Brandel reappears on Golf Channel

[Pat_Irish]

[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383228650' post='8083148']


No.

Because---as far as I know---this is the THIRD TIME that Dyson has been caught tamping down spike marks on the green.

So this is not a situation where someone can claim not to know some arcane rule, or to have mixed up the options available to him on a drop....or a point-of-view issue on whether a ball moved enough to be penalized or it just "oscillated".

You have a player is his repeatedly violating one of the most basic rules of the game. Do it once, its a brain-fart. Do it twice....wait a minute.

Do the same thing a third time...it get pretty hard to argue that its not intentional.
[/quote]
I quite like some of your arguements , although we have little in common . like your idea of arcane rules, or mixed up options available to him to drop , He is a pro 14 Majors and 79 other victorys on the PGA, I don't believe for one minute you actually believe that he didnt know the rule ( or his caddie), and what arcane rule ? Tiger broke a number of rules this year, The one thing common to them all was not once did he ask for a ruling ( he has a problem with rules officials? ) Is this not reallly a case Do it once its dumb do it again well then its time you were called in and told no matter who you are, Time to learn the rules man and come back when you have a little knowledge, I have no idea if Dyson is guilty ( he has already been hung here by lots of people some who are in Tigers camp ) I will await the verdict, the only thing I am glad about is that it was spotted and now a proper investigation is taking place without fear or favour

[nochct1]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1383235585' post='8083714']


That's like saying a bad guy breaks into a home, gets caught, goes to court and there's not enough evidence to send him away, so he gets a slap on the hand penalty. Mind you, he was caught in the house. Just because someone doesn't realize the full brunt on the law, or in this case, breaking the ROG, doesn't mean it didn't happen. It sounds as though you're saying that because the burglar wasn't sent to prison, being caught in the house didn't happen either?
[/quote]

Sounds like a fair analogy. Someone committing an actual crime and someone breaking a rule in golf. Weren't you the one who was upset because I compared golf rules and football rules? You dismissed those, but come up with a comparison of breaking into a home and taking an incorrect drop?

But if you want to go down that road. If someone breaks into a home, it doesn't mean that they are breaking in to assault the occupants and burn the place down. The judge determines if the punishment fits the crime.

If you really want to compare the two, Tiger would be the person who broke into an empty home, during the day and got caught. He wasn't armed, and there was no evidence that he was going to harm anyone, so he would get a slap on the wrist.

You guys are acting as though he is a burglar who broke into an occupied house at night with a gun and a can of gas. In the golf world, he broke a rule and was penalized. If the PGA Tour felt that he was willingly cheating then he would have received a more severe penalty.

One more time for the newcomers:

Abu Dhabi - checked with his playing partner to see if he was entitled to a drop. Kaymar says yes, but they were both wrong because it wasn't a closely mown area. If he was cheating, then Kaymar must have been in on it.

Masters - He was penalized 2 shots for taking an incorrect drop. He discussed the drop on TV. If he was cheating, then why would he willingly talk about the drop knowing that he did it to cheat?

Players - He asked his playing partner to assist with locating the point where he should drop. If he was cheating, then why would he ask? And if he's going to cheat, why give himself a crappy lie?

BMW - He moves a twig and thinks the ball oscillates. After reviewing slow motion HD video, the tour determines that the ball moved and he was penalized? He didn't call a penalty because he didn't believe the ball moved. Just like when Peterson didn't call and penalty on himself.

But keep coming up with stupid analogies. Maybe you're one of those guys that likes to compare him to Kobe Bryant. Those are always fund to read.

[daWRXguy]

[indent=1]I think tigers personal life and golf life need to be kept seperate though in all arguements. Him being alledged a "cheater" shouldnt be backed up by "because he cheated on his wife". Of course, half the tiger "haters' reason for not liking him is the scandel.[/indent]

[MadGolfer76]

[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1383190158' post='8081868']


The fact that you have the freedom to say whatever you want does not include the freedom to be immune to any consequences for what you have said.
[/quote]

I am just curious if this profound knowledge is first or second-hand? All mine is first hand, and btw, I wasn't whining - I was "harumphing."

[nochct1]

[quote name='Jamboy72' timestamp='1383236000' post='8083774']
[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1383190995' post='8081914']


That is certainly a valid (albeit incorrect, IMO) opinion. But it has nothing to do with Madgolfer76's whine about a free press.

