CSI: Tigerdrop Sawgrass '13 Winners!

Cork Gaines wins for the best forensic of Tiger's tee shot, noting the angle of splash and how it doesn't match the hard hook angle that would be necessary for the drop spot to have worked.

And there should be some sort of award for use of Photoshop.


And this "angle of view" importance breakdown is also quite impressive:

Video Tiger Will Never Tire Of: Sergio's 17th Hole Water Balls

Oddly, the editors of this package deprive us of one of Sergio Garcia's balls going into the TPC Sawgrass's 17th hole lake, but nemesis Tiger Woods will no doubt savor seeing Garcia's Players Championship hopes unravel.

From PGA Tour Entertainment.

Sergio-on-17 highlights from the NBC gang:

Johnny Miller, on Sergio Garcia’s first tee shot into the water – “It was almost too much for him.  The minute he hit that, he knew it was right.”
 
Gary Koch, on David Lingmerth’s tee shot on 17 – “That is the first tee shot I have seen end up right of the flag.”
 
Gary Koch, on Sergio Garcia’s second tee shot on 17 that hit the water – “Absolutely amazing he would come up short.”
 
Johnny Miller, on Sergio Garcia’s struggles on 17 – “Tough to watch.”
 
Dan Hicks, on Sergio Garcia’s struggles on 17 – “You just never want to be one of those guys at 17.  One of those guys in contention who feels all alone when things just start going the other way.”

And while we're piling on, golf.com's Ryan Reiterman posts a nice compilation of Sergio's greatest meltdowns.

“It wasn’t a shining Friday for Fred Ridley and he has at his disposal the best rules officials in golf."

David Eger's comment in today's Charlotte Observer story by Ron Green Jr. about sums up the sentiment I've heard most from the rules community in the story that won't go away: Tiger's Friday Masters drop.

“It wasn’t a shining Friday for Fred Ridley and he has at his disposal the best rules officials in golf,” Eger said. “I’m sure he had more resources available to him than I had sitting at home with my digital recorder playing it back. For the head guy not to use all the resources available to him is disappointing.”

Meanwhile, thanks to reader Chris for tipping me to the Jerry Tarde's just-posted July Golf Digest column stirring up what seems like a non-issue to many at this point: Tiger's decision to keep playing the 2013 Masters. Tarde goes with the what if angle and it's certainly a provocative take.

The decision to, in effect, disqualify himself would go down as one of the legendary gestures of sportsmanship alongside Nicklaus conceding Tony Jacklin the two-foot putt that would tie the 1969 Ryder Cup and German long-jumper Luz Long advising Jesse Owens to start his long jump short of the foul line to ensure qualifying for the final after fouling in his first two attempts at the 1936 Summer Olympics. (Long would go on to get the silver to Owens' gold.) 

Tiger Skipping Quail Hollow & Its Troubled Greens

Doug Ferguson surmises that Tiger's decision not to play the Wells Fargo Championship at Quail Hollow is a product of its week-closer-to-Augusta date.

However, photos making the rounds show troubled putting surfaces on a few holes recently rebuilt (again) by the Fazio family re-doing their previous work. And knowing Tiger's history of avoiding potentially suspect greens out of fear of messing up his stroke, it's not a surprise he is passing.

Alex Miceli has the lowdown on the Quail Hollow greens situation, which includes Tour player and member Johnson Wagner blaming the PGA Tour's agronomy staff of making things worse.

Wagner played at Quail Hollow two weeks ago during the Masters and putted on temporary greens at Nos. 8 and 10. Upon seeing the greens Monday, he said it was clear that the putting surfaces would be bumpier then usual, but the eighth and 10th greens were in trouble.

Wagner blamed the problems at No. 10 on extensive top-dressing by the Tour's agronomy staff, which oversees conditions at host courses in advance of tournaments. “It went from a perfectly sodded green three weeks ago, which I thought was unbelievable, to being dead,” Wagner said.

