# How would you have reacted? 2



## Whereditgo (Jul 13, 2014)

Played in the 2nd round of the club Foursomes yesterday, the 2nd round matches have to be played by mid August and what with holidays, work commitments (my PP works shifts) this weekend was the only dates we could sort out. We were drawn against a couple of the fast improving juniors, 2 nice lads and they will both be decent golfers in a couple of years.

Our club has a Junior Open running today and of course the lads were playing in that, so we had to play Saturday. I had a B Team match in the afternoon, away with a 45 minute drive and 13:00 tee time, so we booked a 7:40 tee for the Foursomes match. It meant a long day for me, up at 6:00 and not home until after 20:00, I live another 30 mins away from my club.

We had a good match with the lads and they managed to win the last 2 holes with a par, getting a stroke on 17 and a par on the last after my PP put us in a greenside bunker and I only got it out to about 10 foot, so we made bogey to end up all square.

We walked over to the 1st tee and there was quite a queue, one group on the tee, 3 greenfee groups waiting and then a society gathering. I asked the starter if we could 'push in', he said no, because the greenfee groups had 
booked their tee times, but he would see if he could squeeze us in before the society. My PP, said "I'm not hanging around, we'll concede, come on lads I'll give you a lift home".

I was pretty hacked off to say the least! Not the first time there have been 'attitude' issues with the guy, we play together regularly and he has a 'flakey' temperament to say the least.

It has now got me considering switching clubs, I have a 25 mile drive including a toll bridge crossing just to get to my current club and yet my office overlooks probably the most picturesque course in the area, with a nice outdoor practice area etc. 

On the positive side, I was still pretty miffed on the first tee in the afternoon and drove the green and sunk the 8 footer for eagle!  Had a good match with a couple of guys that were really good company and won 3 & 2.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

If you are playing extra holes then surely you have the right to go in front of the waiting people and the starter should know that as you prob wouldnt hold up the people behind for too long ?


----------



## sev112 (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If you are playing extra holes then surely you have the right to go in front of the waiting people and the starter should know that as you prob wouldnt hold up the people behind for too long ?
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree , if you are going to have a starter, at least they should have some knowledge of matches and how long extra holes are likely to last 

PS even if PP was going to leave, you could have played on yourself


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

sev112 said:



			Totally agree , if you are going to have a starter, at least they should have some knowledge of matches and how long extra holes are likely to last 

*PS even if PP was going to leave, you could have played on yourself*

Click to expand...

It was a foursomes match


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 13, 2014)

sev112 said:



			PS even if PP was going to leave, you could have played on yourself
		
Click to expand...

It was Foursomes.....alternate strokes with one ball.


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 13, 2014)

I would've insisted on playing through them regardless.

You have priority over anybody (including the captain) when in a club competition like this scenario.

I'd be having a word with the club manager or whoever is charge of the starters to make sure it doesn't happen again.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

I agree. The starter was at fault and should have had the common sense and nous to realise it will only impact those behind for one or two holes at most. I'd also be looking for a new partner. How far is the course overlooking the office from home. If the drive isn't too much more than you do now then go there. Easy peasy for getting holes and practice after work and not a huge pain to get to and from at weekends for comps


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

How would I have reacted?

(a) why concede? you are well within your rights to arrange a rematch at a later date. I totally understand matches where all parties concerned have limited dates when they are available, but it's always funny how everyone turns up for their regular 4 ball at the weekend. Personally, I would rather the club gave a fixed date for the match to be played - if you can't make it, tough.

(b) 2 matches in one day is pushing it really. You lost one, you won the other. So all is not lost. If it were me, I wouldn't be playing 2 matches - if you had extra holes to decide the outcome, then theres a strong chance you could've been late for the next match.

(c) Never argue about tee times with starters. Starters are there to ensure booked tee times start at the correct time (booked tee times are useless without one) - if you haven't got an allotted time and there isn't a spot available...tough (yes, even if you're in a competition, you have no right of way).

(d) consider changing clubs on the basis of this? are you serious? what else do you do when you don't get your own way? apart from asking everyone else for their opinion of course.....


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

nemicu said:



			How would I have reacted?

(a) why concede? you are well within your rights to arrange a rematch at a later date. I totally understand matches where all parties concerned have limited dates when they are available, but it's always funny how everyone turns up for their regular 4 ball at the weekend. Personally, I would rather the club gave a fixed date for the match to be played - if you can't make it, tough.

(b) 2 matches in one day is pushing it really. You lost one, you won the other. So all is not lost. If it were me, I wouldn't be playing 2 matches - if you had extra holes to decide the outcome, then theres a strong chance you could've been late for the next match.

*(c) Never argue about tee times with starters. Starters are there to ensure booked tee times start at the correct time (booked tee times are useless without one) - if you haven't got an allotted time and there isn't a spot available...tough (yes, even if you're in a competition, you have no right of way).*

(d) consider changing clubs on the basis of this? are you serious? what else do you do when you don't get your own way? apart from asking everyone else for their opinion of course.....
		
Click to expand...

During a round your must ensure there is no delay of more than 5 mins - as per the rules of golf so yes you do have a right a way to ensure your game stays within the allotted time rules and of course there is good old etiquette


----------



## rosecott (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*During a round your must ensure there is no delay of more than 5 mins - as per the rules of golf *so yes you do have a right a way to ensure your game stays within the allotted time rules and of course there is good old etiquette
		
Click to expand...

Eh?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			During a round your must ensure there is no delay of more than 5 mins - as per the rules of golf so yes you do have a right a way to ensure your game stays within the allotted time rules and of course there is good old etiquette
		
Click to expand...

The OP's stipulated round ended with a tie - they therefore have no rights over any tee time booked in advance. They are not mid match or in any competition - not that it gives them any rights either over a tee time that may have been booked some time in advance. It could well have been another match they were trying to push in front of (i know it wasn't) but that is what tee times are there for - otherwise, why book a tee time?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

nemicu said:



			The OP's stipulated round ended with a tie - they therefore have no rights over any tee time booked in advance. They are not mid match or in any competition - not that it gives them any rights either over a tee time that may have been booked some time in advance. It could well have been another match they were trying to push in front of (i know it wasn't) but that is what tee times are there for - otherwise, why book a tee time?
		
Click to expand...

The match needed to go into extra holes to find the winner hence why they needed to carry on.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

nemicu said:



			How would I have reacted?

(c) Never argue about tee times with starters. Starters are there to ensure booked tee times start at the correct time (booked tee times are useless without one) - if you haven't got an allotted time and there isn't a spot available...tough (yes, even if you're in a competition, you have no right of way).
		
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. A good starter shouldn't act like some clock watching jobsworth and should have the nous and ability to adapt to situations. A match going into extra holes isn't going to take forever and by letting them through as I think he should, it then creates a natural buffer behind the group teeing off in front of the play off. That means the tee time held up has a gap in front of them to enjoy and with a bit of flexibility behind it can create a nice cushion throughout


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

rosecott said:



			Eh?
		
Click to expand...


Ignore the five mins got my lost balls mixed up there


----------



## Junior (Jul 13, 2014)

Shame, sounds like a great and tight match. Can only really speak for my course but you would have had right of way on the first.

I would have told my playing partner to hang on a bit to try and get out before the society. Then id have wrote to the committee and request the starter be told that knockout matches going onto extra holes have  priority on the 1st.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The match needed to go into extra holes to find the winner hence why they needed to carry on.
		
Click to expand...

A match doesn't NEED to go to extra holes on the same day if both parties cannot agree the result of the match. You can either concede (which they did) or arrange the match to be concluded to a result at another time WHICH doesn't clash with any other previously booked tee time or round. They DO NOT have any right to play in front of any group or tee time booked (or even not booked). Any extra holes would be at the sole discretion of any groups already on the course or waiting to play (courtesy may prevail at these times) - the match ended with a tie...that's the end of the round. The starter got it absolutely right - the OP got it absolutely wrong.


----------



## williamalex1 (Jul 13, 2014)

No starter at my course except for comp days, we use a ball shute all other days . When the same happened in our matchplay we were told carry on down the 1st, by the good mannered gents who had their balls in the shute  :rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

nemicu said:



			A match doesn't NEED to go to extra holes on the same day if both parties cannot agree the result of the match. You can either concede (which they did) or arrange the match to be concluded to a result at another time WHICH doesn't clash with any other previously booked tee time or round. The DO NOT have any right to play in front of any group or tee time booked (or even not booked). Any extra holes would be at the sole discretion of any groups already on the course or waiting to play (courtesy may prevail at these times) - the match ended with a tie...that's the end of the round. The starter got it absolutely right - the OP got it absolutely wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but thankfully our club has stated that players playing extra holes in a match have the right to filter in on the first or the tenth dependant on which holes they started on and I'm guessing that thankfully most clubs work along the same lines and also most golfers have the decency and follow common sense to allow them to quickly finish their match.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

nemicu said:



			A match doesn't NEED to go to extra holes on the same day if both parties cannot agree the result of the match. You can either concede (which they did) or arrange the match to be concluded to a result at another time WHICH doesn't clash with any other previously booked tee time or round. The DO NOT have any right to play in front of any group or tee time booked (or even not booked). Any extra holes would be at the sole discretion of any groups already on the course or waiting to play (courtesy may prevail at these times) - the match ended with a tie...that's the end of the round. The starter got it absolutely right - the OP got it absolutely wrong.
		
Click to expand...

But the OP had already said they could only do this weekend and so I'm assuming that there wasn't a chance to arrange to come back and play to a conclusion. A starter given this information should be flexible enough to be able to adapt and let the match through for the sake of a hole or two. I would be prepared to bet if the course didn't have the starter and the match rocked back up to the first and explained to those waiting, as golfers they'd see the sense and let them on their way. The starter seems to be the root cause of all the issues. It wasn't you was it?


----------



## bozza (Jul 13, 2014)

If I'd booked a tee time at a course, paid my green fee then after waiting on the tee due to the course being busy and then got told a members foursome comp was going to extra holes and I had to delay my tee time even more I wouldn't return to that course. 

I know comps have priority but going to extra holes is just tough luck and you should plan for that. 

From funding out you're opponents how long did you have to play the match by?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

bozza said:



			If I'd booked a tee time at a course, paid my green fee then after waiting on the tee due to the course being busy and then got told a members foursome comp was going to extra holes and I had to delay my tee time even more I wouldn't return to that course. 

I know comps have priority but going to extra holes is just tough luck and you should plan for that. 

From funding out you're opponents how long did you have to play the match by?
		
Click to expand...

But as it was a) foursomes and so would move quickly and b) going to a few extra holes at most it isn't as if this is really going to interrupt your day out that much. If I'd been in the same position I'd have let them go. Hit a few putts and they'd have been gone time you got back to your bag and problem over. If you can't wait an extra ten minutes I wouldn't book a tee time at busy periods.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			But the OP had already said they could only do this weekend and so I'm assuming that there wasn't a chance to arrange to come back and play to a conclusion. A starter given this information should be flexible enough to be able to adapt and let the match through for the sake of a hole or two. I would be prepared to bet if the course didn't have the starter and the match rocked back up to the first and explained to those waiting, as golfers they'd see the sense and let them on their way. The starter seems to be the root cause of all the issues. It wasn't you was it?
		
Click to expand...

Lol - if it were, I would probably be holding a shotgun too.
True enough, most starters are flexible enough to read into most situations on the course. However, they are also there to ensure tee times are upheld - otherwise, whats's the point of booking a tee time if it isn't available at the time you want? Matches in comps also must start at allotted times and dates - and competitors in matches should make every effort to make themselves available for these times and dates.
I've been in matchplay comps before where dates and times have to be agreed between groups - no surprises either that some teams are totally inflexible with dates and can only play during a working week at 10am. They normally get a bye to the next round because the other side can't make it. To stop this, our club has now instituted matchplay comps on fixed dates at the weekend - if you can't play, then you shouldn't have really entered the competition. 
Needless to say, quite a few weekend matches also go the distance of 18 holes and sometimes they have the ability to go to extra holes - IF the groups waiting to play on whatever hole agree to allow them through (like I said - courtesy normally prevails) but by the same token, matches also waiting to start also think they have the right to play at their allotted time slot (which they do).
It all adds up to bedlam at times, but without a starter to ensure things run smoothly (and indeed tee times are upheld), it can go a lot worse. It's no use in allowing a match to play through if it holds up another 3 groups waiting to tee off - the match could end up going several extra (18?) holes - and they normally take their time about too like they're playing for a row of houses.
In my opinion, the starter got it right on balance since the match was tied after 18 holes and it didn't need to go extra holes unless all parties could agree - that includes the opponents, the starter and the rest of the groups teeing off. Once the OP conceded anyway (a bit of a rash decision IMO) then it was a done deal. But then again, if you enter 2 competitions in one day, you leave yourself open to such situations. 
But tee times are tee times - otherwise, as stated, whats the point of booking a time..or having a starter?


----------



## bozza (Jul 13, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			But as it was a) foursomes and so would move quickly and b) going to a few extra holes at most it isn't as if this is really going to interrupt your day out that much. If I'd been in the same position I'd have let them go. Hit a few putts and they'd have been gone time you got back to your bag and problem over. If you can't wait an extra ten minutes I wouldn't book a tee time at busy periods.
		