As to punishment fitting the crime? Maybe we should wait to see what if any punishment there is, since there hasn't been any so far. Personally I think a suspension of 2-4 weeks, including the next major, would be appropriate.
[/quote]

Why should BC be "punished" at all?? What exactly did he do wrong??
[/quote]

He shouldn't be "punished" but the golf channel will determine whether it makes sense to keep him on board. One of the things that they have to consider is the relationship that their employees have with players on tour. If Brandel has hurt that relationship then they might not keep him around.

That's just smart business. If a reporter on ESPN ruins a relationship with LeBron James or Tom Brady, then they might not be around as it will hurt ESPNs ability to work with one of the top players.

[nbg352]

[quote name='MtlJeff' timestamp='1383173554' post='8080538']
[quote name='rafal' timestamp='1383173122' post='8080510']
Great guy that Tiger Woods. His retirement can't come soon enough.
[/quote]

I said a while ago it will be very interesting when he retires. I think you are going to see a lot of stories come out that won't be too flattering, by people who feel too scared to share those opinions now
[/quote]
I think very few negative words will be said or written about Tiger Woods until well after he is on the wrong side of the grass. As long as he draws breath he will continue to be a powerful force in the world of golf. And let's not forget that the "tales" of many famous, pedastaled bad boys, after they've left us, have done nothing, except to further cement their immortality.

[mlamar]

[quote name='Vindog' timestamp='1383172594' post='8080472']
[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1383171800' post='8080404']
You mean he was a gallant gentleman? I wouldn't go that far, but I won't argue the point.
[url="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cavalier"]http://www.merriam-w...ionary/cavalier[/url]

But if you mean he doesn't care whether he plays by the rules, you have no grounds for saying that. At most, he's too confident that he knows the rules, and he should call in an official more often.
[/quote]

He probably meant this [i]cavalier[/i]

From the same link:


[b] [sup]2[/sup]cavalier[/b]
[i]adjective[/i]

: having or showing no concern for something that is important or serious
[/quote]

So he's basically saying TW doesn't care about the RULES or TW could care less about the RULES. That's even worst

[MadGolfer76]

[quote name='daWRXguy' timestamp='1383237198' post='8083886']
[indent=1]I think tigers personal life and golf life need to be kept seperate though in all arguements. [b]Him being alledged a "cheater" shouldnt be backed up by "because he cheated on his wife".[/b] Of course, half the tiger "haters' reason for not liking him is the scandel.[/indent]
[/quote]

Now, now ...go back and read the context of that post.

[kellygreen]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.

[eagle1997]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383236642' post='8083826']
[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383236418' post='8083814']
so, any golfer, or rather, any person who cheated on their wife doesn't have honor in your eyes? this is an honest question: i just want clarity on your statement.
[/quote]

Before I answer, are you going to take it personally? I just want to clarify your question.
[/quote]

not at all. i've never cheated on my wife. i do know of people who have, both in the public realm, as well as personally.

[Playaway]

I do not think Brandel is on an island here. I think behind the scenes he has some high profile people who concur with his viewpoint, which, IMHO, gave Brandel the coconuts to say what he did.

IMHO, he has a little issue regarding Tiger, but he does say some positive things, 'that he is the best player "by miles"' so he is not totally bashing Tiger with every syllable like some make it sound.

And even though nobody knows Tiger's intent during all those violations, is it that bad to speculate? Share an opinion, as is his job?

I mean, are you one of the people who actually believe that Iran does not want to develop a nuclear weapon, just because they say they are not and that there is no absolute proof?

FYI: Speculation = the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.

Are we not entitled to an opinion/speculation, especially if it is our job to give it?

[kellygreen]

[quote name='cxx' timestamp='1383235707' post='8083732']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383233856' post='8083562']
Thankfully you are not my attorney.

No One can "prove a negative" (When did you stop beating your wife?). Which is why it is one of the oldest smear tactics in the book...and why it is often the basis for most successful libel/slander suits.

As for Tiger not being able to withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit? Please. This man has endured one the most public and widely-reported sex scandals in the HISTORY of sex scandals. Having withstood a degree of media attention and public ridicule that would make politicians cringe.

The media coverage and the discovery process that would result from a libel lawsuit is small potatoes compared to what he has already endured at the hands of the media...and the cost of legal fees would be little more than pocket change.

