Opinion & Analysis
An opposition to call-in rules violations
A question for the philosophers: if a golf ball moves so short a distance that no one in that ball’s owner’s threesome can be certain whether it moved or not, did it move? Is there a penalty?
Is there a penalty if there is virtually no one standing in that area because the players in the group? Is there a penalty if the ball in question belongs to tournament leader Tiger Woods, whose every shot is televised and, therefore, scrutinized above all others?
Is it not the case that the television broadcast shows only a tiny fraction of all of the golf shots hit in a given day of competition? Is it not also the case that a small fraction of competitive rounds of golf encounter such potential infractions?
If a handful of hard-to-call rules violations occur over a given year on television, how many more occur in the groups elsewhere on the golf course? How many possible transgressors of the Rules are penalized? How many cannot, along with the others in their group, determine well enough that something untoward happened and thus proceed unpenalized?
Consider a viewer at home, who loves golf (as we all do) and regards it as the most inherently just of all sports (as we all should). Does he have an obligation to use whatever connections he has to inform the tournament organizers that a rules violation has occurred? Should he have the power to potentially affect the outcome of a PGA Tour event by virtue of his cable subscription.
Does this mean a PGA Tour event’s normal complement of rules officials—who know much, much more about the sometimes obtuse Rules of Golf and Decisions on the Rules of Golf than the average home viewer—is insufficient? Certainly the viewer at home only wants to see justice done as often as possible, but does this desire forsake the view of the proverbial forest for an intense eye on a few particular trees?
Which scenario is more “fair?”
- That six possible (i.e. indeterminate without slow-motion high-definition cameras) Rules violations occur with a total of zero penalties assessed, or
- That six such possible violations occur but one of them results in a penalty because it was the only one viewable on television? Is this the price the leader or Tiger Woods pays for playing better than most everyone else in the field? Should they pay it?
Above: Video shot by a freelance videographer was the basis of Tiger Woods’ 2-shot penalty at the BMW Championship. Tiger argued that his ball “oscillated” when he removed loose impediments around his ball, but the video evidence convinced PGA Tour rules officials that there was movement.
Click here to read more about Tiger’s 2-shot penalty at the BMW Championship.
Not every possible Rules infraction results in a penalty. Indeed, some incidents that should be penalized ultimately are not, through myriad factors, from player and caddie uncertainty to rules official misinterpretation. Golf’s practice of self-policing is one of its great virtues, but the presence of rules officials is necessary for resolving some especially murky situations. But aren’t those rules officials fallible themselves? The fact is that there is a human element in golf that sometimes keeps the objective happenings from being reflected on a scorecard.
Does this murkiness injure the game? If so, does it not follow that the television audience should be able to potentially assist the tournament staff and rules officials in the execution of those Rules? Is golf reduced in standards to a level equal with baseball and football if the on-site refereeing sometimes fails to deliver justice? That couldn’t be—even though the system is not perfect, the self-policing aspect of golf will forever set it apart from sports where attempts to manipulate and mislead officials are part of the culture.
Charles Howell was robbed of a tournament victory when his shot once struck the pin and careened into a pond. T.C. Chen’s horrid lie caused him to double-hit a pitch shot and cost him a chance to win the U.S. Open. These are just two of countless turns of events in golf that comprise the concept of “rub of the green,” which is a central principle of the game. So, why is it unreasonable to consider the occasional missed penalty part of the rub of the green? Are these “missed calls” so pervasive that it becomes necessary to disrupt the game in order to ameliorate a fraction of a relative rarity in the competitive game? No.
Golf’s governing bodies: stand by your rules officials. Honor their extensive training and expertise. If an armchair arbiter is on the line, let it go to voicemail.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
BJ
Sep 29, 2013 at 1:17 pm
Many people question Tiger’s character or integrity because of what happened in his personal life, I doubt that Woods is the only guy on tour to commit such transgressions, but we never hear about them. I also have a hard time believing that other golfers don’t make questionable rules interpretations in their own favor, despite the “honor” of the players. Whenever there are large amounts of money involved people will take advantage.
So it’s probably safe to say the players outside the top 20 are not under this kind of scrutiny.
Mat
Sep 25, 2013 at 9:41 pm
Those of you judging the ethos of players… I’m sure that you have no faults of your own.