Click to expand...

But there was 3 groups of paying visitors waiting and then a society, who says the foursome match would have been quick, it could have went on for another 9 holes which would have caused a backlog and delayed pre booked tee times. 

From my experience you usually get a month to play matchplay comps, if your free time is that limited you can only play 1 day from a whole month then I'd suggest rethinking about entering these comps.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

bozza said:



			it could have went on for another 9 holes which would have caused a backlog and delayed pre booked tee times.
		
Click to expand...

But do you honestly see that happening in sudden death and playing foursomes which is a format where holes can be won or lost very easily


----------



## fundy (Jul 13, 2014)

Some of the posts on this thread make me grateful to be a member at the club I am at


----------



## Airlie_Andy (Jul 13, 2014)

bozza said:



			But there was 3 groups of paying visitors waiting and then a society, who says the foursome match would have been quick, it could have went on for another 9 holes which would have caused a backlog and delayed pre booked tee times. 

From my experience you usually get a month to play matchplay comps, if your free time is that limited you can only play 1 day from a whole month then I'd suggest rethinking about entering these comps.
		
Click to expand...

They weren't "waiting" they had booked tee times. Assuming the tee times were running on time then your talking a 5-10 minute delay in starting for the next group out which would be quickly made up once the match was finished. By the 18th hole most of those groups would be walking off at exactly the same time they would have been had they not let them through to finish the matchplay. It would seem to be a very selfish attitude to not let them through on the first in those circumstances.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			But do you honestly see that happening in sudden death and playing foursomes which is a format where holes can be won or lost very easily
		
Click to expand...

They can also halve very easily too - for several holes. Good job there's enough daylight in summer...


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 13, 2014)

Think the clue is in the title of the thread. How would you have reacted. I think the starter in this situation was errant. As Airlie_Andy rightly points out, the delay at the beginning will easily be made up by the time everyone has played 18. For the sake of a few minutes to let them off it wouldn't have caused the huge backlog everyone seems to think would be inevitable


----------



## bozza (Jul 13, 2014)

Airlie_Andy said:



			They weren't "waiting" they had booked tee times. Assuming the tee times were running on time then your talking a 5-10 minute delay in starting for the next group out which would be quickly made up once the match was finished. By the 18th hole most of those groups would be walking off at exactly the same time they would have been had they not let them through to finish the matchplay. It would seem to be a very selfish attitude to not let them through on the first in those circumstances.
		
Click to expand...

The op said there was 3 groups of visitors waiting on the 1st tee which indicates to me the course was busy and there was a delay as why would 3 groups be on 1 tee?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 13, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Think the clue is in the title of the thread. How would you have reacted. I think the starter in this situation was errant. As Airlie_Andy rightly points out, the delay at the beginning will easily be made up by the time everyone has played 18. For the sake of a few minutes to let them off it wouldn't have caused the huge backlog everyone seems to think would be inevitable
		
Click to expand...

Since when did every starter know what the result of a match needing extra holes would be? The onus needs to be placed on agreement by all parties - courtesy plays a big part in this.
The things that gets up my nose is "competition" matches assume they have rights over and above everyone else on the course. They don't. 
A simple "do you mind if we play through?" usually suffices in most circumstances, but I've seen enough groups also state "we're in a competition - we ARE coming through" to know that it doesn't take much to p**s off any groups waiting to play (who may have also traveled some distance and gone to similar extenuating lengths to play at a certain time). 
If you want to read the rule book verbatim, then only the committee can decide if extra holes should be played after the conclusion of an 18 hole tie - but normally common sense (and the aforementioned courtesy) comes into to play.
How would I have reacted? Well, once the starter had stated there wasn't a space available, that would have been the end of the matter and a re-match would need to be arranged. Not ideal perhaps, but better than conceding and arguing the toss later.


----------



## bozza (Jul 13, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			But do you honestly see that happening in sudden death and playing foursomes which is a format where holes can be won or lost very easily
		
Click to expand...

But there's a chance it may not, what if they all have a nightmare on the 1st and have to look for balls? 

Like i said earlier, you usually get around a month to play your round of a matchplay comp, if your time is that limited you only have 1 free day in a month to play it then you should reconsider entering such comps.


----------



## Airlie_Andy (Jul 13, 2014)

bozza said:



			The op said there was 3 groups of visitors waiting on the 1st tee which indicates to me the course was busy and there was a delay as why would 3 groups be on 1 tee?
		
Click to expand...

Because they were early? Because they knew each other and arrived together? Because the putting green is very close to the first tee? Who knows. The likelihood is, however, that all of those groups would be walking off the 18th tee at exactly the same time whether they let the match play finish off or not. So for me it's selfish to not allow them to finish off.


----------



## bozza (Jul 13, 2014)

Airlie_Andy said:



			Because they were early? Because they knew each other and arrived together? Because the putting green is very close to the first tee? Who knows. The likelihood is, however, that all of those groups would be walking off the 18th tee at exactly the same time whether they let the match play finish off or not. So for me it's selfish to not allow them to finish off.
		
Click to expand...

Or because the course was busy and there was already a delay? 

We don't actually know the reason though.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 14, 2014)

Personally I think the actions of the starter are irrelevant. Simple fact is that the playing partner committed to play the match and was totally out of order for walking off and conceding. The starter was in a difficult position trying to look after the interests of the paying guests and the members. The person who conceded was just being selfish and is the only person who has acted wrongly


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

GB72 said:



			Personally I think the actions of the starter are irrelevant. Simple fact is that the playing partner committed to play the match and was totally out of order for walking off and conceding. The starter was in a difficult position trying to look after the interests of the paying guests and the members. The person who conceded was just being selfish and is the only person who has acted wrongly
		
Click to expand...

Seems the most reasonable reply to me.

If I were the Starter, then I'd filter matches that needed extra holes - especially Foursomes (played properly) as it's super-quick - faster than a single even! It would only require a small touch of diplomacy - I can normally handle that - as the explanation that groups will almost certainly still finish at the same time as expected should suffice.

As a team, it was a bit naff for 1 player not to consult with his partner!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

fundy said:



			Some of the posts on this thread make me grateful to be a member at the club I am at
		
Click to expand...

Me too!

I've never known a situation where a match going to extra holes wouldn't have been allowed to play through to a conclusion.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

When I read the original post I get the idea the question is "How would you have reacted".... towards the OP's partner!

I think the starter was looking to provide a solution without just barging a group in to the order of play and is therefore a bit of a red herring

The partner's actions as described are for me are out of order & for not consulting or apparently considering the teams options, he needs a slap with a wet fish










Edit: just re-read my post and cant believe what I wrote so I should clarify that while the red herring is an option for said weapon to doll out the stated punishment ideally a fish with larger stature & girth should be selected


----------



## Snelly (Jul 14, 2014)

Some of the replies on this thread are borderline embarrassing.  

Here is the correct answer for those that haven't played golf very long or haven't quite understood the spirit of the game......

The playing partner is someone to be avoided by the sounds of things.  

The starter is totally in the wrong and should have given the match immediate priority.   

Priority on the tee for matches going to extra holes is part of the fabric of the game.  It is common sense, it is basic courtesy and it is the right thing to do.  Anyone on this thread that disagrees is simply wrong.   You are entitled to your opinions of course but in this case your views are worthless and you need to develop your understanding of some of the more prosaic, unwritten intricacies of golf.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

Although its worthless, I think _immediate priority_ is impractical and unwarranted in the scenario. The starter was getting them priority but it would seem not fast enough for a player who perhaps thought another group should be pulled off the tee box!

The trouble with unwritten intricacies is that they are unwritten and most amount to no more than worthless personal opinions


----------



## patricks148 (Jul 14, 2014)

If its a members club, you should get priority, no question.

We have full time starters and even if there were 50 guys waiting on the tee we would be let though to play extra holes.

as for your partner, i wouldn't be happy about that either.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			If its a members club, you should get priority, no question.

*We have full time starters and even if there were 50 guys waiting on the tee we would be let though to play extra holes.*

as for your partner, i wouldn't be happy about that either.
		
Click to expand...

I think that's the right thing to do although I'd stop short of expecting a group to be pulled off the tee box for me (might become complicated if its comp groups waiting to go out at set times which is why the process seems to be down to common sense)


----------



## guest100718 (Jul 14, 2014)

if your going to play a matchplay game you have to factor in that it may go to extra holes and allow enough time.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

Snelly said:



			Some of the replies on this thread are borderline embarrassing.  

Here is the correct answer for those that haven't played golf very long or haven't quite understood the spirit of the game......

The playing partner is someone to be avoided by the sounds of things.  

The starter is totally in the wrong and should have given the match immediate priority.   

Priority on the tee for matches going to extra holes is part of the fabric of the game.  It is common sense, it is basic courtesy and it is the right thing to do.  Anyone on this thread that disagrees is simply wrong.   You are entitled to your opinions of course but in this case your views are worthless and you need to develop your understanding of some of the more prosaic, unwritten intricacies of golf.
		
Click to expand...

100% correct


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

chrisd said:



			100% correct
		
Click to expand...

...and I will add my 100%

And in this situation I'd go into the pro shop and ask the pro to overrule the starter.  The pro can explain the situation to the groups who have booked tee time.  

I wonder what any group of visitors moaning about this would say if they were told they HAD to play the front 9 in max 2.75 hrs.  And if they took longer than that they'd get hoofed off the course.  Quite...


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Strange - I've never been to club where the pro had any ability to overrule any situation on the course. If you need to go crying to the pro in the shop to sort out a situation that can be addressed in 10 seconds by all parties involved on the tee, it's certainly not a club worth visiting either. 
The biggest problem with any club is those playing in competitions are too far up their own arse to know courtesy on the course also extends to themselves.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			The biggest problem with any club is those playing in competitions are too far up their own arse to know courtesy on the course also extends to themselves.
		
Click to expand...


Absolute tosh!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Absolute tosh!
		
Click to expand...

Is it? Why so many opinions that the match had the right of way through groups waiting on the tee?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Is it? Why so many opinions that the match had the right of way through groups waiting on the tee?
		
Click to expand...

Because you've made a broad sweeping statement covering all players in competitions being up their own arses which is clearly not true and that competitive play is the generally the bedrock of most golf clubs. Most private clubs derive much income from competitive golf and its also the way that players maintain the handicap system. Most regular competitive players know and observe the rules and etiquette of golf better than casual players as they will quickly be pulled up if they don't

The reason that the match should be called through were summed up quite eloquently by Snelly in post 38 and largely comes down to common sense


----------



## North Mimms (Jul 14, 2014)

The idea that a fourball (who had trouble finding just one date that suited all of them) would play 18 holes to a tie,  then arrange another date to play possibly just one extra hole to settle the match,  rather than finishing it off the same day is daft. 

OP playing partner was out of line conceding. 
But why on earth did OP arrange to play 2 matches the same day? Did the possibility of slow play /extra holes /heavy traffic not occur to him? 

And I think starter should have let them through. The ones waiting would have finished their 18 no later.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Strange - I've never been to club where the pro had any ability to overrule any situation on the course. If you need to go crying to the pro in the shop to sort out a situation that can be addressed in 10 seconds by all parties involved on the tee, it's certainly not a club worth visiting either. 
The biggest problem with any club is those playing in competitions are too far up their own arse to know courtesy on the course also extends to themselves.
		
Click to expand...

At my club the Pro is the Golf Manager.  Besides - he is respected by all members and if the pro explained the situation to the starter and then to the group there would be zero issue.  Any issue the group had would be dealt with by the Pro.

I'm not sure that folk here are seriously arguing against the courtesy of giving a formal club match precedence on the tee in this situation.  Those that argue against it are simply wrong and that folk might think otherwise simply beggars belief and simply highlights a big hole in their understanding of the courtesies of golf.


----------



## Crazyface (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Strange - I've never been to club where the pro had any ability to overrule any situation on the course. If you need to go crying to the pro in the shop to sort out a situation that can be addressed in 10 seconds by all parties involved on the tee, it's certainly not a club worth visiting either. 
The biggest problem with any club is those playing in competitions are too far up their own arse to know courtesy on the course also extends to themselves.
		
Click to expand...

You keep to your Munis then, and let real golfers play the game and observe the correct etiquette.


----------



## Sports_Fanatic (Jul 14, 2014)

I'd agree that it would seem sensible for the match to play through and finish.

But I also don't find the playing partners actions that out of line. Yes they should have consulted, but at the end of the day they probably thought that the length of wait wasn't worth it, that playing partner would need to head off, and that two juniors had played well in a tight match and would be better to go through. Or perhaps he just appreciated him and his playing partner were struggling for dates etc. Not exactly the biggest crime ever although frustrating.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			At my club the Pro is the Golf Manager.  Besides - he is respected by all members and if the pro explained the situation to the starter and then to the group there would be zero issue.  Any issue the group had would be dealt with by the Pro.

*I'm not sure that folk here are seriously arguing against the courtesy of giving a formal club match precedence on the tee in this situation.  Those that argue against it are simply wrong and that folk might think otherwise simply beggars belief and simply highlights a big hole in their understanding of the courtesies of golf*.
		
