Messages

But is the point not that the "get out clause" doesn't, or at least shouldn't, apply in this scenario?

[In that case, Villegas still would be disqualified for not knowing the rule.]

http://www.pga.com/rule-changed-spare-players-being-dqd-in-cases-trial-tv

In a change directed at scorecards and television viewers, golf revised one of its rules Thursday so that players who learn of a violation after they sign their cards can be penalized without being disqualified.

The Royal & Ancient and U.S. Golf Association announced the new interpretation an hour before the Masters began. It is effective immediately.

'TRIAL BY TELEVISION'

Reports of rule violations by TV viewers got Camilo Villegas and Padraig Harrington disqualified from big events in recent months.

Villegas DQ'd from Kapalua after TV viewer phones in rules violation
Called-in report of Villegas' violation prompts spirited debate over rule
Harrington DQ'd after TV viewer reports violation
R&A might 'have a look' at rule after Harrington DQ'd
Rule changed to spare players from being DQ'd in cases of 'trial by TV'
The change stems from two incidents earlier this year on separate tours.

Padraig Harrington was disqualified after opening with a 65 in the European Tour's Abu Dhabi Championship when a slow-motion replay on high-definition television revealed that his ball moved ever so slightly after he replaced his marker.

Harrington knew the rule, but did not realize his ball had moved. It should have been a two-shot penalty, but because it was discovered after the round, he was disqualified for signing an incorrect card.

Under the change, Harrington would have had two shots added to his score and could resume playing the tournament.

In the first PGA Tour event of the year in Hawaii, Camilo Villegas was disqualified for signing an incorrect card after a television viewer noticed he had tamped down a divot in an area where his chip was rolling back down a slope. In that case, Villegas still would be disqualified for not knowing the rule.

It is not a change in the actual Rules of Golf, rather a book of Decisions that allows officials various case studies. The new interpretation is of Decision 33-7/4.5, that essentially gives officials more latitude to determine if a player should be disqualified.

Even with the new interpretation, it makes clear that knowing the rules is up to the player.

"For some time, we have been concerned that, in certain limited circumstances, disproportionate disqualification penalties have been required by the rules," R&A Chief Executive Peter Dawson said. "This carefully considered decision reflects our desire to ensure that the Rules of Golf remain fair and relevant in the changing environment in which the game is played today."

That changing environment mostly relates to television.

For the last three decades, there have been a few incidents in which TV viewers will see what they believe is an infraction. It can lead to penalties, but often the reporting of the violation comes after the player has signed his card.

"This is a logical and important step in our re-evaluation of the impact of high-definition video on the game," USGA Executive Director Mike Davis said. "We collectively believe that this revised decision addresses many video-related issues never contemplated by the Rules of Golf."

I'll freely admit I'm talking through my pocket here as I lumped onto the 6/5 that he'd be disqualified but its hard to see how the rule above saved him. Surely it was intended for incidents where the player couldn't have realised that a rule had been broken. Either Tiger forgot the rules (most likely) or he deliberately broke them. Either way, while disqualification mightn't fit the crime, it seems it did fit the rules.

http://espn.go.com/golf/blog/_/name/golf/id/9166946/tiger-woods-taken-illegal-drop-15th-hole-round-2-masters-golf

Looks like he's in real trouble. I'm no expert but it seems that the only rule he could possibly have complied with was that the ball was dropped "as near as possible" to the original spot but he's pretty much admitted he didn't do that.

Teaforthree ticks a lot of boxes for me albeit that he falls foul of the second season chaser stat above. Also like Imperial Commander. First Lieutenant is striking me as the value at 3s for the Bowl (Silviniaco Conti evens) while I think Thousand Stars looks a big each way price for the Aintree hurdle given the fact that he's been laid out for Liverpool and was only touched off on the line in both 2011 and 2012.

PS- Hands up if you enjoyed my detailed and informative Cheltenham research.

Competitive looking renewal of the Powers Gold Cup tomorrow. Anybody with any strong views?

How many of them will complete the course? There are some seriously skittish jumpers in it.

Went for Mount Benbulben in the end. Convinced Marito had a big hand to play in the Jewson before coming to grief and the form with that one stacks up well. The front 4 in a 6 horse race are very tight in the betting.

[Cross Appeal 29.14]

Panther Claw had a pretty tough.race last week IMO. Just back the three biggest outsiders e.w.