The article is about the complexity of the Rules, and that their application is either unnecessarily difficult or overly draconian. Turning it into a morality contest seems… Well, not right.
Fred
Oct 1, 2013 at 8:46 pm
In the spirit of your comment, Mat, I offer this… It’s interesting – Tiger was accessed a two-shot penalty based on the judgment by PGA officials that his balled moved, which the rules say gave him an “advantage,” toward his next shot. Meanwhile, the USGA has ruled that players who use a belly putter have, in part, an “advantage” over those who use a standard-sized putter, which is why it will become illegal to use in the next four years. So, this means that for the next four years, Adam Scott will be allowed to use a putter the USGA says gives him an advantage over other players, and do so without penalty. Maybe I’m stretching it a bit, here, but, somehow, it seems like a contradiction in defining the term “advantage.” Just a thought.
jo
Sep 25, 2013 at 4:30 pm
a lot of hate here ,thing is tiger was is and always will be the greatest golfer that ever lived ,and people who are small minded and jealous of him will always try put him down .did the ball move it’s easy to say when you can pause rewind and watch over and over again ,but when you get one chance to call it and from a different angle it’s not that easy he did what he thought was right ,hater’s will always hate .
Mark
Sep 25, 2013 at 2:56 am
No other professional sport accepts calls from the general public reporting a violation of the sport’s rules that was seen during a broadcast. As anyone who has watched instant replay in football knows, video shown in slow motion shows much different detail than the same incident viewed in real time.
In the case of the incident with TW, his viewing angle was quite different than the viewing angle of the camera. Any reasonable person would expect to see the same event in two entirely different ways from these angles. The fact that the PGA or whoever was running the tournament allowed this video to be used to change the outcome of an already rendered ruling is a huge black mark on golf itself (regardless whether TW or some other golfer was involved.)
Mike
Sep 25, 2013 at 9:31 am
absolutely agree with this. if other sports don’t accept public calls especially TV viewer, why should golf??
William E. Rawlinson, Jr.
Sep 24, 2013 at 10:23 pm
I think Tiger has always been on the edge in keeping the rules of golf actually and in the spirit of the game. Golf is now and has always been better to Tiger than Tiger has been to golf. With all the fine young players coming on the scene, golf will continue to be the best sport to watch and to play there is. What other game can be played and enjoyed for a lifetime? Tiger’s ball moved, when he removed that small branch. It matters not how the picture was taken – or if there had been no picture. Tiger should have called a penality on himself. That’s keeping the spirit of the game alive.
Andrew
Sep 24, 2013 at 7:53 pm
The origins of this rule – it’s purpose then is (surely) to prevent a “preferred lie” being created and to prevent a series of nudges to get closer or in the hole.
It isn’t to find a way to penalise a golfer for unintentional fractional movements (hence the oscillation clause).
Given that – the rules do not wish to add strokes of penalty to a player who unintentionally moves his ball for no advantage.
We need to interpret rules and consider their application within these parameters.
99.5% of golfers only have to satisfy their playing partners (card markers) that no infractions have occurred. Tiger has to satisfy pedants with HD lenses whose motive is solely to penalise a tall poppy. This motive is contrary to the spirit of the laws of the game and makes golf unjust.
To me, the movement was barely perceptible, making it very consistent with “oscillation”. If you can’t figure out how to move it back and make it look different to how it currently is, then just agree to call it “oscillation” and move on. Why call a penalty on someone (or insist they call it on themselves) for that?
Carlos
Sep 24, 2013 at 6:26 pm
In the 1958 Masters, Arnold Palmer declared his ball embedded in his own pitch and played for a par3 after a double bogey 5. Ken Venturi was against this play. Palmer marked the 2 scores and Bobby Jones accepted the embedded issue without seeing it. No TV cams. The moral of this story : If you are The King, you are entitled to cheat. Tiger is not the King, yet.