Click to expand...

I guess I am one of those because none backing priority to the match are conceding any etiquette to other players

They should get some priority but they should never have that priority extended to removing a group from the tee! 

If that point can be conceded as etiquette from the match players then its about establishing how much priority should a play off have

Perhaps it would be easier if the etiquette had been established with some thought in the first place i.e the play-off should receive priority sufficient for the match to continue within XX minutes


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

Slab said:



			I guess I am one of those because none backing priority to the match are conceding any etiquette to other players

They should get some priority but they should never have that priority extended to removing a group from the tee! 

If that point can be conceded as etiquette from the match players then its about establishing how much priority should a play off have

Perhaps it would be easier if the etiquette had been established with some thought in the first place i.e the play-off should receive priority sufficient for the match to continue within XX minutes
		
Click to expand...

The match cannot demand priority on the tee unless there is a club rule that states matched have priority.  But it is incumbent upon the others to understand the etiquette and simply bloody-minded of them to refuse to concede the tree when a match is going to extra holes.

So the groups play off as booked and the match gets priority over others waiting.  At what point does the match get asked to play through out of courtesy?  Because as they are playing a comp they should be called through - and that holds everyone up.


----------



## bladeplayer (Jul 14, 2014)

Snelly said:



			Some of the replies on this thread are borderline embarrassing.  

Here is the correct answer for those that haven't played golf very long or haven't quite understood the spirit of the game......

The playing partner is someone to be avoided by the sounds of things.  

The starter is totally in the wrong and should have given the match immediate priority.   

Priority on the tee for matches going to extra holes is part of the fabric of the game.  It is common sense, it is basic courtesy and it is the right thing to do.  Anyone on this thread that disagrees is simply wrong.   You are entitled to your opinions of course but in this case your views are worthless and you need to develop your understanding of some of the more prosaic, unwritten intricacies of golf.

Click to expand...


Hallelajuh    [ or how ever you spell that ]


----------



## bozza (Jul 14, 2014)

Snelly said:



			Some of the replies on this thread are borderline embarrassing.  

Here is the correct answer for those that haven't played golf very long or haven't quite understood the spirit of the game......

The playing partner is someone to be avoided by the sounds of things.  



The starter is totally in the wrong and should have given the match immediate priority.   

Priority on the tee for matches going to extra holes is part of the fabric of the game.  It is common sense, it is basic courtesy and it is the right thing to do.  Anyone on this thread that disagrees is simply wrong.   You are entitled to your opinions of course but in this case your views are worthless and you need to develop your understanding of some of the more prosaic, unwritten intricacies of golf.
		
Click to expand...

You are also entitled to your opinion but in this situation the op and his playing partner are at fault for arranging 2 games in one day. 

Then expect to push infront of paying guests that have a pre booked tee time.


----------



## JamesR (Jul 14, 2014)

If the starter had just said to those on the tee "sorry chaps but these guys are playing a foresomes match and it's gone to extra holes, it's sudden death so shouldn't take too long, would you mind if they play through?"
I believe most golfers would be absolutely fine about it.
Even if it meant the 4 ball on the 1st tee played off, waited for the Forseomes pair to drive, and they walked down the fairway together. 
Assuming the other pair from the foresomes started walking down the fairway a little they could play the 2nd shots before the group on the tee even got to their balls!

In my opinion this shows that the players who rush around as quickly as possible, and can't wait for a few minutes, are going to spoil the game for the rest of us.

I agree with Snelly and commend the idea to the house!


----------



## rosecott (Jul 14, 2014)

Gil_Emott said:



			If the starter had just said to those on the tee "sorry chaps but these guys are playing a foresomes match and it's gone to extra holes, it's sudden death so shouldn't take too long, would you mind if they play through?"
I believe most golfers would be absolutely fine about it.
Even if it meant the 4 ball on the 1st tee played off, waited for the Forseomes pair to drive, and they walked down the fairway together. 
Assuming the other pair from the foresomes started walking down the fairway a little they could play the 2nd shots before the group on the tee even got to their balls!

In my opinion this shows that the players who rush around as quickly as possible, and can't wait for a few minutes, are going to spoil the game for the rest of us.

I agree with Snelly and commend the idea to the house!
		
Click to expand...

I'll also go with that.

Region3 and I played a pairs matchplay at Sherwood Forest and we were all square after 18. There were several groups waiting to tee off on the first but no-one objected to us going straight through when the situation was explained.

We did win at the 3rd extra hole!.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

bozza said:



			You are also entitled to your opinion but in this situation *the op and his playing partner are at fault for arranging 2 games in one day. *

Then expect to push infront of paying guests that have a pre booked tee time.
		
Click to expand...

Completely irrelevant I'm afraid.


----------



## CMAC (Jul 14, 2014)

*common sense, courtesy, etiquette and basic good manners* are all it takes to ensure situations like the OP never get to a heated forum with ridiculous answers.


----------



## freddielong (Jul 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If you are playing extra holes then surely you have the right to go in front of the waiting people and the starter should know that as you prob wouldnt hold up the people behind for too long ?
		
Click to expand...

Spot on Phil


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

where does everyone get "have the right" from?


----------



## JamesR (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			where does everyone get "have the right" from?
		
Click to expand...

It may or may not be written down, but most people who play golf, you would hope, would have enough common sense and understanding of the situation (especially if it was explained to them) to allow them to play.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			where does everyone get "have the right" from?
		
Click to expand...

really? - you ask this question?  In most circumstances you may not formally have 'the right' - although right may be on your side - but many if not most clubs will state (usually in members handbook) that, in context of competitions, players continuing a competitive club round have right of way over those starting.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

freddielong said:



			Spot on Phil
		
Click to expand...

It's spot on only if the Comp committee made it so

For my own understanding I went looking for the rule for it:

_33-6. Decision of Ties
The Committee must announce the manner, day and *time *for the decision of a halved match or of a tie, whether played on level terms or under handicap.   _

My bold. So if the committee didn't announce this to the players & starter you get threads like this 

It would be nice to think that the committee would include priority on the tee for this scenario when they announce when ties should take place!

Edit: looking at post above... so sudden death priority information for that comp should be in the OP's handbook or posted separately, so the only reply to the thread in relation to the starter or priority would be 'what does it say in your handbook'


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Gil_Emott said:



			It may or may not be written down, but most people who play golf, you would hope, would have enough common sense and understanding of the situation (especially if it was explained to them) to allow them to play.
		
Click to expand...

That is quite correct and clearly the starter knew the situation and acted accordingly. Nobody ever "has the right" to barge their way through anybody on the course without first asking permission or seeking approval from the parties concerned.
"Have the right" as many have bandied about seems to suggest that everyone must get out of the way and the match doesn't have to ask for, or seek approval from anyone. Which is clearly not the case at any time - match or not. 
It seems the OP was pretty pushed for time anyway and couldn't be bothered to wait (now there's a thought?) and conceded rather than extend the match to a conclusion. That, I'm afraid is nobody else's fault but their own - they cannot assume a "right" to play on, even if at times this is the normal course of action 9 times out of 10. 
Maybe next time plan your match so if does go to extra holes, you actually have enough time (or maybe the course is clearer) to get a result. Blaming the starter for your predicament is futility in itself.


----------



## bladeplayer (Jul 14, 2014)

Gil_Emott said:



			It may or may not be written down, but most people who play golf, you would hope, would have enough common sense and understanding of the situation (especially if it was explained to them) to allow them to play.
		
Click to expand...

You would hope so  , wouldnt you ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

bladeplayer said:



			You would hope so  , wouldnt you ?
		
Click to expand...

Though by some responses here any such concession would be given grudgingly.  And that is sad.


----------



## Slab (Jul 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Though by some responses here any such concession would be given grudgingly*.  And that is sad.
		
Click to expand...

A huge assumption. And that is sad.


----------



## londonlewis (Jul 14, 2014)

I'd have been a bit annoyed at my mate and would talk to him about it next time I saw him. 

As for leaving the club; I'd leave if there was a better course for me to be a member of. 
Better could be defined in many ways though. 
Would I leave purely because of what happened to you? I don't think I would.


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 14, 2014)

Ok, it seems there a re a number of points that need clearing up:

1 - I don't believe it was suggested that anyone should be asked to step back off the tee to let us conclude our match.

2 - All other groups waiting were perfectly accepting of us being allowed to go through.

3 - We have circa 5 weeks to play the match, the juniors can play evenings or weekends, my PP is on nights then annual leave for 3 weeks, he arrives back as I leave for my hols. So as per the OP, last weekend was the only available date.

4 - Don't know where the idea that time was tight between matches comes from? I had a coffee in the clubhouse, drove to Lincoln, went to MacDonalds, a quick look round Direct Golf, then on to the course arriving an hour before anyone else!

5 - While I did, and still do, think the starter was unreasonable (no, I'm not sure what, if anything, is stated in the club handbook to cover this situation) given that all the greenfee groups appeared not to have a problem, my annoyance was with my PP, I would have waited until after all the greenfee groups had gone out if necessary to complete the match.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			That is quite correct and clearly the starter knew the situation and acted accordingly. Nobody ever "has the right" to barge their way through anybody on the course without first asking permission or seeking approval from the parties concerned.
"Have the right" as many have bandied about seems to suggest that everyone must get out of the way and the match doesn't have to ask for, or seek approval from anyone. Which is clearly not the case at any time - match or not. 
It seems the OP was pretty pushed for time anyway and couldn't be bothered to wait (now there's a thought?) and conceded rather than extend the match to a conclusion. That, I'm afraid is nobody else's fault but their own - they cannot assume a "right" to play on, even if at times this is the normal course of action 9 times out of 10. 
Maybe next time plan your match so if does go to extra holes, you actually have enough time (or maybe the course is clearer) to get a result. Blaming the starter for your predicament is futility in itself.
		
Click to expand...

If I was playing in a club matchplay and finished all square then the very most I would expect is to let the first group queuing go ahead then dovetail in. No one at our place that I know would agree what you have written and, as a club, most people treat others as they would want to be treated.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

Snelly said:



			Anyone on this thread that disagrees is simply wrong.   You are entitled to your opinions of course but in this case your views are worthless and you need to develop your understanding of some of the more prosaic, unwritten intricacies of golf.
		
Click to expand...

Have you got this text on a hot-key?


----------



## CMAC (Jul 14, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Have you got this text on a hot-key?
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

:clap:


----------



## pbrown7582 (Jul 14, 2014)

londonlewis said:



			I'd have been a bit annoyed at my mate and would talk to him about it next time I saw him. 

As for leaving the club; I'd leave if there was a better course for me to be a member of. 
Better could be defined in many ways though. 
Would I leave purely because of what happened to you? I don't think I would.
		
Click to expand...



^^^^^^


this for me in answer to the OP. and if no joy talking to my mate I'd be looking for a new partner.

with regard to playing extra holes there is no given "right" but I'd personally be amazed if anyone who was waiting on the first tee objected to let a foresome matchplay match continue the match  ahead of them on the 1st. Reading through the thread seems ive been lucky in my choice of clubs over the years!


----------



## JamesR (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			That is quite correct and clearly the starter knew the situation and acted accordingly. *Nobody ever "has the right" to barge their way through anybody on the course without first asking permission* or seeking approval from the parties concerned.
"Have the right" as many have bandied about seems to suggest that everyone must get out of the way and the match doesn't have to ask for, or seek approval from anyone. Which is clearly not the case at any time - match or not. 
It seems the* OP was pretty pushed for time anyway and couldn't be bothered to wait *(now there's a thought?) and conceded rather than extend the match to a conclusion. That, I'm afraid is nobody else's fault but their own - they cannot assume a "right" to play on, even if at times this is the normal course of action 9 times out of 10. 
*Maybe next time plan your match so if does go to extra holes, you actually have enough time (or maybe the course is clearer*) to get a result. Blaming the starter for your predicament is futility in itself.
		
Click to expand...

He did ask permission, it was the starter who refused it.

He wasn't rushed for time, it was his PP who quit.

How on earth do you plan a 4ball match, which is already difficult enough to get 4 people available at the same time, and make sure that when you've finished the course is definately clear for you to go back out on the first? Book the time 4hrs after you started your first round?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Ok, it seems there a re a number of points that need clearing up:

1 - *I don't believe it was suggested that anyone should be asked to step back off the tee to let us conclude our match.*

2 - All other groups waiting were perfectly accepting of us being allowed to go through.

3 - We have circa 5 weeks to play the match, the juniors can play evenings or weekends, my PP is on nights then annual leave for 3 weeks, he arrives back as I leave for my hols. So as per the OP, last weekend was the only available date.

4 - Don't know where the idea that time was tight between matches comes from? I had a coffee in the clubhouse, drove to Lincoln, went to MacDonalds, a quick look round Direct Golf, then on to the course arriving an hour before anyone else!

5 - While I did, and still do, think the starter was unreasonable (no, I'm not sure what, if anything, is stated in the club handbook to cover this situation) given that all the greenfee groups appeared not to have a problem, my annoyance was with my PP, I would have waited until after all the greenfee groups had gone out if necessary to complete the match.
		
