could even have golfers back watching golf never mind the average punter.

First Up

ForeRight wrote: »

We get it... you hate him!

You are blinded by that hatred if you don't think things are different with him back at the top level.

I don't hate him but I dislike to some of the things he has brought to the game.

I dislike galleries heckling and abusing other players who have the temerity to compete against him.

I dislike galleries moving balls in the rough and intimidating marshalls who try to stop it.

I dislike a player enlisting help from the gallery to move a boulder out of the way of his errant shot.

I dislike rules officials bowing to pressure and giving him a free drop out of a maintenance yard.

I dislike him having a tournament moved away from a course he didn't play well on (costing a local charity hundreds of thousands of dollars.)

I can put up with the little things such as media sycophants like Mark Roe hired for that job only, or Ewan Murray drooling over a sand save as if it was akin to the second coming. I can put up with Sky calling him the man of the moment, while Paul Casey was being presented with the trophy. I can put up with TV scoreboards pushing his name as high up as possible (in breach of the convention that players on the same score are ranked by number of holes played.) I can put up with the cameras lingering n him scratching his nose instead of covering others playing their shots.

I can put up with the professional golf industry being a business to extract as much cash from the gullible as it can. And I understand other players putting up with this crap because ultimately it puts more cash in their pockets too.

But I don't have to pretend t like it.

Henry Ford III

Great golfer (Nickalus was better imho) but a deeply flawed individual. No morals. No class.

I'm delighted that he's back and playing well and bringing new energy to the game. He has done so well to seemingly overcome serious injuries.

Doesn't mean I want him to win though.

AGC

First Up wrote: »

I don't hate him but I dislike to some of the things he has brought to the game.

I dislike galleries heckling and abusing other players who have the temerity to compete against him.

I dislike galleries moving balls in the rough and intimidating marshalls who try to stop it.

I dislike a player enlisting help from the gallery to move a boulder out of the way of his errant shot.

I dislike rules officials bowing to pressure and giving him a free drop out of a maintenance yard.

I dislike him having a tournament moved away from a course he didn't play well on (costing a local charity hundreds of thousands of dollars.)

I can put up with the little things such as media sycophants like Mark Roe hired for that job only, or Ewan Murray drooling over a sand save as if it was akin to the second coming. I can put up with Sky calling him the man of the moment, while Paul Casey was being presented with the trophy. I can put up with TV scoreboards pushing his name as high up as possible (in breach of the convention that players on the same score are ranked by number of holes played.) I can put up with the cameras lingering n him scratching his nose instead of covering others playing their shots.

I can put up with the professional golf industry being a business to extract as much cash from the gullible as it can. And I understand other players putting up with this crap because ultimately it puts more cash in their pockets too.

But I don't have to pretend t like it.

Wow

The galleries heckling others is wrong, and unfortunate that the majority follow Tiger but he can’t be blamed for Marshall’s not doing their job.

The Boulder IMO was genius to even have thought of it, every golfer uses the rules to their advantage and rightly so, he didn’t break any rules.

Was the maintenance yard marked out of bounds?

I am sure Tiger, through his foundation has given more than his fair share to charities and I am sure local charities where the tournament is now being held are benefitting from it.

Sky, of course are going to fall over themselves with him not just being back, but in contention. Mark Roe is insufferable at the best of times anyway.

Personally I think it is great as a golf fan to see him back and him playing well is just testament to how good he is.

ForeRight

First Up wrote: »

I don't hate him but I dislike to some of the things he has brought to the game.

I dislike galleries heckling and abusing other players who have the temerity to compete against him.

I dislike galleries moving balls in the rough and intimidating marshalls who try to stop it.

I dislike a player enlisting help from the gallery to move a boulder out of the way of his errant shot.

I dislike rules officials bowing to pressure and giving him a free drop out of a maintenance yard.

I dislike him having a tournament moved away from a course he didn't play well on (costing a local charity hundreds of thousands of dollars.)

I can put up with the little things such as media sycophants like Mark Roe hired for that job only, or Ewan Murray drooling over a sand save as if it was akin to the second coming. I can put up with Sky calling him the man of the moment, while Paul Casey was being presented with the trophy. I can put up with TV scoreboards pushing his name as high up as possible (in breach of the convention that players on the same score are ranked by number of holes played.) I can put up with the cameras lingering n him scratching his nose instead of covering others playing their shots.

I can put up with the professional golf industry being a business to extract as much cash from the gullible as it can. And I understand other players putting up with this crap because ultimately it puts more cash in their pockets too.

But I don't have to pretend t like it.

Yeah but remember that chip in at the masters that was great

HighLine

Always surprises me when people go on about the boulder ruling. It's just ignorance of the rules IMO. The rule was there in black and white (quoted below).

It would be like saying to an opponent in a match after his ball lands in a rabbit hole "you may play that as it lies, would be against the spirit of the game to avail of relief".



23-1/3 Assistance in Removing Large Loose Impediment
Q.May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc. assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?