Pazder vehemently disagreed as to why the 10th green needed to be re-sodded. “There were a number of factors involved which contributed to the decline in the conditions of the 10th green,” said Pazder, without elaborating, "but over-top-dressing was not one of them.”

Stevie Defends Tiger, Also Says He Should Have Been DQ'd

New Zealand's 3 News tracked down looper Steve Williams at the airport and talked to him about all things Masters, those who think caddies are mere luggage toters (nostrils expand!), and in the most enjoyable portion at minute 12, Tiger's penalty. (Thanks to reader Chris for this.)

Williams stammers and struggles with the situation, prefacing his comments and even giving the likely explanation for Tiger's mistake (confusing the hazard lines on 15), before also matter-of-factly stating that despite the lack of intent to circumvent the rules, there should have been a disqualification.

Two Follow-Ups To The Woods Drop Controversy

The Tiger Woods 15th hole drop story went a couple of directions Sunday.

In the case of this appropriately measured Barry Rhodes blog post sent in by another member of the rules community, you're seeing how the experts on these matters are reacting to Fred Ridley's invocation of Rule 33-7 to resolve the situation.

So, to be absolutely clear, the Committee waived the penalty of disqualification, because they considered that this was an exceptional individual case where such a penalty would have been too harsh. I am not aware of any other situation where a player who did not know a Rule of Golf (or if they did, they forgot about it) has been favourably treated in this way. I am therefore surprised at the ruling and believe that it may have adverse consequences in the future in similar situations.

In the conspiracy theory with just enough validity department, Augusta Chronicle photographer Michael Holahan's images today were analyzed in this unbylined wire story which suggests that Woods was

While the photos may not be conclusive evidence and they will no doubt be picked apart, Tiger does appear to be standing within inches of where he took his first shot, not the two yards that he himself thought he had moved.

Holahan maintained his location for both shots, offering a clear comparison. Television replays, on the other hand, came from different locations as an ESPN cameraman on the course set up in slightly different locations.

The photo comparison prompted more questions of Woods about the drop after his final round 70 left him four shots out of the playoff.

Q.  Is there any chance that you were mistaken when you said you were two yards back, because there were photos that looked like you were in the exact same spot?
TIGER WOODS:  No, I saw the photos.

Q.  What do you think?
TIGER WOODS:  I was behind it.

Q.  You do?
TIGER WOODS:  Yeah.

Q.  So you're pretty sure that the two yards is actually ‑‑
TIGER WOODS:  One, two yards.  But it certainly was not as close as the rule says.

Clippings: Woods Penalty Analysis

I've written a short Golf World Daily item on this, but right off the bat, I and many others got this part of the Tiger Woods 2-stroke penalty wrong: it was the long held Rule 33-7 which the Masters Committee invoked to absolve Woods of disqualification. NOT, 33-7/4.5, which specifically addressed the HD video call in issue. Even Tiger, talking after the round, did not understand this:

TIGER WOODS:  I don't know.  Under the rules of golf I can play.  I was able to go out there and compete and play.  Evidently this is the Harrington rule, I guess.  If it was done a year or two ago, whatever, I wouldn't have the opportunity to play.  But the rules have changed, and under the rules of golf I was able to play.

The initial Golf Channel and ESPN standups suggested 33-7/4.5, and only after Fred Ridley's press conference and some help from rule aficionados did more understand the distinction. Nick Faldo, critical of Woods on his Golf Channel appearance, backed down on CBS according to Michael Hiestand.

Talking about Woods' two-stroke penalty as a result of a rules violation Friday, Faldo noted golf rules were relatively cut-and-dried in the past -- with players generally disqualified for infractions. Now, he suggested, interpretations are more nuanced. Said Faldo on-air: "We're in a new era, under new rules."

However, as this Brendan Porath posted video notes, Faldo's contrition in the CBS Butler Cabin opening continued to suggest Woods was a beneficiary of a new rule, when it was an old decision that the committee invoked.

