So will Tiger call a penalty on himself at his OWN TOURNAMENT?

If you didn't see it the first time, check out Tiger Woods' second shot on 18 in Friday's round. His ball is resting well off the fairway on sand under a palm bush or palmetto plant. Virtually no backswing is possible so he appears to smash it out by just whipping the club forward from just behind the ball. It runs probably 20 feet into a nice lie in the short rough.

HOWEVER.... replays showed that he "raked" or "carried" the ball on the clubface. In other words, there was no "hit," the ball was scraped along the ground, carried out actually on the face of the club -- a CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE RULES.

Sadly, none of the announcers immediately mentioned a possible rules violation or a penalty...., not Dan Hicks, not David Feherty. I write this only moments after the shot so there may be further developments.

The question is: will Woody call the penalty on himself. Or WILL ANYBODY?

What's that new movie that came out recently..."Ben Breaks the Internet?"

Slow motion replay ruins sports. I haven’t seen the shot yet but I would imagine that raking a golf shot would be incredibly obvious.

Even FoT (Friend of Tiger) Feherty thinks that one reeks a little. Doesn't look good.

TW like

Multiple angles shown.. rear angle shows backswing and follow through.. front shot shows the ball sticking to the face.. I'm not sure if that's a penalty..

They are looking at it. Slowed down from in front it appears to be scraped. In full speed less so and from behind not at all.

Should be DQ .

Does anybody here wonder if Tiger is arguing on his own behalf? That's exactly what happened four or five years ago after the world saw a closeup shot of his ball in the gunk, a ball that clearly moved at address. Tiger fought the ruling (and the obvious) but walked away with a two-shot penalty. Many were amazed at his contrary behavior.

As I write, he's still in the scoring hut but it's clear that this wasn't a clean hit -- more of a scoop and a carry.

Looked fine from where I was sitting....

Two stroke penalty, move on.

e: No penalty, ok.

Front on in slow mo is a bit deceiving, especially since he hit it well left with a closed face, full speed it looks like a clear stroke to me

No penalty!

Does anybody here wonder if Tiger is arguing on his own behalf? That's exactly what happened four or five years ago after the world saw a closeup shot of his ball in the gunk, a ball that clearly moved at address. Tiger fought the ruling (and the obvious) but walked away with a two-shot penalty. Many were amazed at his contrary behavior.

 

As I write, he's still in the scoring hut but it's clear that this wasn't a clean hit -- more of a scoop and a carry.

i hope he's arguing since the ref gave him the go for the shot

Thought so.. no penalty.

Thought so.. no penalty.

Not discernible to the "necked" eye????

Not discernible to the "necked" eye????

Is that in effect now?

Not discernible to the "necked" eye????

Correct spelling is "nekkid", I think.

So if I’m hearing it correctly a newer “ if you can’t see it with the necked eye “ statute saved him from a penalty? Seems plausible.

they mentioned the specific rule.. 18, something, something.. official stated it stuck on the face for too long when they viewed it in super hi-def, slo-mo.. but also that Tiger would've never known or felt it.

If it was SICJAM, the officials would have quickly DQed him because he is a known cheater at golf and life. As for Tiger...well, it is his tournament.

Woody got lucky with this one but I'll agree that the ruling is correct. He couldn't feel the double hit or "scoop" and since such a violation COULD ONLY BE DETERMINED with the aid of High-Def and slow-motion (that's an addition to the rule only about two years old) then there's no penalty. If he HAD felt something off in the stroke -- as we all do with most double hits -- then it would be his responsibility to call a penalty on himself.

If it was SICJAM, the officials would have quickly DQed him because he is a known cheater at golf and life. As for Tiger...well, it is his tournament.

Sorry... we all know who "FIGJAM" is.... but who's this SICJAM of which you speak?

no surprise that Cheetah didn't call a rules infraction on himself....he's no Bobby Jones!

Not sure about that one. Even if you slow motion play a swing it will look like that. Just because he has a short back swing, it will look as if he pushed it but if I were a rules official and intent is in play, then his intent was to put a forward swing on the ball and not push the ball forward.

Video?

Stop the insanity...

This is ridiculous. How can he generate enough speed in that short of a space to have the ball not appear to "stick" to the face unintentionally. The club speed and ball speed were probably close to identical, nothing he could do.