A.Yes.

First Up

AGC wrote: »

Wow

The galleries heckling others is wrong, and unfortunate that the majority follow Tiger but he can’t be blamed for Marshall’s not doing their job.

The Boulder IMO was genius to even have thought of it, every golfer uses the rules to their advantage and rightly so, he didn’t break any rules.

Was the maintenance yard marked out of bounds?

I am sure Tiger, through his foundation has given more than his fair share to charities and I am sure local charities where the tournament is now being held are benefitting from it.

Sky, of course are going to fall over themselves with him not just being back, but in contention. Mark Roe is insufferable at the best of times anyway.

Personally I think it is great as a golf fan to see him back and him playing well is just testament to how good he is.

I didn't blame Tiger; I blamed the yobbos who follow him. Marshalls are human and they can't be everywhere. Even if they see or suspect skulduggery, unless the tournament provides them with a police escort, its understandable if they back off when confronted by a boozed up mob.

The ball in the maintenance yard was never found. Someone said they saw someone drive away in a buggy and thought they had seen them pick up a ball. The buggy driver was never located, the ball was never found or identified but on the strength of that he got a free drop. Outrageous.

The boulder incident stank. Apart from being unsportsmanlike, it relied on outside forces (the gallery) - a resource not available to every player. If you think it was genius, it confirms my concerns about what he has brought to the game.

AGC

First Up wrote: »

I didn't blame Tiger; I blamed the yobbos who follow him. Marshalls are human and they can't be everywhere. Even if they see or suspect skulduggery, unless the tournament provides them with a police escort, its understandable if they back off when confronted by a boozed up mob.

The ball in the maintenance yard was never found. Someone said they saw someone drive away in a buggy and thought they had seen them pick up a ball. The buggy driver was never located, the ball was never found or identified but on the strength of that he got a free drop. Outrageous.

The boulder incident stank. Apart from being unsportsmanlike, it relied on outside forces (the gallery) - a resource not available to every player. If you think it was genius, it confirms my concerns about what he has brought to the game.

There is plenty of armed police following all the top players so yes te marshalls should do their job.

Likewise with the referees, I didn’t know exact background on maintenance yard but ridiculous he got that ruling. More ridiculous by an official to give it.

As set out above the boulder move was well within the rules, why shouldn’t he move it in an attempt to win an event? Any other golfer, if they could would do the same.

Any issues you have with officials, Marshall’s or fans is not Tiger’s issue, if you dislike what he has brought to golf you must be one of a tiny percentage.

If you disliked him for mass cheating on his wife or being whacked off his brain driving I would understand.

First Up

HighLine wrote: »

Always surprises me when people go on about the boulder ruling. It's just ignorance of the rules IMO. The rule was there in black and white (quoted below).

It would be like saying to an opponent in a match after his ball lands in a rabbit hole "you may play that as it lies, would be against the spirit of the game to avail of relief".

Not the same thing at all. The rules should apply in the same way to everyone, not depend on how many people happen to be around. Anyone can take relief from a rabbit hole; not everyone has 15 people available to move a rock.

AGC

First Up wrote: »

Not the same thing at all. The rules should apply in the same way to everyone, not depend on how many people happen to be around. Anyone can take relief from a rabbit hole; not everyone has 15 people available to move a rock.

They could ask, same way Tiger did.

There is hundreds of rules that pro’s can take advantage of because of the crowds etc... over what an amateur could at their monthly medal

FixdePitchmark

AGC wrote: »

They could ask, same way Tiger did.

There is hundreds of rules that pro’s can take advantage of because of the crowds etc... over what an amateur could at their monthly medal

Yes, but the monthly medal is not the same as a pro event.

Same as there is no ball boy at a normal game of ball.

Eveyone knows that Tiger is a bit dodge as a bloke - but there is the bloke and the golfer for me.

Roger_007

AGC wrote: »

They could ask, same way Tiger did.

There is hundreds of rules that pro’s can take advantage of because of the crowds etc... over what an amateur could at their monthly medal

If the rock was twice or three times as big, would it have been ok to get a JCB, (if there was one nearby), to move it? Surely there is a point when something that is part of the landscape should not be regarded as a loose impediment.
A sensible ruling would be that if the player him/herself cannot move the rock, then it should be regarded as an integral part of the course unless declared otherwise in local rules.

AGC

Roger_007 wrote: »

If the rock was twice or three times as big, would it have been ok to get a JCB, (if there was one nearby), to move it? Surely there is a point when something that is part of the landscape should not be regarded as a loose impediment.
A sensible ruling would be that if the player him/herself cannot move the rock, then it should be regarded as an integral part of the course unless declared otherwise in local rules.

That would be a sensible ruling yes but as the rule currently stands he did nothing wrong.

Peoples issue with rules, Marshall’s etc... are not tigers fault.

ForeRight

I remember phil taking a few rulings last year at the same tournament that were "unsporting" as some in here would say.