Whereas the legal fees that BC would likely rack up would likely devastate him financially...and make him untouchable professionally...even if Woods didn't win the suit. Which is why TGC made BC fall on his sword---trust me they aren't "doubling down"----in a very public way on this matter...and why Golf.com basically threw him under the bus.

TW might sustain some superficial damage in a lawsuit...but BC likely wouldn't survive it.

Which is why the normally arrogant Chamblee is looking so scared and so humbled about now.
[/quote]

Sounds like you are quite proud of Tiger's smack down of Chamblee. I'm not sure it will play out well in the end.
[/quote]

I recognize it for what it is.

The careful, calculated use to economic power to achieve a goal. The sort that goes on in the business world everyday.

What BC did was the equivalent of a guy in corporate sales acting in an unprofessional manner, and insulting his biggest client. Then that client calls up his sales manager and makes it clear that the guy needs to be "dealt with" or he's going to pull his business....and the clients attorneys call and let the sales manager know that if the guy isn't dealt with, that there might be legal action to address economic losses due to your salesman's behavior.

Name me a business that WOULDN'T have jerked the guy's tail in a knot...and frog-marched him out to apologize to the client?

What I find fascinating in all of this, is that BC's OWN KID is able to recognize that his dad was out of line, and behaved unprofessionally.

Yet, so many here prepared to try to defend the indefensible on his part.

[kemau]

[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383234355' post='8083610']
[quote name='kemau' timestamp='1383232968' post='8083492']
[url="http://www.golfchannel.com/media/golf-central-brandel-chamblee-speaks-103013/"]http://www.golfchann...-speaks-103013/[/url]
[/quote]

thank you! interesting to see it vs. the transcript posted earlier. BC does appear to be more contrite in the video than his words may suggest in the transcript. again, thanks for the link.
[/quote]

you're welcome.....i almost advised to turn the volume up as he's borderline whispering when answering questions and explaining. got a wake up call for sure

[MadGolfer76]

[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238166' post='8083956']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

[b]Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.[/b]

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.
[/quote]

Kelly, now you are resorting to drama. What rocks are being thrown? I am merely pointing out a [i]combination[/i] of behaviors displayed over time, the most recent of which is the reaction to Chamblee. I didn't think you would react so strongly to it.

[MadGolfer76]

[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383238398' post='8083976']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383236642' post='8083826']
[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383236418' post='8083814']
so, any golfer, or rather, any person who cheated on their wife doesn't have honor in your eyes? this is an honest question: i just want clarity on your statement.
[/quote]

Before I answer, are you going to take it personally? I just want to clarify your question.
[/quote]

not at all. i've never cheated on my wife. i do know of people who have, both in the public realm, as well as personally.
[/quote]

I just wanted to know if you would take it personally. I never asked if you cheated on your wife. Don't care to know.

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Playaway' timestamp='1383238743' post='8084004']
I do not think Brandel is on an island here. I think behind the scenes he has some high profile people who concur with his viewpoint, which, IMHO, gave Brandel the coconuts to say what he did.

IMHO, he has a little issue regarding Tiger, but he does say some positive things, 'that he is the best player "by miles"' so he is not totally bashing Tiger with every syllable like some make it sound.

And even though nobody knows Tiger's intent during all those violations, is it that bad to speculate? Share an opinion, as is his job?

I mean, are you one of the people who actually believe that Iran does not want to develop a nuclear weapon, just because they say they are not and that there is no absolute proof?

FYI: Speculation = the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.

Are we not entitled to an opinion/speculation, especially if it is our job to give it?
[/quote]

Not if that "opinion" or "speculation" has no basis in fact, and has the ability to do irreparable harm to the person who is the target of it.

That is why slander and libel laws exist. They enforce the RESPONSIBILITY---to truth and good judgement---that goes along with a free press. Because human nature is want to focus on Rights...and ignore (or at least play fast-and-loose) with those responsibilities.

In short, you don't accuse anyone of being a cheater unless you've got something to back it up with.

This is no different than someone writing article that baselessly "speculates" that Tiger has been using PEDs.

[nbg352]

By suggesting that BC's fate rests in the hands of GC, you guys are all [b]a**[/b]uming that means Woods wants GC to fire BC?
What a load of donkey p00p that is!
His statement could just as easily mean that while he is done with the whole thing, that BC's employer may not be. Some of you will try to twist anything Woods into ugliness in order to justify the way you want everyone else to feel about him. If it wasn't so sad, I'd be laughing.