Click to expand...

So in summary, the starter go it right then? Especially when you consider their aim is to "start" groups and not "finish" them. Quit making the starter the bad guy. If you weren't really that rushed as you indicated, your beef needs to be with your PP and nobody else really.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

Slab said:



			A huge assumption. And that is sad.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry - I assumed that anyone arguing *against* a comp playing extra holes being given priority on the 1st tee would not be that keen in giving a match that courtesy.


----------



## the hammer (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Played in the 2nd round of the club Foursomes yesterday, the 2nd round matches have to be played by mid August and what with holidays, work commitments (my PP works shifts) this weekend was the only dates we could sort out. We were drawn against a couple of the fast improving juniors, 2 nice lads and they will both be decent golfers in a couple of years.

Our club has a Junior Open running today and of course the lads were playing in that, so we had to play Saturday. I had a B Team match in the afternoon, away with a 45 minute drive and 13:00 tee time, so we booked a 7:40 tee for the Foursomes match. It meant a long day for me, up at 6:00 and not home until after 20:00, I live another 30 mins away from my club.

We had a good match with the lads and they managed to win the last 2 holes with a par, getting a stroke on 17 and a par on the last after my PP put us in a greenside bunker and I only got it out to about 10 foot, so we made bogey to end up all square.

We walked over to the 1st tee and there was quite a queue, one group on the tee, 3 greenfee groups waiting and then a society gathering. I asked the starter if we could 'push in', he said no, because the greenfee groups had 
booked their tee times, but he would see if he could squeeze us in before the society. My PP, said "I'm not hanging around, we'll concede, come on lads I'll give you a lift home".

I was pretty hacked off to say the least! Not the first time there have been 'attitude' issues with the guy, we play together regularly and he has a 'flakey' temperament to say the least.

It has now got me considering switching clubs, I have a 25 mile drive including a toll bridge crossing just to get to my current club and yet my office overlooks probably the most picturesque course in the area, with a nice outdoor practice area etc. 

On the positive side, I was still pretty miffed on the first tee in the afternoon and drove the green and sunk the 8 footer for eagle!  Had a good match with a couple of guys that were really good company and won 3 & 2.
		
Click to expand...

as you seem fairly local, where do you play?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			So in summary, the starter go it right then? Especially when you consider their aim is to "start" groups and not "finish" them. Quit making the starter the bad guy. 

.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but in summary the starter did get it wrong according to most of us who have posted


----------



## bozza (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Ok, it seems there a re a number of points that need clearing up:

1 - I don't believe it was suggested that anyone should be asked to step back off the tee to let us conclude our match.

2 - All other groups waiting were perfectly accepting of us being allowed to go through.

3 - We have circa 5 weeks to play the match, the juniors can play evenings or weekends, my PP is on nights then annual leave for 3 weeks, he arrives back as I leave for my hols. So as per the OP, last weekend was the only available date.

4 - Don't know where the idea that time was tight between matches comes from? I had a coffee in the clubhouse, drove to Lincoln, went to MacDonalds, a quick look round Direct Golf, then on to the course arriving an hour before anyone else!

5 - While I did, and still do, think the starter was unreasonable (no, I'm not sure what, if anything, is stated in the club handbook to cover this situation) given that all the greenfee groups appeared not to have a problem, my annoyance was with my PP, I would have waited until after all the greenfee groups had gone out if necessary to complete the match.
		
Click to expand...

Did you let the starter know that the other groups on the tee were fine with you teeing off before them to complete your match?


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 14, 2014)

bozza said:



			Did you let the starter know that the other groups on the tee were fine with you teeing off before them to complete your match?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, he simply said he couldn't do that as they had times booked.



nemicu said:



			So in summary, the starter go it right then? Especially when you consider their aim is to "start" groups and not "finish" them. Quit making the starter the bad guy. If you weren't really that rushed as you indicated, your beef needs to be with your PP and nobody else really.
		
Click to expand...

Bit of selective reading I think? Someone, maybe Slab, implied in an earlier post that we expected the group on the tee to be asked to stand aside, so I clarified that wasn't the case.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Yes, he simply said he couldn't do that as they had times booked.



Bit of selective reading I think? Someone, maybe Slab, implied in an earlier post that we expected the group on the tee to be asked to stand aside, so I clarified that wasn't the case.
		
Click to expand...

So if wasn't the case, are you saying the starter "made" your PP throw the towel in?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Yes, he simply said he couldn't do that as they had times booked.
		
Click to expand...

Then he was about as stupid a Starter as you are likely to find!


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			So if wasn't the case, are you saying the starter "made" your PP throw the towel in?
		
Click to expand...

I don't believe that's been either stated or implied.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			I don't believe that's been either stated or implied.
		
Click to expand...


So why did your PP concede - if you had no issue with the groups on the tee or with the starter doing his job?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			So if wasn't the case, are you saying the starter "made" your PP throw the towel in?
		
Click to expand...

It's quite clear this this PP wasn't going to hang about because of the intransigence of the starter, that was made clear in the OP


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			I don't believe that's been either stated or implied.
		
Click to expand...




chrisd said:



			It's quite clear this this PP wasn't going to hang about because of the intransigence of the starter, that was made clear in the OP
		
Click to expand...

The OP just stated that was not the case, or certainly not implied. Which does beg the question why have we 9 pages of a thread?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			The OP just stated that was not the case, or certainly not implied. Which does beg the question why have we 9 pages of a thread?
		
Click to expand...

Because people want to discuss the issue?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			I don't believe that's been either stated or implied.
		
Click to expand...




chrisd said:



			Because people want to discuss the issue?
		
Click to expand...

The issue with the starter or the issue with the PP? The starter did their job as they saw fit - the PP clearly had another agenda. I think the OP maybe feels (understandably) hard done by by the situation, but I feel his attention is directed to the wrong culprit.
The OP could have stayed and played, but the PP didn't - he feels the starter is largely but not entirely to blame but can't seem to form this direct statement and would rather the forum would reassure him that he didn't do anything wrong and agree his opinion is correct - judging by the "how would you react"? title. End of discussion really. Thank christ.


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			So why did your PP concede - if you had no issue with the groups on the tee or with the starter doing his job?
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps because of this.



Whereditgo said:



			Played in the 2nd round of the club Foursomes yesterday, the 2nd round matches have to be played by mid August and what with holidays, work commitments (my PP works shifts) this weekend was the only dates we could sort out. We were drawn against a couple of the fast improving juniors, 2 nice lads and they will both be decent golfers in a couple of years.

Our club has a Junior Open running today and of course the lads were playing in that, so we had to play Saturday. I had a B Team match in the afternoon, away with a 45 minute drive and 13:00 tee time, so we booked a 7:40 tee for the Foursomes match. It meant a long day for me, up at 6:00 and not home until after 20:00, I live another 30 mins away from my club.

We had a good match with the lads and they managed to win the last 2 holes with a par, getting a stroke on 17 and a par on the last after my PP put us in a greenside bunker and I only got it out to about 10 foot, so we made bogey to end up all square.

We walked over to the 1st tee and there was quite a queue, one group on the tee, 3 greenfee groups waiting and then a society gathering. I asked the starter if we could 'push in', he said no, because the greenfee groups had 
booked their tee times, but he would see if he could squeeze us in before the society. My PP, said "I'm not hanging around, we'll concede, come on lads I'll give you a lift home".

*I was pretty hacked off to say the least! Not the first time there have been 'attitude' issues with the guy, we play together regularly and he has a 'flakey' temperament to say the least.
*
It has now got me considering switching clubs, I have a 25 mile drive including a toll bridge crossing just to get to my current club and yet my office overlooks probably the most picturesque course in the area, with a nice outdoor practice area etc. 

On the positive side, I was still pretty miffed on the first tee in the afternoon and drove the green and sunk the 8 footer for eagle!  Had a good match with a couple of guys that were really good company and won 3 & 2.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo; said:
			
		


			We had a good match with the lads and they managed to win the last 2 holes with a par, getting a stroke on 17 and a par on the last after my PP put us in a greenside bunker and I only got it out to about 10 foot, so we made bogey to end up all square.

I asked the starter if we could 'push in', he said no, because the greenfee groups had 
booked their tee times, but he would see if he could squeeze us in before the society. My PP, said "I'm not hanging around, we'll concede, come on lads I'll give you a lift home".
		
Click to expand...

It suggest to me that he wasn't going to hang around because the starter was unhelpful I arranging suitable passage through




nemicu said:



			The OP just stated that was not the case, or certainly not implied.
		
Click to expand...

It certainly seems implied to me that the starter was a clown!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

it would be a lot easier if the OP simply stated - rather than implying - whom he felt was to blame. 10 pages in, judging by his last response, I* think* he is swaying towards the PP.


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			it would be a lot easier if the OP simply stated - rather than implying - whom he felt was to blame. 10 pages in, judging by his last response, I* think* he is swaying towards the PP.
		
Click to expand...

You asked if I was saying that the starter "made" my PP concede - I've neither stated nor implied that.

For the hard of thinking......

I think the starter was wrong given that none of the groups waiting objected to us going straight through, I also think my PP was a complete prat for not even discussing any options, showed a lack of respect to to his PP and not a very good example to the two juniors!


----------



## Maninblack4612 (Jul 14, 2014)

In my view both the starter & the PP are both pricks. If the match had been allowed to go through it would have gone on for a few holes at the most. Once the players walked in the gap would have probably closed up with the match behind catching up the group in front and everyone would have finished at exactly the same time as they would have done if they'd started on time. All it needed was a bit of common sense on the part of the starter.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			it would be a lot easier if the OP simply stated - rather than implying - whom he felt was to blame. 10 pages in, judging by his last response, I* think* he is swaying towards the PP.
		
Click to expand...

The post asked what how we, the forum members, would have reacted had we been in his place. Most of us said that we would blame the starter and react accordingly  - it wasn't important what and who he blamed although I would also, like most, have been unhappy with my PP at his reaction. 

You seem to me that you just majored on the OP's views


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			I don't believe that's been either stated or implied.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think the problem lies with the starter and stated as much. The PP needs a slice of humble pie washed down with a can of man up. The OP needs to work on his communication skills on saying what he really means. That means stating rather than implying.
Should we imply he gets a new PP or is it a bit obvious?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			I don't think the problem lies with the starter and stated as much. The PP needs a slice of humble pie washed down with a can of man up. The OP needs to work on his communication skills on saying what he really means. That means stating rather than implying.
Should we imply he gets a new PP or is it a bit obvious?
		
Click to expand...

Or maybe you should have tried answering the question he asked


----------



## nemicu (Jul 14, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Or maybe you should have tried answering the question he asked
		
Click to expand...

I did - on the first page.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 14, 2014)

nemicu said:



			I did - on the first page.
		
Click to expand...

And followed with masses of crap about how the starter was holier than the pope and absolutely faultless in the whole process


----------



## chrisd (Jul 14, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			And followed with masses of crap about how the starter was holier than the pope and absolutely faultless in the whole process
		
Click to expand...

Cheers HJS, I was struggling to find a different way to say the same thing, judging by some of his posts, one day, he's going to make a terrific starter, especially after reading the crap on post 45!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Cheers HJS, I was struggling to find a different way to say the same thing, judging by some of his posts, one day, he's going to make a terrific starter, especially after reading the crap on post 45!!
		
Click to expand...

Now that truly was a peach of a post 

A real 'winner' when many if not most on here are members of golf clubs and play in club comps.


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

I think this thread has been really useful in highlighting several interesting side issues


Itâ€™s a rule of golf that the club committee decide when a tied match is to be decided (note that the committee decision will not automatically apply to other clubs or comps) 
I donâ€™t believe that assumed/perceived/made up etiquette should replace this Rule of Golf 
I do believe that any affective committee should (& probably do) make provision for a certain level of tee priority in their comp rules for deciding a tied game
I donâ€™t believe that the level of priority needs to be â€œimmediateâ€ (as suggested) in order for the game to be concluded in a timely manner 
I do believe that the scenario in general is a good learning point for me because in this example if any one of those involved from the  Starter, OP, PP or opponents actually knew what the committee decision was for tee priority when deciding a tied game, then the whole situation would not have arisen in the first place


I still believe if your PP takes off in the huff they should be slapped with a wet fish!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			I think this thread has been really useful in highlighting several interesting side issues


Itâ€™s a rule of golf that the club committee decide when a tied match is to be decided (note that the committee decision will not automatically apply to other clubs or comps) 
I donâ€™t believe that assumed/perceived/made up etiquette should replace this Rule of Golf 
I do believe that any affective committee should (& probably do) make provision for a certain level of tee priority in their comp rules for deciding a tied game
I donâ€™t believe that the level of priority needs to be â€œimmediateâ€ (as suggested) in order for the game to be concluded in a timely manner 
I do believe that the scenario in general is a good learning point for me because in this example if any one of those involved from the  Starter, OP, PP or opponents actually knew what the committee decision was for tee priority when deciding a tied game, then the whole situation would not have arisen in the first place


I still believe if your PP takes off in the huff they should be slapped with a wet fish!
		