Regis
Sep 24, 2013 at 5:26 pm
Personally I don’t care for Tiger. But I also am getting tired of the increased scrutiny afforded by viewers off the course. However I think a very good purpose is served when no one on the course picks up an obvious rules violation (Tiger’s improper drop at Augusta) when someone calls it in. What I would change is the moved ball rule (oscillating?) I would simply change the rule to read that if a player’s ball is moved inadvertently (by any source-outside agency-wind-caddie-other player-player himself{eg: he stepped on it in the rough}) except during a stroke it shall be replaced as close to possible to its original position. The current grouping of rules( Rules 18,19,23,24.1) are just too confusing and for the strict constructionalist slow up play
Bob
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:58 pm
Let’s see… how much does Tiger make a year playing golf? Guess this is the price of success, just follow the rules Tiger. BTW, the call on him at the Masters was made by the former head of rules at the USGA… who was watching on TV. He’s got all the officials phone numbers anyway.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:41 pm
Remember when Craig Stadler put a towel down under a tree so as to not mess up his $150 pants and it cost him 2 shots. Do you know he could have “taken his pants off.” Yea, he should have taken his pants off in front of millions, do you think he might have proved a point and that rule changed? Some rules are mindless to the point of insanity, sort of like the laws in our judicial system. Some make no sense but some miscreant says, “well, its the law.” This Tiger thing is like beating a dead horse because he “did not” consciously cheat. He knows a camera is on him all the time and yea, he might have felt the ball did not move. It did according to officials but Tiger did not have the luxury of rapid frame HD cameras on his ball and who knows what goes through his mind at the time. It was a bad shot gone worse.
Viewers should “NOT” be able to call in rules violations…period. I guarantee the people who call most real golfers would not even associate with. They are probably A holes.
Doug
Sep 24, 2013 at 1:54 pm
I think its odd that they show photos of him dropping a ball at the masters. It wasn’t TV cameras or a phone in that did him in at the masters it was his post round interview where he stated he dropped the ball in an improper place to gain an advantage. Why wasn’t he disqualified from the Masters? Again another opportunity to say “I made a mistake” show some integrity and gracefully bow out. Nope, not Tiger.
Styles
Sep 24, 2013 at 1:32 pm
It is quite possible that from Tiger’s vantage point looking directly down at the ball he could not see the ball move downward and truly thought it had oscillated (OK by the rules) and not moved at the time. But for him to deny that the ball moved after seeing the video becomes the most telling demonstration of his character. His denial that the ball moved after watching the video can only be interpreted as a bald faced lie when the truth would have worked.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:43 pm
That is my take, I even experimented with it and I’m not sure he had a better view than the HD camera.
Styles
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:17 pm
But Tiger’s denial that the ball moved after watching the video can only be interpreted as a bald faced lie when the truth would have worked……a most telling demonstration of his character.
DCM
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:45 pm
That was the most RIDICULOUS call ever!
The motive behind the rule is that the player doesn’t gain some advantage as a result of the ball movement.
Can any of you tell me how Tiger had an advantage because of the millimeter his ball moved?? NO.
Y’all need to grow up
RB
Sep 24, 2013 at 1:05 pm
Hey Dude, you are completely wrong in this case, since you would need to be standing over the ball and assessing both lies (before and after) to make sure it wasn’t a better lie afterwards. Seems a bit crazy, but even if the ball only moves a quarter of an inch, it could be a much better lie than before. And, at any rate, the rule is clear. It has to be replaced before it is played.
I had this happen in a tournament. I took a practice stroke when my ball was on the fringe, and some debris under my ball moved as a result of the practice stroke. Nobody saw it and there was no advantage gained, but I called a member of the group over, explained what happened, replaced the ball, took a penalty and a bogey and went on. Tiger has no similar ethics when it comes to golf.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:46 pm
If your ball moved ever so slightly how would you know where to replace it, if it moved at all. Perhaps it did not move and you incurred a penalty by calling a penalty on yourself and replacing the ball to another spot it wasn’t. Ask other members of your group if they think the ball moved, if not maybe it did not move and you are hallucinating from all the conjecture in your mind worrying about the rules instead of hitting the damn golf ball like you should have.
Andy Roberts
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:13 pm
Well said/written, Tim Gavrich. One of the (many) great things about golf is that it’s a mirror of one’s character.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:57 pm
I agree but I would never judge a man based on one episode of supposedly cheating but a person who is called out regularly is probably a cheater.
Mat
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:06 pm
Maybe you guys haven’t read your rules lately, but move and oscillate are considered very different. The definition of move here is the ball goes into motion and comes to rest in a different position. Oscillate is to have the ball move but come to rest in the same position.
A ball is allowed to move (strict) assuming its motion was oscillation (def). If the ball moves (def) then it is a penalty.
Personally, once a rules official is called in, THEN there should be no call-in. Incidents where officials are called in to observe and rule should not have them second-guessed by callers. However, if a referee was not involved, the notifications should continue for now.