[prickle]

[color=#000000]
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."[/color][color=#000000]
[url="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/v/voltaire.html"]Voltaire[/url][/color]

[nbg352]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383239011' post='8084020']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238166' post='8083956']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

[b]Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.[/b]

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.
[/quote]

Kelly, now you are resorting to drama. What rocks are being thrown? I am merely pointing out a [i]combination[/i] of behaviors displayed over time, the most recent of which is the reaction to Chamblee. I didn't think you would react so strongly to it.
[/quote]
Yeah, but he's absolutely right in his dramatic analogy..

[tbowles411]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383239011' post='8084020']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238166' post='8083956']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

[b]Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.[/b]

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.
[/quote]

Kelly, now you are resorting to drama. What rocks are being thrown? I am merely pointing out a [i]combination[/i] of behaviors displayed over time, the most recent of which is the reaction to Chamblee. I didn't think you would react so strongly to it.
[/quote]
I'm retired military and am now in a private company. I've pretty much seen it all; high ranking officials down to the lowest worker bee. I've seen hard working and brilliant people who can't keep their pants up or legs closed and wrong their spouses. But that doesn't mean they deserve public scorn when they do their job even though we don't like it. Are there whispers? Sure. But not outright indignation or even anger because it doesn't affect any one of us personally. As long as they do their jobs, it's none of our business. People may hate that fact or even disagree, but like I said, I've seen it all, and nothing much surprises me anymore.

But back to the initial issue, people can't get over the fact that BC simply was wrong to call him a cheater with nothing more than an opinion backing him up. He's free to say it, but when all hell is unleashed, he had to expect a response. It wasn't angry, but "as a matter of fact."

[legitimategolf]

Brandel's got you guys right where he wants you, and that to me is the real shame in all this. Here's a newsflash. This guy is just trying to advance his career. He doesn't actually care about the game.

[eagle1997]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383239058' post='8084024']
[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383238398' post='8083976']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383236642' post='8083826']
[quote name='eagle1997' timestamp='1383236418' post='8083814']
[b]so, any golfer, or rather, any person who cheated on their wife doesn't have honor in your eyes?[/b] this is an honest question: i just want clarity on your statement.
[/quote]

Before I answer, are you going to take it personally? I just want to clarify your question.
[/quote]

not at all. i've never cheated on my wife. i do know of people who have, both in the public realm, as well as personally.
[/quote]

I just wanted to know if you would take it personally. I never asked if you cheated on your wife. Don't care to know.
[/quote]

i don't have a problem saying it, so no worries. what's your answer?

[Jamboy72]

[quote name='nochct1' timestamp='1383237433' post='8083904']
[quote name='Jamboy72' timestamp='1383236000' post='8083774']
[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1383190995' post='8081914']
That is certainly a valid (albeit incorrect, IMO) opinion. But it has nothing to do with Madgolfer76's whine about a free press.

As to punishment fitting the crime? Maybe we should wait to see what if any punishment there is, since there hasn't been any so far. Personally I think a suspension of 2-4 weeks, including the next major, would be appropriate.
[/quote]

Why should BC be "punished" at all?? What exactly did he do wrong??
[/quote]

He shouldn't be "punished" but the golf channel will determine whether it makes sense to keep him on board. One of the things that they have to consider is the relationship that their employees have with players on tour. If Brandel has hurt that relationship then they might not keep him around.

That's just smart business. If a reporter on ESPN ruins a relationship with LeBron James or Tom Brady, then they might not be around as it will hurt ESPNs ability to work with one of the top players.
[/quote]

Fair enough - Golf Channel will do whatever it sees fit - But I can't help but acknowledge that, if in fact, BC is terminated or released or whatever, that IMO he didn't do anything to deserve that -

He questioned TW...he walked right up to the point of calling him a cheater and then stopped - I think the greatest shame in all of this is that the story of Tiger's rules "issues" this year is absolutely 100% valid...and given the frequency of them, there is more than enough room to question it....

[b]Tiger created this doubt, not BC - [/b]but yet, it's now BC's issue and he is the one sitting in the crosshairs...