Click to expand...

All of which could easily be dealt with using a liberal helping of common sense!without any need for a committee to get involved at all


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

chrisd said:



			All of which could easily be dealt with using a liberal helping of common sense!without any need for a committee to get involved at all
		
Click to expand...

Agree to an extent. But what if one mans common sense actually contravenes a comp rule? i.e what time to commence play, what hole to play etc etc 

And the Rules state that the committee are already involved (albeit this should ideally be when circulating the comp rules and not when groups are collecting on the 1st tee)


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Agree to an extent. But what if one mans common sense actually contravenes a comp rule? i.e what time to commence play, what hole to play etc etc 

And the Rules state that the committee are already involved (albeit this should ideally be when circulating the comp rules and not when groups are collecting on the 1st tee)
		
Click to expand...

The rules are generally paramount  I do however think that common sense should always prevail. I have been in comps at our place, we have 7 minute spacing for 3 balls, if the 2 groups in front lose balls and search for just 3 minutes per group then it's likely that the timing will be slightly delayed for the next groups, it happens, and normally everyone pretty much catches up by the end.

When there is a starter and a group comes round that need to play extra holes, which would be pretty rare, then, as has been said, they would not often play many more holes and would soon clear out of the way, so COMMON SENSE should prevail and the jobsworth in this incident should look at what a pillock he was.

If, however, a group went off without checking that (where clubs have a 2 tee start)  they wouldn't bump into a tee closure on the turn then they pretty much get what they deserve, but if there's a starter that shouldn't happen


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

chrisd said:



			The rules are generally paramount  I do however think that common sense should always prevail. I have been in comps at our place, we have 7 minute spacing for 3 balls, if the 2 groups in front lose balls and search for just 3 minutes per group then it's likely that the timing will be slightly delayed for the next groups, it happens, and normally everyone pretty much catches up by the end.

When there is a starter and a group comes round that need to play extra holes, which would be pretty rare, then, as has been said, they would not often play many more holes and would soon clear out of the way, so COMMON SENSE should prevail and the jobsworth in this incident should look at what a pillock he was.

If, however, a group went off without checking that (where clubs have a 2 tee start)  they wouldn't bump into a tee closure on the turn then they pretty much get what they deserve, but if there's a starter that shouldn't happen
		
Click to expand...

I get that I really do... but if your common sense said in the event of a tie match then to decide the outcome replay from the 1st but the competition rule says in the event of a tie match then to decide the outcome replay the 18th then a common sense approach is inherently flawed. 

It's not common sense, (or the right thing/etiquette as suggested) its simply making it up as you go along

From the info we have it is a lack of knowledge of a competition rule that caused the OP scenario not a lack of common sense

And I'll say again the tie match _*should *_have some priority... but its not the players common sense decision to make, it is the committees

Common sense _might _solve the issue for a one off situation but what happens to the next group that need an extra hole or two to decide a tie result. How can we be sure their common sense also arrives at the right outcome?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			I think this thread has been really useful in highlighting several interesting side issues


Itâ€™s a rule of golf that the club committee decide when a tied match is to be decided (note that the committee decision will not automatically apply to other clubs or comps)
I donâ€™t believe that assumed/perceived/made up etiquette should replace this Rule of Golf
I do believe that any affective committee should (& probably do) make provision for a certain level of tee priority in their comp rules for deciding a tied game
I donâ€™t believe that the level of priority needs to be â€œimmediateâ€ (as suggested) in order for the game to be concluded in a timely manner
I do believe that the scenario in general is a good learning point for me because in this example if any one of those involved from the  Starter, OP, PP or opponents actually knew what the committee decision was for tee priority when deciding a tied game, then the whole situation would not have arisen in the first place


I still believe if your PP takes off in the huff they should be slapped with a wet fish!
		
Click to expand...

Well done Slab. You seem to be the only one else in this thread with an ounce of common sense. The starter is only an instrument of club policy - and even if we don't agree with it at times, we must agree with club policy or at least respect it's decision.
No, I'm not a starter - never have been and never will be - but if I'm told there isn't a spot, then there isn't a spot.
As for "holier than thou", the only ones that seem to display these qualities all too often are.....competition golfers - who, to their discredit, are arrogant, rude, bullish, clueless, slow and cause chaos to an otherwise straightforward round of golf.
The starter probably did the rest of the course (who outnumber one group incidentally) a favour.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Well done Slab. You seem to be the only one else in this thread with an ounce of common sense. The starter is only an instrument of club policy - and even if we don't agree with it at times, we must agree with club policy or at least respect it's decision.
No, I'm not a starter - never have been and never will be - but if I'm told there isn't a spot, then there isn't a spot.
As for "holier than thou", the only ones that seem to display these qualities all too often are....*.competition golfers - who, to their discredit, are arrogant, rude, bullish, clueless, slow and cause chaos to an otherwise straightforward round of golf.*
The starter probably did the rest of the course (who outnumber one group incidentally) a favour.
		
Click to expand...

Nothing beats a generic rude statement that encompasses one judgement onto everyone !

Thankfully our committee and members have the common sense to understand that if a matchplay needs to go to extra holes then they filter in on the relevant hole - as with everyone else the starter on this occasion could have and prob should have displayed the same such common sense especially when the groups on the tee had no issue at all.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Nothing hurts like the truth either LP. And the truth is the starter is there to protect the course and the club policy - not the to uphold the progress of matches which according to the rules of golf have completed a stipulated round.


----------



## Fyldewhite (Jul 15, 2014)

The ONLY problem here is the starter, or his inflexible approach to the situation. If he hadn't been there, which lets face it is the case at 90% of clubs then there wouldn't have been a problem. The match would have been concluded, the groups behind would have been delayed slightly but in all probability would have soon caught up and the PP would not have thrown the toys out (another issue really). I'm firmly in the common sense camp on this one.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Nothing hurts like the truth either LP. And the truth is the starter is there to protect the course and the club policy - not the to uphold the progress of matches which according to the rules of golf have completed a stipulated round.
		
Click to expand...


Nothing is hurting at all and there has certainly been no truth spouted - you have made a generic highly judgemental statement about people who play comp golf - 99% of people on here play comp golf so your insults ( they are insults after all ) are aimed at everyone of those comp golfers. 

The starter I'm also very sure is human and has common sense and is able to distinguish when sometimes that common sense can be used to ensure a matchplay game is completed especially when all parties concerned are happy with the suggestions.


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Well done Slab. You seem to be the only one else in this thread with an ounce of common sense. The starter is only an instrument of club policy - and even if we don't agree with it at times, we must agree with club policy or at least respect it's decision.
No, I'm not a starter - never have been and never will be - but if I'm told there isn't a spot, then there isn't a spot.
As for "holier than thou", the only ones that seem to display these qualities all too often are.....competition golfers - who, to their discredit, are arrogant, rude, bullish, clueless, slow and cause chaos to an otherwise straightforward round of golf.
The starter probably did the rest of the course (who outnumber one group incidentally) a favour.
		
Click to expand...

I know we're basically saying the same thing here about the topic (& it was your initial post that made me look into this in more detail which I really appreciate) but I'll view your comment on comp golfers separately and say we don't agree on that one... I have seen the competition golfer you describe but thankfully they're vastly outnumbered


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Nothing is hurting at all and there has certainly been no truth spouted - you have made a generic highly judgemental statement about people who play comp golf - 99% of people on here play comp golf so your insults ( they are insults after all ) are aimed at everyone of those comp golfers. 

The starter I'm also very sure is human and has common sense and is able to distinguish when sometimes that common sense can be used to ensure a matchplay game is completed especially when all parties concerned are happy with the suggestions.
		
Click to expand...

Since you like to perpetuate an argument...
maybe the starter also has the common sense to know when another group moving onto the tee are going to create a problem. Maybe he knows the OP and his PP have had form before. Maybe the course was completely chocker. We'll never know. But since the only one who made a decision based on the evidence is the starter, maybe we should respect it rather than dismissing it out of hand like we all know better.....a bit like the aforementioned stereotypical competition golfer.


----------



## JohnnyLarge (Jul 15, 2014)

How many on this thread have actually acted as a starter at a club? Not a one-off competition - actually paid to do the job.
I have! Paid employment as a starter/course marshal/ticket checker at a Municipal operated by a private company with a resident golf club on site. 
The mix of people visiting the site can range from club members, societies, pay and play, club matches, ladies, juniors, seniors and any combination of all the above. Tee times are 8 minutes apart.
I can assure you that the tee can become a very busy place to be and the starter needs to be on his game. The pressure to get people off on time is great. At times you can suffer abuse and people insisting on trying to tell you the job.

The only person I was accountable to was the Golf Manager responsible for the whole of the business. His view is that I am responsible for the management of the tee, no interference from the Pro, Committee of the resident club or anyone else.
People with pre-booked times, whatever their status, have priority. We do not do back-nine starts at any time.

In the case above, had there been a gap to fit them in, they would have been fitted in. If not, sorry.
Anyone insisting they have the *right* to 'push in' certainly would not be allowed to tee off unless there was space for them to proceed without delaying play.
Anyone displaying aggressive or overly insistent behaviour would not be playing on that day.

I'm with nemicu on most of his points. Not sure of how 'proper' members clubs would be but that's how it works when I was on.
I suppose every club does things slightly differently.

John


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			........ The starter I'm also very sure is human and has common sense and is able to distinguish when sometimes that common sense can be used to ensure a matchplay game is completed especially when all parties concerned are happy with the suggestions.
		
Click to expand...

Phil you surely don't mean that if all parties present are happy to waive a competition rule that you're ok with that!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			I know we're basically saying the same thing here about the topic (& it was your initial post that made me look into this in more detail which I really appreciate) but I'll view your comment on comp golfers separately and say we don't agree on that one... I have seen the competition golfer you describe but thankfully they're vastly outnumbered
		
Click to expand...


Thanks. I've used the term at it most extreme to highlight there is two sides to every coin. Thankfully, quite a few golfers (the majority hopefully) have the courtesy to avoid these situations, but alas I've seen this sort of behaviour all too often to dismiss it as a non-issue. Either way, it's certainly not problem created by any starter I've ever met.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Since you like to perpetuate an argument...
maybe the starter also has the common sense to know when another group moving onto the tee are going to create a problem. Maybe he knows the OP and his PP have had form before. Maybe the course was completely chocker. We'll never know. But since the only one who made a decision based on the evidence is the starter, maybe we should respect it rather than dismissing it out of hand like we all know better.....a bit like the aforementioned stereotypical competition golfer.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe he doesn't and the starter is being a robot jobs worth and not taking into account the needs of the people that pay his wages - the golfers of the club. 

Again all the people on the tee had no issue - the groups waiting had no issue at all - all the information has been given to you without the need to create scenarios and it appears that the starter failed to show the common sense needed and would expect to see the starter no longer there if it happened at the clubs I play. 

You certainly don't mind making insulting judgements do you.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Phil you surely don't mean that if all parties present are happy to waive a competition rule that you're ok with that!
		
Click to expand...

Which competition rule has been waived ?


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Which competition rule has been waived ?
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, you have no idea what the correct action is that needs to be taken to decide the outcome of this tie yet are happy to go with mob rule! 

Ok mob rule isn't the right description but fun to type


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Exactly, you have no idea what the correct action is that needs to be taken to decide the outcome of this tie yet are happy to go with mob rule! 

Ok mob rule isn't the right description but fun to type 

Click to expand...


Competition rule in out place is to allow matches to filter in - every club I have been too has been the same.

Thankfully most golfers I have played golf with would use the common sense and follow general etiquette and allow them to filter in and finish their match

And also thankfully that appears to be the majority view on here also. 

And yes even if the competition doesn't have priority then if all groups are happy to allow them through then yes that's using common sense - regardless what the starter says.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

From my perspective, I've seen enough "we know better" attitude on this thread to uphold my opinion of some golfers. The only real fact is the only person authorised to make an informed judgement did so - and the majority of people seem to feel the need to ignore it, even though they weren't there or knew nothing (other than the OP's drip-fed information) of the situation. 
Maybe if you can't agree with the decision of an appointed representative of a club or at least respect it, then maybe it really is time to find another club OP.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			From my perspective, I've seen enough "we know better" attitude on this thread to uphold my opinion of some golfers. The only real fact is the only person authorised to make an informed judgement did so - and the majority of people seem to feel the need to ignore it, even though they weren't there or knew nothing (other than the OP's drip-fed information) of the situation. 
Maybe if you can't agree with the decision of an appointed representative of a club or at least respect it, then maybe it really is time to find another club OP.
		
Click to expand...

So now it's just some golfers as opposed to competition playing golfers ?

Well I have also met the odd golfer with the attitude and judgement you have announced on us all and in my experience it is very much the smallest minority and certainly isn't restricted to someone playing a competition. 

Actually I believe the players can also make their own judgement by following golfing etiquette and allowing a quicker group through :thup:


----------



## Wabinez (Jul 15, 2014)

Coming in right at the end, and skipped a lot of pages.  At our place, matches coming off the 18th requiring extra holes have priority over any groups on the first tee.  I would have assumed that it would be the same (or similar) to other clubs...