RB
Sep 21, 2013 at 5:44 pm
The ball moved, he saw it move, and he stopped moving his hand immediately after the ball moved, which only confirms that he saw it move as he stood over it. Not even a question. Watch the video and take a look at when he stops moving his hands (and, of course, the loose impediments). I know we all love to debate, but there is no grey area there, friends. He saw it move and immediately stops moving his hands.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:58 pm
Perhaps he saw it “oscillate.”
M.Coz
Sep 21, 2013 at 12:10 am
Everywhere in life we have to deal with racist idiots with an agenda. Every time there is a TW topic some of them have to show up. Without TW, golf would be a 3rd World sport. substandard income for professionals at every level. As it is club pros still have to fight and scratch. Many do it for the love of the game. Every tour player owes TW a cut of their money because w/o him they would be fortunate to make half of what they do now. I personally know dozens of people who are non-golfers that golf when TW plays that never watched the sport before. (Of course they expect him to win every event.)
Now I have had dinner with TW and Elin. I spent most of the time talking to Elin who I discovered was extremely smart. I like her a lot and non of that has to do with her looks. Also after several “meetings” I am not a fan of TW’s agent Mark Steinberg who is not personable (to say the least). Frankly he comes across as a body guard in public when TW is around. Although he did show a little humbleness at an event a few months after all the sh** hit the fan. Also Butch Harmon is a friend of mine. So I, personally, could actually have a grudge or at least some reservations in regards to TW. But I don’t. I would never consider TW a cheater (on thre golf course!)
But he is going to have more issues because that is what happens to people who are constantly in the Public Eye. The more you are known the more “shots” you have to take, fair or not. None of our “heroes” are bullet proof or perfect except maybe Willie Mays.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:02 pm
I don’t think Tiger is a cheater at all and he has called a penalty on himself before, a year or two ago. As with him being the reason they are making a lot of money, they owe is all to Arnold. They would be making the same money because if not Tiger, someone else would have been the man. Tiger is not charismatic enough but if he was like Arnold, he would probably be the President of planet now.
Fred
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:36 pm
Leftright – good point. And, let’s face it… if Tiger were British like “Sir” Nick Faldo, the Queen wouldn’t have bothered to make him a Night. She would have made him king!
Christian
Sep 27, 2013 at 1:10 am
There isn’t a fact in this universe or any other that would support Tiger not being the reason for the high prize money on tour these days.
J.G.
Sep 20, 2013 at 8:45 am
Ask yourself one question would the game of golf be better without tiger like him or hate him he made golf matter again.
joe
Sep 20, 2013 at 9:41 am
I love watching tiger, but for me, he’s hard to root for.
No story would be good without a villain.
Reg
Sep 20, 2013 at 9:48 am
Golf has always mattered to me, Tiger did nothing to change that. All the pros do to affect my game is to drive the prices up on equipment that I have to buy (they get it for free) because they get so much money to use it.
leftright
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:06 pm
Golf was fine before Tiger and it will be fine after Tiger. There is always someone who steps up. Tiger made everyone else better though because he actually made many of them remove doubt as to their ability. They had to dig for 100% instead of being happy with marginal efforts. He may not have made golf better but I think he made everyone a better golfer who aspired to improve.
Fred
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:31 pm
Unfortunately – and the USGA backs this up – golf is not fine. Attendance and interest is down and fewer people are taking up the game; it’s not a sport that is easy to learn to play well. When Tiger is not playing in an event, viewership is minimal, at best. if you want to call Tiger a “cheater” because he let a ball slip a 6th of an inch and didn’t broadcast it to the world, fine. At least he’s never – to my knowledge – ever thrown a club into a crowded gallery and hurt someone like Bobby Jones did.
B MAC
Sep 20, 2013 at 7:09 am
Tiger woods cheater in life and golf ! Not a great role model !
S5PJM
Sep 20, 2013 at 5:47 am
I am a tiger fan but this incident was a huge missed opportunity for Tiger to show that he has strong integrity. Imagine if that happened and he came walking out of the woods and told the guys he was playing with. “hey guys i know there was no possible way for you to tell from all the way over here but I was just trying to move a loose impediment near my ball and I think it might have moved or osculated .. i need to call a 1 shot penalty on myself” everyone would be admiring his honesty (something he could use some PR help with)and all it would have cost him was one shot .. instead he tried to get away with it and it cost him 2 penalty shots and a ding to his character
Doug
Sep 24, 2013 at 1:49 pm
Exactly right. He has no integrity.
