April 13, 2013 - Tiger Woods was assessed a 2-stroke penalty Saturday morning at the 2013 Masters, prior to the start of the third round, for an incident that occurred on Friday during his second round.

But Woods was not disqualified, as he could have been for signing an incorrect scorecard.

Here's the situation that happened in the second round: Woods' approach shot to the 15th green hit the flagstick and rolled back into the water hazard in front of the green.

Woods decided to proceed under stroke-and-distance, walked back to the spot of his original shot, and dropped. That's Rule 26-1a.

But the issue is this: Woods didn't then drop on the original spot, but a couple yards behind it. Woods, who clearly didn't realize he had done anything wrong, gave himself away in his post-round interview on Friday:

"Q. How hard is it, that second shot on 15 after getting a bad break like that?"

TIGER WOODS: "Well, I went down to the drop area, that wasn't going to be a good spot, because obviously it's into the grain, it's really grainy there. And it was a little bit wet. So it was muddy and not a good spot to drop.

"So I went back to where I played it from, but I went two yards further back and I took, tried to take two yards off the shot of what I felt I hit.

"And that should land me short of the flag and not have it either hit the flag or skip over the back. I felt that that was going to be the right decision to take off four right there. And I did. It worked out perfectly."

Rule 26-1a, which covers dropping at the original spot when taking relief from a water hazard, states that the ball must be played "as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played."

As nearly as possible. The exact spot from which Tiger played the original shot was known, because of his divot. Woods walked back to that divot, then - as he said in his comments - went back another (approximately) two yards in order to give himself a better distance into the green.

So he did not play the stroke "as nearly as possible" to the original spot. Two-stroke penalty.

But wait, the situation gets more confused. Woods signed a scorecard on Friday that did not include the penalty assessed Saturday morning - the second-round scorecard he signed was incorrect! The penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard is disqualification. So Woods was DQ'd, right?

No. Woods avoided disqualification on the basis of Rule 33-7, which reads like this:

"33-7. Disqualification Penalty; Committee Discretion
"A penalty of disqualification may in exceptional individual cases be waived, modified or imposed if the Committee considers such action warranted.

"Any penalty less than disqualification must not be waived or modified.

"If a Committee considers that a player is guilty of a serious breach of etiquette, it may impose a penalty of disqualification under this Rule."

More specifically, there's a decision on the rules, Decision 33-7/4.5, which was implemented in 2011 by the R&A and USGA in reaction to television viewers phoning in rules violations after the fact - the so-called "HD rule," where "HD" refers to high-definition televisions.

There's much debate about whether that decision even applies in this case, since TV didn't really have anything to do with the incident coming to light. Tiger simply appeared to mix up two different options for proceeding: dropping on a line that runs from the flag straight back through where the ball last entered the water; or dropping as nearly as possible at the original spot. However, a television replay of Woods' drop - showing the original divot, and where Tiger was dropping in relation to that original divot - was in constant rotation on TV Saturday morning and, presumably, among Masters rules officials debating which ruling to make.

With the line-from-the-flagstick option, the golfer can drop as far back as he wants. But with the dropping-at-the-original spot option, he must play "as nearly as possible" from the spot of the original stroke.

Tiger, by his own words, didn't do that, appearing to mix the two options together.

With the 2-stroke penalty, Woods fell from 3-under par after the second round to 1-under par, from three strokes behind leader Jason Day to five strokes off the lead going into the third round.

But he's still playing. He was not disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard, the Augusta National poobahs apparently believing that Woods' lack of intent to break the rule, the after-the-fact nature of the violation coming to light, and the "discretion" given the Committee by Rule 33-7 were reason to avoid DQ'ing Tiger Woods from The Masters.

Update: The Masters has issued a statement explaining the Tiger Woods ruling. The key parts are the fact that the tournament's Competition Committee reviewed Woods' drop on Friday, before he completed the round, after being alerted by a television viewer, and at that time decided Woods had done nothing wrong. Only after Woods' interview comments about moving back a couple yards to improve his yardage did the tournament decide it needed to take another look.

About disqualification, the statement says this: "The penalty of disqualification was waived by the Committee under Rule 33 as the Committee had previously reviewed the information and made its initial determination prior to the finish of the player's round."

Update II: On May 1, 2013, the USGA and R&A issued a joint statement examining the ruling, whether it was correct, and whether it changes the way other rules committees should deal with DQ penalties.