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*1 Competition rule in out place is to allow matches to filter in* - every club I have been too has been the same.

Thankfully most golfers I have played golf with would use the common sense and follow general etiquette and allow them to filter in and finish their match

*2 And also thankfully that appears to be the majority view on here also. *

And yes even if the competition doesn't have priority then if all groups are happy to allow them through then yes that's using common sense - regardless what the starter says.
		
Click to expand...

My 1st bold: and really you need to preface your advice with this comment instead of "surely you have the right to go in front of the waiting people"

Just because its been decided this way by the committee on courses where you've noticed, it does not make it a national or global competition policy 

Any variant by A.N Other club comp committee to your clubs 'popular' method leaves the potential for a breach (in regards tee priority probably not so serious a punishment but in regards to say, stipulating the play-off holes etc then it could be a DQ)

My 2nd bold: that's just crying out for me to be able to write mob rule again


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Actually they filter in - they don't just jump straight to the front unless the groups offer normally will filter behind the first group waiting . 

And as for it being national - with the reaction on here bar one it appears the forums golf clubs and members bar one follow the same common sense and etiquette in regards play offs for tied matchplay matches.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

In a nutshell, all the sane, regular golfers playing at decent clubs, have posted that it would be normal for a group having to play extra holes, in order to conclude a proper competition, to be given a waive through on the tee.

Nemicu clearly disagrees, as is his right to do, but, has decided to be extremely rude about competitive players at clubs and to create scenarios that never existed to support his view (as pointed out by Phil) . There is no way we'll ever agree but I just hope that Nemicu never ever applies to join the club I belong to with his attitude!


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*Actually they filter in - they don't just jump straight to the front unless the groups offer normally will filter behind the first group waiting *. 

And as for it being national - with the reaction on here bar one it appears the forums golf clubs and members bar one follow the same common sense and etiquette in regards play offs for tied matchplay matches.
		
Click to expand...

Post #2


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Post #2
		
Click to expand...

Again that's my view as oppose to what happens at our club 

At the end of the day through all the huffing and puffing it appears most golfers and clubs follow the common sense and etiquette path - and hopefully will continue to do so


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Again that's my view as oppose to what happens at our club 

At the end of the day through all the huffing and puffing it appears most golfers and clubs follow the common sense and etiquette path - and hopefully will continue to do so
		
Click to expand...

Actually its just as true to say it appears most golfers and clubs follow the Club Competition Rules - and hopefully will continue to do so

It is not etiquette to follow the rules 

[huff] If it makes you feel better about yourself to think you are using good etiquette then go nuts but all you are doing is following a rule [puff]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Actually its just as true to say it appears most golfers and clubs follow the Club Competition Rules - and hopefully will continue to do so

It is not etiquette to follow the rules 

[huff] If it makes you feel better about yourself to think you are using good etiquette then go nuts but all you are doing is following a rule [puff]
		
Click to expand...

Unless the club has no rules stipulating priority on a tee for comps or even before a certain time ( think its 11 at weekend for us ) but still allow them through - that's called common sense and etiquette :thup: 

And bringing in any rules from the committee in regards priority will also be showing common sense and etiquette by allowing them to finish and to filter in when playing extra holes when needed.


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*Unless the club has no rules stipulating priority on a tee for comps* or even before a certain time ( think its 11 at weekend for us ) but still allow them through - that's called common sense and etiquette :thup: 

And bringing in any rules from the committee in regards priority will also be showing common sense and etiquette by allowing them to finish and to filter in when playing extra holes when needed.
		
Click to expand...

Phew, its a good thing we're discussing something that your comp committee does have a rule for then isn't it... and the fact that your view on tee priority differs somewhat from your clubs is for you to deal with


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			Phew, its a good thing we're discussing something that your comp committee does have a rule for then isn't it... and the fact that your view on tee priority differs somewhat from your clubs is for you to deal with
		
Click to expand...

My club rule gives them priority when starting on the first after 11Am at weekends 

During the week it is left to the discretion of the membership 

For extra holes the match must go to the relevant tee they started from and then filter in normally behind the first group waiting but the membership use their common sense and let them go off ASAP to ensure no delay for them - that is how I believe it should be done following the common sense approach. 

Being on the comp committee myself I have yet to be told of one single complaint or issue being caused so it appears it works and our approach appears to work. 

Great work from membership and committee alike - would you like to drag any other points around ?


----------



## williamalex1 (Jul 15, 2014)

We have 2 ball shutes white for ties yellow for non comp games, alternate between shutes. There could be 10 balls in the yellow shute but if you arrive and place a ball in the white shute , you will be next on the tee.
 Once on the course ties are normally asked if they wish to play through . I posted a few weeks ago  re my tie going into extra time, when we were immediately given priority back at the 1st without asking.

It Might have been different story if there had been a visiting party already started teeing off, we would not break up a party .

I hope your PP is now your EX PP.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My club rule gives them priority when starting on the first after 11Am at weekends 

During the week it is left to the discretion of the membership 

For extra holes the match must go to the relevant tee they started from and then filter in normally behind the first group waiting but the membership use their common sense and let them go off ASAP to ensure no delay for them - that is how I believe it should be done following the common sense approach. 

Being on the comp committee myself I have yet to be told of one single complaint or issue being caused so it appears it works and our approach appears to work. 

Great work from membership and committee alike - would you like to drag any other points around ?
		
Click to expand...


I'm not sure whether we have a rule or not, although I believe not in the case of playing extra holes.

The reason .............. because no one at our place would be ignorant enough to stand in the way of a match going into extra time, so manners and etiquette prevail !!


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My club rule gives them priority when starting on the first after 11Am at weekends 

During the week it is left to the discretion of the membership 

For extra holes the match must go to the relevant tee they started from and then filter in normally behind the first group waiting but the membership use their common sense and let them go off ASAP to ensure no delay for them - that is how I believe it should be done following the common sense approach. 

Being on the comp committee myself I have yet to be told of one single complaint or issue being caused so it appears it works and our approach appears to work. 

Great work from membership and committee alike - *would you like to drag any other points around *?
		
Click to expand...

You and I both it would appear!

Ok:

Philâ€™s stated view: _â€œyou have the right to go in front of the waiting peopleâ€_
Philâ€™s stated Club rule: _â€œCompetition rule in our place is to allow matches to filter inâ€_

Your â€˜viewâ€™ caused nemicu to challenge this (still unsupported) â€˜rightâ€™ you talked about

Your view on what you think should be your â€˜rightâ€™ became â€˜good etiquetteâ€™ in later posts which then became â€˜common senseâ€™ which weirdly actually made you correct (eventually)... 

Of course its common sense... but it never was your 'right' and claiming it as such shows unsavory etiquette


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

chrisd said:



			I'm not sure whether we have a rule or not, although I believe not in the case of playing extra holes.

*The reason .............. because no one at our place would be ignorant enough to stand in the way of a match going into extra time, so manners and etiquette prevail* !!
		
Click to expand...

And that sums it up in one :thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			You and I both it would appear!

Ok:

Philâ€™s stated view: _â€œyou have the right to go in front of the waiting peopleâ€_
Philâ€™s stated Club rule: _â€œCompetition rule in our place is to allow matches to filter inâ€_

Your â€˜viewâ€™ caused nemicu to challenge this (still unsupported) â€˜rightâ€™ you talked about

Your view on what you think should be your â€˜rightâ€™ became â€˜good etiquetteâ€™ in later posts which then became â€˜common senseâ€™ which weirdly actually made you correct (eventually)... 

Of course its common sense... but it never was your 'right' and claiming it as such shows unsavory etiquette
		
Click to expand...


Excellent all sorted then :thup:


----------



## Slab (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Excellent all sorted then :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Glad to help


----------



## Fish (Jul 15, 2014)

Slab said:



			to doll out the stated punishment ideally a fish with larger stature & girth should be selected 

Click to expand...

:thup:


----------



## rosecott (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Nothing hurts like the truth either LP. And the truth is the starter is there to protect the course and the club policy - not the to uphold the progress of matches which *according to the rules of golf have completed a stipulated round*.
		
Click to expand...

Don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

*2-3. Winner of Match 

A match is won when one side leads by a number of holes greater than the number remaining to be played. 

If there is a tie, the Committee may extend the stipulated round by as many holes as are required for a match to be won.*


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 15, 2014)

rosecott said:



			Don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

*2-3. Winner of Match 

A match is won when one side leads by a number of holes greater than the number remaining to be played. 

If there is a tie, the Committee may extend the stipulated round by as many holes as are required for a match to be won.*

Click to expand...

Surely your quote shows him to be correct? By saying "may extend the stipulated round", this signifies that if it isn't extended, it has finished....


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Correct. At the completion of 18 holes, there was no winner at that time. And the committee *may* (i.e. they have the discretion to, but not always necessary) extend the match to a conclusion.


----------



## rosecott (Jul 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Surely your quote shows him to be correct? By saying "may extend the stipulated round", this signifies that if it isn't extended, it has finished....
		
Click to expand...




nemicu said:



			Correct. At the completion of 18 holes, there was no winner at that time. And the committee *may* (i.e. they have the discretion to, but not always necessary) extend the match to a conclusion.
		
Click to expand...

Look at the Conditions of Competition of any Matchplay knockout and you will see that the committee, at any club I have ever played (and there have been many), will always decree that that the stipulated round is extended until the conclusion of the match.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

rosecott said:



			Look at the Conditions of Competition of any Matchplay knockout and you will see that the committee, at any club I have ever played (and there have been many), will always decree that that the stipulated round is extended until the conclusion of the match.
		
Click to expand...

That may well be true, but cannot be assumed to mean immediately after completion of 18 holes. It would appear that this opinion was not held by the starter (i.e. with immediate effect) and consequently the extension of a match need not be immediately after the round finishes. The OP had options to wait or reschedule, but his PP chose instead to concede. End of story.


----------



## Fish (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			where does everyone get "have the right" from?
		
Click to expand...


I haven't read all the replies but the fact that your 'in play' still and the others waiting on the tee aren't is a significant fact. 

At my old club it is written that if you are holing out on the 9th or 18th greens, you are not allowed to tee off in front of that group if they are playing through, subsequently if a match goes to the 19th hole and people are on the tee, they would have right of passage, not just because of the local rule but again, they are seen as being 'in-play'.

If another group was behind them, it is said they have to then alternate to be fair to those on the tee waiting to start.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 15, 2014)

At my club it is one group allowed to tee off the 1st 10th or 19th tee ahead of a group already playing a round. Makes sense to me


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

It ALL circumstances, the committee should comply with rule 33-6 (which means posting the process in advance).
Decision 33-6/1 applies - as does rule 2-5. 
At the time in question, the starter is a duly appointed representative of the committee and his decision should be final.
Understand that rule 2-3 concerning settling ties, the term *may* rather than *shall* (as in rule 33-6) is used. For the committee and players involved, there is a distinct difference between "may" and "shall" as per the rules of golf.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Cant believe this is still being dragged on.

One easy way around the starter is the groups waiting allowing the people finishing the comp to play through them - ie as per etiquette - allowing a quicker group to play through - simple - and that is once again using common sense.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

I can't believe it's going on either, but since everybody wants to split hairs over a match that has been concluded by concession, it's fair to say that common sense seems to have gone out of the window.


----------



## North Mimms (Jul 15, 2014)

If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?


----------



## GB72 (Jul 15, 2014)

North Mimms said:



			If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?



Click to expand...

Nope


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			I can't believe it's going on either, but since everybody wants to split hairs over a match that has been concluded by concession, it's fair to say that common sense seems to have gone out of the window.
		
Click to expand...

We're only splitting hairs because you won't accept what would and should happen, and does at most of our clubs,  and you want to argue pedantically about the answer that most of the club members and sane people on here gave, which was that the starter was a complete numpty and it was obvious that they should have been allowed to play through and complete their match at which point the PP wouldn't have cleared off!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 15, 2014)

Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much? 
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.


----------



## North Mimms (Jul 15, 2014)

North Mimms said:



			If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?



Click to expand...

I like this game....


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much? 
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.
		
Click to expand...

I've read some claptrap on the forum over the years and this is certainly up for this years award entitled CLEARLY MISSING THE POINT


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 15, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much? 
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.
		
Click to expand...

Tosh and your replies on here smack of fishing trips looking for reactions


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

chrisd said:



			I've read some claptrap on the forum over the years and this is certainly up for this years award entitled CLEARLY MISSING THE POINT
		
Click to expand...

Chris - it appears that there are some golfers who will not accept anything that is not written down - which is a bit of a problem in golf as so much of our etiquette and aspects of courtesy to other players has evolved over time and is not explicitly written down - even although it may generally be accepted the world over.  Maybe we take an old-fashioned view of things and must accept the new order - that is along the lines of - if it ain't written down and it doesn't suit me then I will choose whether to bother about it - and if I choose to ignore it then tough - I've paid my money and that's it.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Chris - it appears that there are some golfers who will not accept anything that is not written down - which is a bit of a problem in golf as so much of our etiquette and aspects of courtesy to other players has evolved over time and is not explicitly written down - even although it may generally be accepted the world over.  Maybe we take an old-fashioned view of things and must accept the new order - that is along the lines of - if it ain't written down and it doesn't suit me then I will choose whether to bother about it - and if I choose to ignore it then tough - I've paid my money and that's it.
		