Joe
Sep 19, 2013 at 8:58 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZFG3_o27Uk
Maybe he moved his ball on that one.
Taylor
Sep 19, 2013 at 12:59 pm
If news never broke that he was a bad husband, none of you would have an issue with this. As I mentioned above, He still punched the ball out. It’s not like he was able to put a club on it and knocked it stiff. Put an HD camera on everyone who moves stuff around a ball and let’s see what happens. Golf wouldn’t be where it is today without Tiger, so let’s put the pitch forks and torches away.
They need to pull the plug on answering outside phone calls. It should be like football, if you hit your next shot, then what happened in the past is done. If the ball moves but doesn’t better the condition, then why penalize the golfer.
Dave
Sep 19, 2013 at 4:18 pm
Moving a loose impediment is improving the lie, that’s what he was doing when the ball moved. I agree that Tiger might not have been able to see it move live, but on camera it clearly shifts and he stuck to his story. Tiger didn’t cheat his way to his record, but it does make me wonder if there have been any other times where this may have happened in his career and no one was there to document it. That said, the only level playing field would be to disallow call-in penalties. The example in the article is right on, 0/6 is more equitable than 1/6 on rules infractions just because the 1 is the most scrutinized golfer in the world… I guess you could also argue that if you’re not on TV you’re not playing well and it doesn’t really matter as much, eh?
Fred
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:09 pm
You call the ball moving a 16th of an inch in a pile of brush an improvement in lie?
Jason
Sep 19, 2013 at 12:45 pm
Integrity is what you do when people aren’t watching…..is it surprising that Tiger didn’t call a penalty on himself? Is it surprising that he lacks integrity. If he didn’t think the ball moved is one thing….when shown video that it moved why not just admit you were mistaken. To then go on the attack about how all of your shots are on camera and its not fair for the scrutiny to be directed at him is ridiculous. Hey Tiger you are the best golfer on the planet by leaps and bounds…..of course cameras are pointed at you, that’s why you are a billionaire. Lots of golfers call penaltys on themselves, I’ve had it happen three times this year in tournaments I’ve played in. Everytime nobody in the group saw it and everyone asked are you sure. It’s what real golfers do…..if they break a rule it’s a penalty case closed. I’m not sure how I feel about people calling in a rules infraction but regardless breaking a rule is breaking rule no matter how iris found out.
Steve
Sep 19, 2013 at 3:42 pm
Did you just imply Tiger Woods isn’t a “real golfer”? Lol I’d love to know what a real golfer is then.
Jason
Sep 19, 2013 at 8:25 pm
Sorry you took my “real” golfers comment so seriously…..try not to lose any sleep over it. Hopefully the next time you’re playing golf and one of your buddies has a couple birdies in a row and claims “I’m on fire” you don’t over think it and throw a bucket of water on him.
Bernie
Sep 25, 2013 at 9:11 pm
This made me laugh. Thanks
DB
Oct 13, 2013 at 3:54 pm
hes worth 500 million not a billion step your game up. GOOGLE IT!
nb1062
Sep 19, 2013 at 12:28 pm
Are we now worried about it because the ‘sacred cow’ of the PGA tour doesn’t like that he has been penalized? Personally, I don’t think that they should ever have accepted phone calls. Craig Stadler should never have penalized for kneeling on a towel. No one seemed too worried about it back then. Then again, that was before Tiger Woods invented the game of golf.
Eric
Sep 19, 2013 at 12:01 pm
I hadn’t heard that the video wasn’t even from the telecasts cameras…unbelievable. did that mean that individuals with adv axe to getting can follow players around all day with a camcorder…Will that be allowed at the local club championship.
Personally, the point of golf is for self policing. If the others in the group don’t consider there to be a penalty, there should be no penalty. Period. The officials should be there for clarification of the rules, not to play gotcha.
