| |
BGonline.org Forums
Tiger -- details
Posted By: Taper_Mike In Response To: Tiger -- details (Tom Keith)
Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2013, at 7:07 p.m.
The Golf Channel: Woods is not being disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard under Rule 33-7, which states, “A penalty of disqualification may in exceptional individual cases be waived, modified or imposed if the committee considers such action warranted.” Tom Keith: The Committee's failure to rule against Tiger during the game is a pretty lame excuse for invoking Rule 33-7, IMO.
Does $10,000,000 or $15,000,000 in lost TV ad revenue sound like a good reason to you? It does to me. There are few in this world who can walk away from that kind of money when given an alternative. Bitch and moan as you like. It does not change the fact that most of the players in the PGA understand that increased revenue means more money for them in the long run.
In the backgammon world, if we were lucky enough to have an audience paying such a sum, do you think it would serve the game to alienate that audience, cutting revenue in half, when the rules provided for making a semi-reasonable judgement call that would allow us to keep our audience? Call it pandering, if you wish. To me, it is just good marketing. Backgammon needs an audience, and so long as the rule were in place ahead of time (as it was in Tiger’s case), I would hope that the referees would err on the side of making a decision that keeps the backgammon audience happy, and the money flowing.
By the same token, I think the committee in Augusta made the best choice for golf. Tiger received a significant penalty, and the PGA got to keep its audience for the weekend.
(Note: I do not know the actual figure for TV revenue at the Masters, so I chose a figure that I’m guessing is in the low end of the ballpark.)
Mike
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.