Doug Ferguson's story provides a definitive account of the episode and he notes this right off the bat:

In a bizarre twist to a complex case, it was a television viewer’s phone call that ultimately spared the world’s No. 1 player.

Randall Mell denounced the club's actions over the last two days.

A foul odor hung over Augusta National on Friday when Tianlang Guan was penalized one shot for slow play. The club had discretion in the matter, and it decided not to cut the kid a break. Because while Guan clearly was in violation of the tournament’s slow-play policy, it’s difficult to believe he is the first player in 77 years of the Masters to be in violation. The air here freshened a bit when Guan made the cut, becoming the youngest player to make a cut in major championship history.

Now, with Augusta National using its discretion in the Woods ruling by waiving a DQ for signing an incorrect scorecard, this Masters doesn’t smell right again.

Gene Wojciechowski was also not very kind to Ridley's Rules Committee.

Woods broke a ball-drop rule -- or more correctly, he played from the wrong place after a ball-drop violation. Simple as that. Then the rules committee botched a review of the drop. Simple as that. Then Woods said what he said about the 2 yards.

And then nothing became simple.

My initial gut reaction: He should have been disqualified. If he wasn't DQ'd, he should have withdrawn from the tournament. After all, whether he realized it or not, Woods had broken a rule and had eventually signed an incorrect scorecard.

It would have been the noble thing for Woods to withdraw. I still believe that. But it wouldn't have been the practical -- or correct -- thing to do.

Jeff Rude caught up with good, great or legendary agent Mark Steinberg who says Tiger rose at 7:30 and was at the club by 8 am to explain his non-willful violation.

Cameron Morfit says Tiger can't win this Masters even if he wins this Masters.

Dave Kindred makes several key points in this column, especially this one:

Only in golf are the competitors also the referees. They police themselves and they police others. Many a player would have stopped Woods from the incorrect drop. (By the way, he said that happened because he was "a little ticked" at the misfortune of the first shot kicking back into the water. He also said he "wasn't even really thinking," which is news, considering he'd earlier said he had thought enough to plan the drop two yards back.

In the website poll here, 47% said he should WD, 50% said he should not WD and 3% were unsure.

In a must read, Dave Shedloski caught up with Dow Finsterwald, member of the Masters Rules Committee and recipient of an eerily similar bit of committee effort to avoid a disqualification.

John Morrissett, formerly of the USGA and one of the top rules authorities on the planet, praised the committee's handling and noted this in a Facebook post:

Consider the ramifications if the Committee had disqualified Tiger today. In that case, Tiger would be justified in being furious at the Committee for failing to advise him of the issue yesterday before he returned his score card so that he could have avoided disqualification. Tiger made an error and is penalized two strokes; the Committee's incorrect ruling should not result in further penalty.

Cassie Stein compiles the Tweets of players and dignitaries and they aren't very kind to the committee.

And fnally, the last word goes to the Ancient Twitterer.

Update on 2013-04-14 12:49 by Geoff

**The New York Post had their fun with Tiger's drop.

Update on 2013-04-14 13:34 by Geoff

**AP's Jim Litke says CBS announcer "Jim Nantz sees the interview Friday night and calls Masters officials. They call Woods on Saturday morning and review video of the shot with him."

Scott Michaux in the Augusta Chronicle with this tough assessment of the day:

In a colossal accumulation of failures by all parties to properly apply the rules of golf regarding Woods’ drop on the 15th hole Friday, the Masters rules committee came up with a hybrid solution that retroactively assessed Woods a two-shot penalty yet kept him in the tournament despite signing an incorrect scorecard.

It is far from a Solomonic compromise and has sparked outrage and debate around the world a day after the tournament docked a 14-year-old amateur a stroke for playing too slowly. Shrieks of favoritism will abound and never go away if Woods rallies from four strokes behind and wins his 15th major.