Twice he drove the ball into trees and got relief due to being on a sprinkler in the trees. As I recall nobody could get into the trees to see this sprinkler and he got his drop back out in play unhindered... twice!

I also remember he drove a ball(masters I think) into nowhere and it couldn't be found but the second some bloke walking by says I think I saw someone pick something up over there phil took it as gospel and ran to hit his free unhindered shot.

But sure hey... who talks about rules being bent for anyone but Tiger.

bren2001

ForeRight wrote: »

I remember phil taking a few rulings last year at the same tournament that were "unsporting" as some in here would say.

Twice he drove the ball into trees and got relief due to being on a sprinkler in the trees. As I recall nobody could get into the trees to see this sprinkler and he got his drop back out in play unhindered... twice!

I also remember he drove a ball(masters I think) into nowhere and it couldn't be found but the second some bloke walking by says I think I saw someone pick something up over there phil took it as gospel and ran to hit his free unhindered shot.

But sure hey... who talks about rules being bent for anyone but Tiger.

Tiger getting the boulder moved is no different than:

Dustin Johnson getting the free drop on the fairway when his ball was buried in the rough because the TV tower was in his line of sight to the pin.

Jordan Spieth getting his drop last year at the British Open.

Or as pointed out already, Phil and the sprinkler head last year.

None of them were against the rules. None of them were sportsman like. Pro golfers use the rules as much to their advantage as possible. I see no issue there. Theres no point in holding Tiger to a higher standard. He manipulated the rules, fair play.

Wombatman

If he keeps this standard up he will be playing Ryder Cup in France.

First Up

bren2001 wrote: »

ForeRight wrote: »

I remember phil taking a few rulings last year at the same tournament that were "unsporting" as some in here would say.

Twice he drove the ball into trees and got relief due to being on a sprinkler in the trees. As I recall nobody could get into the trees to see this sprinkler and he got his drop back out in play unhindered... twice!

I also remember he drove a ball(masters I think) into nowhere and it couldn't be found but the second some bloke walking by says I think I saw someone pick something up over there phil took it as gospel and ran to hit his free unhindered shot.

But sure hey... who talks about rules being bent for anyone but Tiger.

Tiger getting the boulder moved is no different than:

Dustin Johnson getting the free drop on the fairway when his ball was buried in the rough because the TV tower was in his line of sight to the pin.

Jordan Spieth getting his drop last year at the British Open.

Or as pointed out already, Phil and the sprinkler head last year.

None of them were against the rules. None of them were sportsman like. Pro golfers use the rules as much to their advantage as possible. I see no issue there. Theres no point in holding Tiger to a higher standard. He manipulated the rules, fair play.

None of those rulings involved a contingent from the gallery coming to a player's assistance.

Using the rules to your advantage is fair enough. Using the help of spectators to improve your situation is not.

HighLine

Roger_007 wrote: »

If the rock was twice or three times as big, would it have been ok to get a JCB, (if there was one nearby), to move it? Surely there is a point when something that is part of the landscape should not be regarded as a loose impediment.
A sensible ruling would be that if the player him/herself cannot move the rock, then it should be regarded as an integral part of the course unless declared otherwise in local rules.

Indeed it's not a sensible rule but it was there then and it's there now. And a rules official was present at the time to oversee it.

As already mentioned, I've seen many situations over the years where pros will use the rules to their favour and sometimes to the extreme.

An example of extreme would have been Bubba's relief below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZywNB9MjZe8

Tiger's relief from the boulder was clearly provided for in the rules. The rule didn't limit the size of the loose impediment.

But then you have actual cases of cheating trying to use the rules. Example being Brandon Grace last year with the bunker incident. An incorrect ruling was given to him allowing him to avail of relief from a bunker lining after he danced to "twist and shout" to try and find the said lining. He admitted he had seen a similar incident previously and thought he could get relief. Rather he should have been penalized for building a stance. (Clip below)

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/grace-takes-free-drop-bunker/

First Up

HighLine wrote: »

Roger_007 wrote: »

If the rock was twice or three times as big, would it have been ok to get a JCB, (if there was one nearby), to move it? Surely there is a point when something that is part of the landscape should not be regarded as a loose impediment.
A sensible ruling would be that if the player him/herself cannot move the rock, then it should be regarded as an integral part of the course unless declared otherwise in local rules.

Indeed it's not a sensible rule but it was there then and it's there now. And a rules official was present at the time to oversee it.

Tiger's relief from the boulder was clearly provided for in the rules. The rule didn't limit the size of the loose impediment.

You could argue about the definition of loose. We'll never know, but another official (and if it was a less well known player) could well have applied a different definition - namely that if you can't move it, it isn't loose.

It wasn't a very edifying incident from any perspective - a player not respecting the spirit of the game (yes, I know) an official giving a questionable ruling because of who was involved, and enlisting spectators to improve your situation.

Not golf's finest moment but the Tiger fanatics loved it of course.