Click to expand...

Quite likely that's right SILH and nemicu, like some other posters we see from time to time, just ignores what reasonable and rational arguments are spelt out and insist that we are all marching out of step except him and Slab, the evolving of etiquette and protocol being what sensible people arrive at through years of experience!

This issue is getting more stupid than the recent "bigger holes for people with the yips" nonsense, a while back!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

Evolving etiquette? Ignores rational arguments? Using reason? Protocols?
Am I missing something here?
Presumably, these are the same etiquette and protocols you are using when you choose to totally ignore or respect the decision of a representative of club policy? (that's the starter for those of you who don't know)
Etiquette, courtesy and common sense are all fine qualities to possess, but when you're being selective in their application to suit your own ends, then I'm afraid you've missed the point. 
Anybody with the slightest amount of etiquette would have accepted the decision of the starter and moved on.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

Some very selective reading going on and getting rather tedious and verging on accusing me of a lack of etiquette 

All I have ever contested on this thread is:

That its is not a '*right*' of any golfer to get priority unless the comp committee deem it
Commencement of playoff does not have to be '*immediate*' unless the comp committee deem it

I didn't introduce these words into the thread, other golfers did and they are wrong! (& it would seem are above any judgement)

I've also said:

Its the committees responsibility to outline priority within the comp rules
In the absence of a competent committee its absolutely common sense to give some form of priority for a play-off

Even though I'm not part of the OP scenario I'll add that yes I would let a play-off go ahead of me if I'm waiting on the 1st tee... because its either in the rules or its the common sense thing to do. It really doesn't matter which (you can add an etiquette notch to your putter if it makes you feel better)

Where am I showing a lack of etiquette? (over to you, time to put up or shut up!) 

*In the absence of committee guideline then getting priority (any priority) is common sense and coincidentally good etiquette. But when as some on here do, you start to expect a certain degree or level of etiquette from others, guess what...  its no longer etiquette, its actually obedience and subservience your looking for! And that is a real shame*


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Evolving etiquette? Ignores rational arguments? Using reason? Protocols?
Am I missing something here?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, sadly you are, but I think at this late stage in the thread it's a case of "you have your view and we'll have ours" after all the only question asked by the OP was "how you would have reacted" and I, like most posters, would have been incensed at the starters intransigence and utter stupidity in the circumstances described and you would have stuck up for the knob.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Yes, sadly you are, but I think at this late stage in the thread it's a case of "you have your view and we'll have ours" after all the only question asked by the OP was "how you would have reacted" and I, like most posters, would have been incensed at the starters intransigence and utter stupidity in the circumstances described and you would have stuck up for the knob.
		
Click to expand...

Etiquette dictates that although we might strongly disagree with a decision (and of course there are appropriate channels to lodge a dispute), we must accept it if forms part of club rules or policy.
I don't get to make the rules - I just play by them. Maybe you should try it sometime.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Where am I showing a lack of etiquette? (over to you, time to put up or shut up!) 

*In the absence of committee guideline then getting priority (any priority) is common sense and coincidentally good etiquette. But when as some on here do, you start to expect a certain degree or level of etiquette from others, guess what...  its no longer etiquette, its actually obedience and subservience your looking for! And that is a real shame*

Click to expand...

I, for one, haven't accused you of anything.

I happen to disagree with your rigidity that the rules should cover ALL eventualities. Swing It Like Hogan made a point in post 148 about the matter that I totally concur that some people have to have everything covered by written rules so that they can be blindly followed and common sense is then not required

Good etiquette is classed as such simply because it is good etiquette and, yes, I would, unless there was an undeniable reason for ignoring it, absolutely expect to see it applied on the course and not ignored by some jobsworth knob of a starter who clearly didn't understand the stupidity of his decision.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

nemicu said:



			I don't get to make the rules - I just play by them. Maybe you should try it sometime.
		
Click to expand...


That is an outrageous comment!


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			We walked over to the 1st tee and there was_* quite a queue*_, one group on the tee, 3 greenfee groups waiting and then a society gathering. I asked the starter if we could 'push in', he said no, because the greenfee groups had 
booked their tee times, but he would see if he could squeeze us in before the society. My PP, said "I'm not hanging around, we'll concede, come on lads I'll give you a lift home".
		
Click to expand...

This in a nutshell is the starters decision. He even tried to allow the group a spot in front of a society which is commendable. Calling him a "knob" because of what in your opinion? Doing his job?


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			I, for one, haven't accused you of anything.

I happen to disagree with *your rigidity that the rules should cover ALL eventualities.* Swing It Like Hogan made a point in post 148 about the matter that I totally concur that some people have to have everything covered by written rules so that they can be blindly followed and common sense is then not required

Good etiquette is classed as such simply because it is good etiquette and, yes, I would, unless there was an undeniable reason for ignoring it, absolutely expect to see it applied on the course and not ignored by some jobsworth knob of a starter who clearly didn't understand the stupidity of his decision.
		
Click to expand...

Jeez Chris its not my rigidity, its the RandA's! 

_Rule 33-6 states in part â€œthe Committee *must *announce the manner, day and time for the decision of a halved match or of a tie, whether played on level terms or under handicapâ€. It is essential that such decisions are taken in advance of the competition and established in the conditions. The recommended methods of settling ties are detailed in Appendix I, Part C of the Rules of Golf. _

I'd rather ditch a number of the rules of golf and make the game a lot more user friendly but it is what it is

What's staggering is those who wish to ignore a written rule! Which other rules will they ignore?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 16, 2014)

It makes sense to have a 'Club Policy' written up and available somewhere. However, part of that policy should state that it is not all-encompassing and that the likes of Starters will be authorised to make decisions according to the circumstances as they see fit.

The fact that this one was a bit of a pillock and didn't seem to apply common sense - and may have breached policy (written or not) anyway - is somewhat beside the point. As Snelly posted so succinctly, it should be obvious that there is a 'proper' way to  handle the situation and it wouldn't have involved any overall delay of the guys on/waiting for the 1st tee, nor needed a concession!

How/why this thread has got to 165 posts amazes me!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

nemicu said:



			This in a nutshell is the starters decision. He even tried to allow the group a spot in front of a society which is commendable. Calling him a "knob" because of what in your opinion? Doing his job?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think a starters job is to ignore the needs of the players ON the course and thereby blindly sticking to a policy of seeing that every golfer gets off exactly at an appointed time. His job, in my opinion, is to manage the tee for the benefit of ALL the golfers. I believe that is, by far and away, the opinion of the majority of the golfers who have posted on this thread and I stick with my opinion of the starter for that reason and don't accept he was "doing his job" in any sense of the phrase that I would accept.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Jeez Chris its not my rigidity, its the RandA's! 

_Rule 33-6 states in part â€œthe Committee *must *announce the manner, day and time for the decision of a halved match or of a tie, whether played on level terms or under handicapâ€. It is essential that such decisions are taken in advance of the competition and established in the conditions. The recommended methods of settling ties are detailed in Appendix I, Part C of the Rules of Golf. _

I'd rather ditch a number of the rules of golf and make the game a lot more user friendly but it is what it is

What's staggering is those who wish to ignore a written rule! Which other rules will they ignore?
		
Click to expand...


So, in this actual case what was the committees laid down rule?


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Jeez Chris its not my rigidity, its the RandA's! 

_Rule 33-6 states in part â€œthe Committee *must *announce the manner, day and time for the decision of a halved match or of a tie, whether played on level terms or under handicapâ€. It is essential that such decisions are taken in advance of the competition and established in the conditions. The recommended methods of settling ties are detailed in Appendix I, Part C of the Rules of Golf. _

I'd rather ditch a number of the rules of golf and make the game a lot more user friendly but it is what it is

What's staggering is those who wish to ignore a written rule! Which other rules will they ignore?
		
Click to expand...

Lol - I did make that distinction in post #148 - but like the starters decision too, most people chose to ignore it.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It makes sense to have a 'Club Policy' written up and available somewhere. However, part of that policy should state that it is not all-encompassing and that the likes of Starters will be authorised to make decisions according to the circumstances as they see fit.

The fact that this one was a bit of a pillock and didn't seem to apply common sense - and may have breached policy (written or not) anyway - is somewhat beside the point. As Snelly posted so succinctly, it should be obvious that there is a 'proper' way to  handle the situation and it wouldn't have involved any overall delay of the guys on/waiting for the 1st tee, nor needed a concession!

How/why this thread has got to 165 posts amazes me!
		
Click to expand...


Spot on Fox, I can't be so difficult to understand surely!


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			So, in this actual case what was the committees laid down rule?
		
Click to expand...

Don't even think about telling us now that you've been making all the sweeping statements and yes questioning my conduct... and you don't even know what this committees laid down rule is!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Don't even think about telling us now that you've been making all the sweeping statements and yes questioning my conduct... and you don't even know what this committees laid down rule is!
		
Click to expand...

So, what was the rule AT THAT CLUB that the starter was enforcing?


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			So, what was the rule AT THAT CLUB that the starter was enforcing?
		
Click to expand...

YOU TELL ME!

I'm not the one who wants to ignore it in favour of my own preference


----------



## rosecott (Jul 16, 2014)

Yes, it would be interesting if the OP could find out, and share with the forum, his club committee's take on the situation under discussion.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			YOU TELL ME!

I'm not the one who wants to ignore it in favour of my own preference
		
Click to expand...

Difficult to IGNORE what we don't know but I didn't start making up the rules


----------



## Fish (Jul 16, 2014)




----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Chris - it appears that there are some golfers who will not accept anything that is not written down - which is a bit of a problem in golf as so much of our etiquette and aspects of courtesy to other players has evolved over time and is not explicitly written down - even although it may generally be accepted the world over.  Maybe we take an old-fashioned view of things and must accept the new order - that is along the lines of - if it ain't written down and it doesn't suit me then I will choose whether to bother about it - and if I choose to ignore it then tough - I've paid my money and that's it.
		
Click to expand...


Now now SILH, why do I feel that this is partly linked towards HNSP! Don't start that again  (accepted the world over, pah  haha)


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Difficult to IGNORE what we don't know but I didn't start making up the rules
		
Click to expand...

But easy enough to slag off the starter when you don't know!


(I apologies for responding to your introduction of caps lock, it was childish)


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Difficult to IGNORE what we don't know but I didn't start making up the rules
		
Click to expand...

Exactly! And here we are full circle. If you have no knowledge of the club rules at that time, what makes the decision (in your opinion) made by the starter wrong? If you're willing to concede that starters are on the course for a reason - and that the majority of times they make the correct calls, then you have no basis for the argument he or she is wrong. You *have *chosen to ignore what you don't know - and this is the problem.


----------



## Fish (Jul 16, 2014)

Would it not fall into the category of, if its an official club comp then they have priority of the course once in play, and as such as the 'match', not the 'round' was not completed, they have priority on the 1st tee to carry on and play the 19th?

I've been a member of 2 clubs and this is certainly the case although I can't find it written anywhere, is it one of those unwritten etiquette rules which we follow?

But then again, do I really want to get involved in this.......:mmm:


----------



## JamesR (Jul 16, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Exactly! And here we are full circle. If you have no knowledge of the club rules at that time, what makes the decision (in your opinion) made by the starter wrong? If you're willing to concede that starters are on the course for a reason - and that the majority of times they make the correct calls, then you have no basis for the argument he or she is wrong. You *have *chosen to ignore what you don't know - and this is the problem.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know what is written down & I don't really care. All I know is that in my opinion, something in which I hold much stock, the starter was in the wrong - he should have let the foresomes matchplay playoff filter onto the first tee amongst those waiting, and the majority of golfers would have been totally accepting of it if they had the situation explained to them.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 16, 2014)

Fish said:



			Would it not fall into the category of, if its an official club comp then they have priority of the course once in play, and as such as the 'match', not the 'round' was not completed, they have priority on the 1st tee to carry on and play the 19th?

I've been a member of 2 clubs and this is certainly the case although I can't find it written anywhere, is it one of those unwritten etiquette rules which we follow?

But then again, do I really want to get involved in this.......:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

This is pretty much identical to how I see it/have come across in the past. :thup:

If its not a club comp then get in the queue


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

Fish said:



*Would it not fall into the category of, if its an official club comp then they have priority of the course once in play, and as such as the 'match', not the 'round' was not completed, they have priority on the 1st tee to carry on and play the 19th?*

I've been a member of 2 clubs and this is certainly the case although I can't find it written anywhere, is it one of those unwritten etiquette rules which we follow?

But then again, do I really want to get involved in this.......:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

I certainly hope this is what they have in place, or something very similar


Edit: and what do you mean you don't want to get involved? I thought you volunteered yourself as the aforementioned fish


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			But easy enough to slag off the starter when you don't know!


(I apologies for responding to your introduction of caps lock, it was childish)
		
Click to expand...

It's easy to support him when you don't know?