Fred
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:02 pm
Eric: the videographer was a freelancer shooting for the PGA. It’s interesting to note – at least it is for me – that I can’t recall the last time we’ve seen a situation where a cameraman actually got down on his knees and got a shot of a player’s ball through the brush as he or she was attempting to move an obstruction from behind it. And if the same thing would have happened to Phil Mickelson, would everyone be calling him a “cheater?” I doubt it. One thing’s for certain, though – Tiger and the cameraman did have two entirely different views of the ball.
t
Sep 19, 2013 at 11:35 am
people who don’t cheat should have nothing to worry about. tiger cheated. I’m glad the camera is always on him
Taylor
Sep 19, 2013 at 12:44 pm
You say it like he kicked the ball back into the fairway. The ball moved like a millimeter and I dont even think it really changed its position. I believe he still punched the ball out.
Get off your soapbox.
AlsoStarring
Sep 19, 2013 at 2:52 pm
What I will like to see is a player calling a penalty on himself. As my friends and I do when we play. Is the third time this year Tiger cheats or tries to force the rules to his advantage. Enough to show the kind of player he is. If he was a hcp 25 in my club, nobody will want to play with him.
P
Sep 21, 2013 at 10:57 am
You don’t have to play golf, Taylor.
AJ Jensen
Oct 4, 2013 at 12:02 pm
I agree that the millimeter move of Tiger’s ball in this case did not affect the lie nor his play of the ball. There comes a point when high-profile players are unfairly scrutinized… in court this would be argued as selective prosecution. Either zoom everybody’s ball until contact with the club, or else quit using TV coverage to assess strokes in play.
Johan
Sep 20, 2013 at 7:24 am
He did not cheat, he payed for it. right?
SCT
Sep 21, 2013 at 9:33 am
You stupid people with your pitchforks and rakes need to give it a break there are not any witches here on golf. He might have done like the movie “The Legend Bagger Vance” and called a penalty on himself if he truely thought it moved, but he thought it oscillated. Rules state you can move a loose object without moving your ball, he obviously touched and moved the impediment not his ball the ball moved on its own less than a fraction of an inch. In my eyes and even Walter Hagen the movie said that’s a stupid rule because its an interpretation thing Tiger didn’t intentionally pick up and move the ball so there shouldn’t be a penalty. No one in his group or the rules official with them thought it moved, the TV camera’s didn’t catch it. He still punched it out from the fraction of an inch it moved. There isn’t instant replay in golf, if the official on hand lets a shot happen and no one in his group objects it is a single stroke. (the same with the dropped ball after the pin/water) End of story right there… This calling a penalty hours after something happens is Bull Kaka
P
Sep 21, 2013 at 11:03 am
SCT,
that is the dumbest thing ever said.
The ball moved. Period. He should have admitted to it, scored properly. He did not. Therefore, that is cheating. This is an honorable sport, and he isn’t an honorable person (we all know that by now).
If that ball had been in a hazard, he would not have tried to touch it, or grounded his club to play the shot, or brushed the grass in the backswing or any of those sorts of rule things – therefore abiding by the “Rules” – so why did he tried to get out of this one? The ball MOVED. End of story.
davePet
Oct 15, 2013 at 6:18 pm
the golf channel did a piece on this and moved the ball the same amount and asked people if they had moved it or not, and not one person with their naked eyes could tell it had moved…. So yes it moved when zooned and watched in slow mo but Tiger wouldn’t have known it did…
Another point to this is lets zoom in on ever time a player plays from the rough now. When they ground they club often the ball moves ( or oscilates ) slightly. lets penalize every one not just Tiger
Josh
Sep 23, 2013 at 3:55 pm
Tiger was looking at the ball from above, while the video was shot from the side. So it is possible that he did not notice the ball move downward by a fraction of an inch. From his point of view, the ball did not move.
Christian
Sep 27, 2013 at 1:02 am
I agree with Josh. We see it on HD in a severe closeup and we don’t know what Tiger saw except what he stated. I think from above it may have appeared to oscillate. Anyone saying he knew it moved and cheated is simply assuming or guessing.
gauffe
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:31 pm
golfers who make a living playing the game should attend a USGA/PGA rules of golf seminar every year and learn the rules. the seminar lasts 3.5 days. at least they should send their caddies. Tiger should not have moved a loose impediment so close to his ball and probably wouldn’t have had he known the rules.
GSark
Oct 17, 2013 at 12:17 am
Have you ever hit a ball into a hazard or lost a ball? Have you always replaced a lost ball with the exact same brand that you lost? If not you are a cheat according to the rules of golf. Be wary of name calling.