Stats-based ratings for the Irish National

Panther Claw    32.02
Cross Appeal    29.14
Sweeney Tune    24.42
Competitive Edge    24.42
Rich Revival    25.28
Jadanli    25.80
Goonyella    24.82
Our Victoria    24.82
Paddy Pub    25.80
Junio    20.54
He'llberemembered    21.08
Jacksonslady    20.82
Muirhead    21.80
Romanesco    20.82
Questions Answered    21.94
Imperial Shabra    21.48
Liberty Counsel    22.20
Carloswayback    21.22
Magnanimity    17.48
Home Farm    17.22
Whodoyouthink    17.94
Marasonnien    17.22
Away We Go    18.60
Blazing Beacon    17.88
Start Me Up    17.48
Carlingford Lough    17.22
Rapidolyte De Ladalka    16.68
Quietly Fancied    17.88
You Must Know Me    9.62
Cootamundra    9.88

What's the craic here? P Carberry - N Meade 40/1?

Poor effort in last year's renewal and has done little since winning the Paddy Power at Christmas in 2011.

Competitive looking renewal of the Powers Gold Cup tomorrow. Anybody with any strong views?

Have you any stats/trends for the National on Monday Hardy?

I'm planning to have a look over the weekend. I think Maddog has a set of stats for it too. The stats are a pretty good guide - delivered Niche Market a few years ago and Lion Na Bearnai last year.

These were last years - will see what i can find in terms of updated guidlelines for this year.

Irish Grand National Trends Summary:
11/11 - Carried 11-0 or less
10/11 - Aged 9 or younger
10/11 - Ran within the last 2 months
9/11 - Carried 10-5 or less
9/11 - Had won over at least 3m before
7/11 - Won by either a 7 or 8 year-old
3/11 - Won by a UK-based trainer
0/11 - Won by a Willie Mullins-trained horse
0/11 - Won by the favourite
The average winning SP in the last 11 years is 19/1

I've been looking at Jadanli. Handicap has worked out perfectly as it doesn't have to concede weight to the 12 or so horses below it in the list. Stats wise, age is the major issue but it won a Powers Gold Cup at the meeting 3 years ago and seems to have returned to reasonable heart this term. A hard race at Cheltenham another possible negative.

What does McKeever mean by cheating? Is he talking about hiting fellas when they're not looking and running back to the subs bench or making up stories about racism when he wants to get a red card overturned?

Alright Billy. How's things?

Desperate news about JT McNamara. It seems so cruel that a sport we all love can have such consequences.

Are people more stupid than they used to be?
In general?
The amount of lads that watch a match like Mayo vs. Donegal today and think that because there would have been a heap of black cards, the game will descend into farce when the new rule comes in.
Complete inability to join the dots.

I've noticed that myself. The concept that tougher sanctions might actually lead to a decrease in this type of tactical fouling seems entirely alien.

To suggest that these new rules will somehow be the ruination of football is a nonsense which sadly is being articulated by too many supporters and players. The 3 non-verbal justifications for a black card all relate to incidents where an opposing player is brought to the ground illegally and with no attempt made to play the ball (or at least that's my interpretation). Anybody who has the best interests of GAA at heart will laud attempts to reduce the instances of this type of tackling.

That said, I think there are better and more equitable ways to achieve that objective. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I'd have preferred to see a sin bin rather than a black card or perhaps even better, the punishment of such fouls with the award of a scorable free.

I think the ground has gone against Bog Warrior. Nichols was fairly bullish on the preview circuit about how well handicapped Sam Winner is for the pertemps.

Nicked a bit of 20s about Texas Jack for the Jewson immediately after the RSA. Finished in a line at Leopardstown with Boston Bob and the first and second home in the RSA. Should hopefully outrun that price, generally 10s this evening.

Think he has an excellent chance too.

Has the ground gone against Bog warrior? Is First Lieutenant in the wrong race? Not convinced by him over this shorter trip; Swaying towards Champion Court

I like Get Me Out Of Here and For Non Stop at each way prices in the big two tomorrow.

Nicked a bit of 20s about Texas Jack for the Jewson immediately after the RSA. Finished in a line at Leopardstown with Boston Bob and the first and second home in the RSA. Should hopefully outrun that price, generally 10s this evening.