[MadGolfer76]

[quote name='nbg352' timestamp='1383239702' post='8084088']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383239011' post='8084020']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238166' post='8083956']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

[b]Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.[/b]

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.
[/quote]

Kelly, now you are resorting to drama. What rocks are being thrown? I am merely pointing out a [i]combination[/i] of behaviors displayed over time, the most recent of which is the reaction to Chamblee. I didn't think you would react so strongly to it.
[/quote]
Yeah, but he's absolutely right in his dramatic analogy..
[/quote]

No, he missed my point entirely, as did you. Hold on though, while I spell it out...

[Royal]

^^^^^^^^^

this is America....... we talk about the politician instead of the policy.

it is easer that way to avoid the "real" issue. Tiger needs to clean up his game in regards to the rules. Its simple, have a clean slate next year......

[kellygreen]

[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383239011' post='8084020']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238166' post='8083956']
[quote name='MadGolfer76' timestamp='1383235339' post='8083692']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383234039' post='8083574']
Rember you said that the next time someone insults your honor, and you decide not to just "take it."
[/quote]

Kelly, you know I love ya, buddy ...but, come on.

I haven't had anyone "insult my honor" since 7th grade, because that is the last time I can remember that concept having any relevance. It is the old "actions speak louder..." philosophy; too bad Woods is more focused on the "words" part.

This doesn't present to me as an "honor" consideration. People with honor don't do to their wife, kids and sponsors what he did. People with honor don't throw public temper tantrums, use foul language in front of children, or play loose with the rules for millions in cash. I know everyone is tired of hearing it, but it is what it is. This is about someone being called on publicly for multiple instances of rules infractions, which is fair in any other arena of life. Welcome to equity, Tiger Woods.

I don't like Brandel either, but the point should have been fair game. The language should be open to criticism, but the point should not have ended up as a forced retraction.
[/quote]

[b]Spend more time in corporate offices, boardrooms, and in the presence of surgoens.[/b]

...and I can think of more than a few things that---if someone said them about me---I'd consider them an insult to honor.

Bottom line...all idols have feet of clay. While you're throwing rocks at Woods for his imperfections...stop to consider what WE might see if cameras and microphones followed you around all day at your job, and made YOUR private life a matter of public record.

I'm honest enough with myself to acknowledge that anyone following me around would find me guilty of many of the same things...except for the cheating on the wife part.

...and if every man who cheats on his wife is "dishonorable"...then statistics show that there are a LOT of "dishonorable hypocrites" among Woods' critics.
[/quote]

Kelly, now you are resorting to drama. What rocks are being thrown? I am merely pointing out a [i]combination[/i] of behaviors displayed over time, the most recent of which is the reaction to Chamblee. I didn't think you would react so strongly to it.
[/quote]

....and I'm saying that if you followed most professionals around with cameras and microphones (and delved into their personal lives) you would see that the behavior you are railing against really isn't all that uncommon.

No, drama necessary.

Just a reality-check.

[Jamboy72]

[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383239172' post='8084036']
[quote name='Playaway' timestamp='1383238743' post='8084004']
I do not think Brandel is on an island here. I think behind the scenes he has some high profile people who concur with his viewpoint, which, IMHO, gave Brandel the coconuts to say what he did.

IMHO, he has a little issue regarding Tiger, but he does say some positive things, 'that he is the best player "by miles"' so he is not totally bashing Tiger with every syllable like some make it sound.

And even though nobody knows Tiger's intent during all those violations, is it that bad to speculate? Share an opinion, as is his job?

I mean, are you one of the people who actually believe that Iran does not want to develop a nuclear weapon, just because they say they are not and that there is no absolute proof?

FYI: Speculation = the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.

Are we not entitled to an opinion/speculation, especially if it is our job to give it?
[/quote]

Not if that "opinion" or "speculation" has no basis in fact, and has the ability to do irreparable harm to the person who is the target of it.

That is why slander and libel laws exist. They enforce the RESPONSIBILITY---to truth and good judgement---that goes along with a free press. Because human nature is want to focus on Rights...and ignore (or at least play fast-and-loose) with those responsibilities.

In short, you don't accuse anyone of being a cheater unless you've got something to back it up with.

This is no different than someone writing article that baselessly "speculates" that Tiger has been using PEDs.
[/quote]

Insinuating that Tiger cheated (if you agree/believe that BC did that) is where he jumped the shark -
And b/c of his approach, we're losing the valid story here which is that Tiger had, in the course of less than a full season, 4 distinct rules issues. Does that means he intended to break the rules? We'll never know. Intention is impossible to prove with 100% certainty -

What we can say is that Tiger has been "cavalier" with the rules and as such there is sufficient reason for people to question this, major media included.

[cxx]

[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383238777' post='8084006']
[quote name='cxx' timestamp='1383235707' post='8083732']
[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1383233856' post='8083562']
Thankfully you are not my attorney.

No One can "prove a negative" (When did you stop beating your wife?). Which is why it is one of the oldest smear tactics in the book...and why it is often the basis for most successful libel/slander suits.

As for Tiger not being able to withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit? Please. This man has endured one the most public and widely-reported sex scandals in the HISTORY of sex scandals. Having withstood a degree of media attention and public ridicule that would make politicians cringe.

The media coverage and the discovery process that would result from a libel lawsuit is small potatoes compared to what he has already endured at the hands of the media...and the cost of legal fees would be little more than pocket change.

Whereas the legal fees that BC would likely rack up would likely devastate him financially...and make him untouchable professionally...even if Woods didn't win the suit. Which is why TGC made BC fall on his sword---trust me they aren't "doubling down"----in a very public way on this matter...and why Golf.com basically threw him under the bus.

TW might sustain some superficial damage in a lawsuit...but BC likely wouldn't survive it.

Which is why the normally arrogant Chamblee is looking so scared and so humbled about now.
[/quote]

Sounds like you are quite proud of Tiger's smack down of Chamblee. I'm not sure it will play out well in the end.
[/quote]

I recognize it for what it is.

The careful, calculated use to economic power to achieve a goal. The sort that goes on in the business world everyday.

What BC did was the equivalent of a guy in corporate sales acting in an unprofessional manner, and insulting his biggest client. Then that client calls up his sales manager and makes it clear that the guy needs to be "dealt with" or he's going to pull his business....and the clients attorneys call and let the sales manager know that if the guy isn't dealt with, that there might be legal action to address economic losses due to your salesman's behavior.

Name me a business that WOULDN'T have jerked the guy's tail in a knot...and frog-marched him out to apologize to the client?

What I find fascinating in all of this, is that BC's OWN KID is able to recognize that his dad was out of line, and behaved unprofessionally.

Yet, so many here prepared to try to defend the indefensible on his part.
[/quote]

I'm not sure that there is the leverage that you describe. Tiger is not an advertiser, he is one of the players. One of the many articles on this topic states that the PGA tour and NBCsports have a contract through 2021 with mandatory media appearances. And for the most part Tiger provides bad interviews. Mostly cliches. If he plays on the tour, he's going to be on the Golf Channel whether he likes it or not.

[MadGolfer76]

[quote]

i don't have a problem saying it, so no worries. what's your answer?
[/quote]

You write like I owe you something...well, fair is fair.

You guys are getting hung up on a single point that I made, and are missing that in the earlier post I noted a [u]collection[/u] of behaviors that suggest TO ME that Woods is not quite the honorable person you would like me to think he is. The adultery is a fraction of the point. I wouldn't have brought it up again, but for the interest you have all shown. I don't mind explaining my opinion to you, if it is that important. I hadn't thought so...

[gators78]

Here's how this conversation is going to go.

TGC Exec: "Brandel, Tiger doesn't want us to keep you"
Brandel: "Yea...that's a tough spot...Oh, hold on a sec, someone from Fox Sports 1 is calling, something about needing a new anchor for their golf broadcasts"

Eyes equal money, and this guy just drove more off season attention to Golf.com and TGC probably since Tiger's accident. The more fired up everyone gets the more cash this guy will command.

It's the Howard Stern line,[color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Researcher[/color]: The average radio listener listens for eighteen minutes. The average Howard Stern fan listens for - are you ready for this? - an hour and twenty minutes.[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Pig Vomit[/color]: How can that be?[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Researcher[/color]: Answer most commonly given? "I want to see what he'll say next."[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Pig Vomit[/color]: Okay, fine. But what about the people who hate Stern?[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Researcher[/color]: Good point. The average Stern hater listens for two and a half hours a day.[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Pig Vomit[/color]: But... if they hate him, why do they listen?[/size][/color][color=#333333][size=3]
[color="#70579d"]Researcher[/color]: Most common answer? "I want to see what he'll say next."[/size][/color]