I have never come across a club that would have a rule that prohibits a match from playing, immediately, the extra holes needed to conclude the tie, it wouldn't be illogical. Nor would a committee bring into a rule instructions for a starter in the event of a queue at the first extra hole, it would be too difficult to word and totally unnecessary in most clubs.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

Gil_Emott said:



			I don't know what is written down & I don't really care. All I know is that in my opinion, something in which I hold much stock, the starter was in the wrong - *he should have let the foresomes matchplay playoff filter onto the first tee amongst those waiting*, and the majority of golfers would have been totally accepting of it if they had the situation explained to them.
		
Click to expand...

He did offer this to the match players, it just wasn't fast enough for the PP


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			He did offer this to the match players, it just wasn't fast enough for the PP
		
Click to expand...

Again, don't let the facts get in the way of the argument - he said they could go after 3 groups of green fees had teed off.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



*It's easy to support him when you don't know?*

I have never come across a club that would have a rule that prohibits a match from playing, immediately, the extra holes needed to conclude the tie, it wouldn't be illogical. Nor would a committee bring into a rule instructions for a starter in the event of a queue at the first extra hole, it would be too difficult to word and totally unnecessary in most clubs.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe just me taking a 'presumed innocent' stance then based on a reliance for committees to have rules & conditions to govern their comps


On the 2nd paragraph, LiverpoolPhil's club has this very thing, perhaps he can get the exact wording for us and it appears to contain instructions for a starter or anyone else to use


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Again, don't let the facts get in the way of the argument - he said they could go after 3 groups of green fees had teed off.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I know that's why I said it wasn't fast enough for the PP, keep up

i.e the priority offered (after green fees but before society) wasn't fast enough for the PP who conceded


Edit: for what its worth I don't agree that in a typical situation a three group wait is quick enough but we don't know enough on this example


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Maybe just me taking a 'presumed innocent' stance then based on a reliance for committees to have rules & conditions to govern their comps
		
Click to expand...


That's what we've been saying all along, if however, the club had a rule telling the starter to act this way we would have simply shifted our comments to the committee for making it so.



Slab said:



			On the 2nd paragraph, LiverpoolPhil's club has this very thing, perhaps he can get the exact wording for us and it appears to contain instructions for a starter or anyone else to use
		
Click to expand...

It would be interesting I agree, but as no one knows what rule, if any, covered the OP's situation I stand by everything I've written ie etiquette and common sense should prevail and I still don't believe that the starter showed either


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Yes I know that's why I said it wasn't fast enough for the PP, keep up

i.e the priority offered (after green fees but before society) wasn't fast enough for the PP who conceded


Edit: for what its worth I don't agree that in a typical situation a three group wait is quick enough but we don't know enough on this example
		
Click to expand...


To be fair to the PP, at the time, and after playing 18 holes, I don't think the majority of golfers would want to queue behind 3 x 4 balls for what could quite easily be half an hour on the tee to continue a match - I'm certain I wouldn't, although I am not certain I'd concede.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			That's what we've been saying all along, if however, the club had a rule telling the starter to act this way we would have simply shifted our comments to the committee for making it so.



It would be interesting I agree, but as no one knows what rule, if any, covered the OP's situation I stand by everything I've written ie etiquette and common sense should prevail and I still don't believe that the starter showed either
		
Click to expand...

Well I'm going to stick with the assumption that a rule does exist but we don't know what it says

After all if no rule for a tie match how did they even know to go to the 1st tee to start play-off holes (its recommend but not a 'must' to use the 1st)


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Well I'm going to stick with the assumption that a rule does exist but we don't know what it says

After all if no rule for a tie match how did they even know to go to the 1st tee to start play-off holes (its recommend but not a 'must' to use the 1st)
		
Click to expand...

Fine Slab, I shall agree that a rule is likely to exist but wouldn't involve advice to the starter in any way shape or form as to his part in the process, it wouldn't require the players to restart the match at another time unless affected by weather or light and that the starter was the cause of all the problems, but I'm glad we got there.

I am somewhat saddened that Nemicu hasn't sought to apologise for his rude comments in earlier posts and, in particular, his wild slagging off of competition golfers.


----------



## nemicu (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Fine Slab, I shall agree that a rule is likely to exist but wouldn't involve advice to the starter in any way shape or form as to his part in the process, it wouldn't require the players to restart the match at another time unless affected by weather or light and that the starter was the cause of all the problems, but I'm glad we got there.

I am somewhat saddened that Nemicu hasn't sought to apologise for his rude comments in earlier posts and, in particular, his wild slagging off of competition golfers.
		
Click to expand...


sorry - but you may need to stay saddened until everybody else apologizes for calling the starter a "prick" "knob" or other profanity that I chose to avoid. Apologies for using the term "up their own arse" though.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Fine Slab, I shall agree that a rule is likely to exist but wouldn't involve advice to the starter in any way shape or form as to his part in the process, it wouldn't require the players to restart the match at another time unless affected by weather or light and that the starter was the cause of all the problems, but I'm glad we got there.
		
Click to expand...

Not really agreement with all you say in this post but not sure we'll ever reach that, the readers can make their own minds up


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Now now SILH, why do I feel that this is partly linked towards HNSP! Don't start that again  (accepted the world over, pah  haha)
		
Click to expand...

ah - wasn't very well disguised was it and easy to spot


----------



## Whereditgo (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Again, don't let the facts get in the way of the argument - he said they could go after 3 groups of green fees had teed off.
		
Click to expand...

Actually it would have been four if you include the group already standing on the tee box, but as previously mentioned no one expected that group to let us through.

I have just spoken to the Competitions Secretary, the rules of competition state that "if after 18 holes the match is tied, the match should proceed playing from the 1st tee under sudden death until there is a winner".

Rather unhelpfully (for this discussion) nothing is stated regarding having priority.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

I'm sure it must have been mentioned elsewhere under this topic - but doesn't the two ball foursomes have precedence over a four ball in any case,  And even if the fourballs with booked tee times tee'd off ahead of the foursomes match - would the fourballs not have to let the foursomes through straight away as they would be (by definition) holding them up - as the foursomes would be standing waiting on the tee - and wouldn't it be accepted courtesy for the fourballs to do exactly that.

We are all frustrated from time to time when a 2 ball that had started on the 9th appears off the 18th green when there are groups waiting to start).  And so the 2 ball slots in after the first group have tee'd off (some clubs would suggest the 2 ball has precedence over ALL groups on the 1st).  And sure enough the 2 ball will then get invited through by all groups currently on the course - if that is what the 2 ball wishes (I note that will often decline the offer to play through if I am in that 2 ball as I know it irks some fourballs to have to do this)


----------



## North Mimms (Jul 16, 2014)

Gahd!

Golfers can be very boring....


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

Whereditgo said:



			Actually it would have been four if you include the group already standing on the tee box, but as previously mentioned no one expected that group to let us through.

I have just spoken to the Competitions Secretary, the rules of competition state that "if after 18 holes the match is tied, the match should proceed playing from the 1st tee under sudden death until there is a winner".

Rather unhelpfully (for this discussion) nothing is stated regarding having priority.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for coming back with that. You're right though doesn't help us much (poor show from them) 

So does it mean the starter (in his role as starter) has authority over placing the group either into/before/after those waiting, it would seem so. And we've no idea of his logic or reasoning (or lack of) in this case


----------



## North Mimms (Jul 16, 2014)

This thread is the reason that I ensure that I lose all matches in the 17th


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Thanks for coming back with that. You're right though doesn't help us much (poor show from them) 

So does it mean the starter (in his role as starter) has authority over placing the group either into/before/after those waiting, it would seem so. And we've no idea of his logic or reasoning (or lack of) in this case
		
Click to expand...

Precisely what most of have been saying Slab. 

I have read and re read rule 33-6 and there is no need for a committee to go into detail about priority on the tee etc in the event of a tie, they simply have to announce the manner, day and time. I simply don't think that many clubs would have anything in their knockout matchplay rules other than the match should be played to a conclusion as all eventualities (light, storm etc) are covered by other rules.


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



*Precisely what most of have been saying Slab*. 

I have read and re read rule 33-6 and there is no need for a committee to go into detail about priority on the tee etc in the event of a tie, they simply have to announce the manner, day and time. I simply don't think that many clubs would have anything in their knockout matchplay rules other than the match should be played to a conclusion as all eventualities (light, storm etc) are covered by other rules.
		
Click to expand...


No Chris its not what people have been saying (otherwise I'd have agreed with them  )

I only got involved in this thread because some claimed a '_right_' to an '_immediate_' start on the 1st and it just doesn't exist


----------



## Fish (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			Thanks for coming back with that. You're right though doesn't help us much (poor show from them) 

So does it mean the starter (in his role as starter) has authority over placing the group either into/before/after those waiting, it would seem so. And we've no idea of his logic or reasoning (or lack of) in this case
		
Click to expand...

Here's a curve ball for you....

I've just moved to a 9 hole course with 18 very different tees, I've never had an issue before, even with a full course but the other week I went out in the medal in the 1st tee time of 07.45hrs.  Now being a 9 holer we have a gap at 10am to take into consideration that everyone will be coming around the loop again which works fine, or it used to!  

I flew round with my 2 playing partners in around 90 minutes so we were at the 10th whilst the tail enders before the 10am gap starts were still teeing off!  The Pro happened to be around near our back tee and I asked if he was going to signal to the 1st tee to let us through, he said no, we have to wait!

I attempted to put my case that I was 'in play' and I should not be 'unduly delayed' but he disagreed and stated that they had booked tee times and everything was on time and as such it was not their fault we had gone round the front 9 so quickly and as a consequence we'd have to wait, irrelevant of how many groups still had to tee off! 

I disagreed with him but had to wait obviously but I will never tee off that early again.

I know the Pro's are not ideal in asking about rules, even club local rules but I can't find anything to support my argument other than the fact I should not be 'unduly delayed'.


----------



## rosecott (Jul 16, 2014)

Fish said:



			Here's a curve ball for you....

I've just moved to a 9 hole course with 18 very different tees, I've never had an issue before, even with a full course but the other week I went out in the medal in the 1st tee time of 07.45hrs.  Now being a 9 holer we have a gap at 10am to take into consideration that everyone will be coming around the loop again which works fine, or it used to!  

I flew round with my 2 playing partners in around 90 minutes so we were at the 10th whilst the tail enders before the 10am gap starts were still teeing off!  The Pro happened to be around near our back tee and I asked if he was going to signal to the 1st tee to let us through, he said no, we have to wait!

I attempted to put my case that I was 'in play' and I should not be 'unduly delayed' but he disagreed and stated that they had booked tee times and everything was on time and as such it was not their fault we had gone round the front 9 so quickly and as a consequence we'd have to wait, irrelevant of how many groups still had to tee off! 

I disagreed with him but had to wait obviously but I will never tee off that early again.

I know the Pro's are not ideal in asking about rules, even club local rules but I can't find anything to support my argument other than the fact I should not be 'unduly delayed'.
		
Click to expand...

The counter argument for your pro is:

_What would happen if we were having a bad round and didn't manage to reach the 10th within the 2:15 allowed? Would we have to go home as we'd missed the 10.00 tee time which had been allocated to us?_

As has been said many times on this thread, there needs to be an element of common sense in these situations. Allowing you to filter in would only make a few minutes difference to the groups waiting to tee off and things would soon start to flow again. After all, there would still be the unused 10:00 tee time to help things along.


----------



## Fish (Jul 16, 2014)

rosecott said:



			The counter argument for your pro is:

_What would happen if we were having a bad round and didn't manage to reach the 10th within the 2:15 allowed? Would we have to go home as we'd missed the 10.00 tee time which had been allocated to us?_

As has been said many times on this thread, there needs to be an element of common sense in these situations. Allowing you to filter in would only make a few minutes difference to the groups waiting to tee off and things would soon start to flow again. After all, there would still be the unused 10:00 tee time to help things along.
		
Click to expand...

There is no 10am tee time, its a gap of 2hrs from 10am - 12noon allowing everyone to come round within that period, obviously people can then tee off from 12noon again but they would have to filter in amongst players that took longer.

My argument was that I was now being delayed through no fault of my own and having to wait for groups to tee off who hadn't even started so delaying them was of no consequence, IMO.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Slab said:



			No Chris its not what people have been saying (otherwise I'd have agreed with them  )

I only got involved in this thread because some claimed a '_right_' to an '_immediate_' start on the 1st and it just doesn't exist
		
Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone claiming a right to an immediate start. The majority said that a good starter would have either done that, as it's often best to, or filtered the match in after the first group had teed off


----------



## chrisd (Jul 16, 2014)

Fish said:



			Here's a curve ball for you....

I've just moved to a 9 hole course with 18 very different tees, I've never had an issue before, even with a full course but the other week I went out in the medal in the 1st tee time of 07.45hrs.  Now being a 9 holer we have a gap at 10am to take into consideration that everyone will be coming around the loop again which works fine, or it used to!  

I flew round with my 2 playing partners in around 90 minutes so we were at the 10th whilst the tail enders before the 10am gap starts were still teeing off!  The Pro happened to be around near our back tee and I asked if he was going to signal to the 1st tee to let us through, he said no, we have to wait!

I attempted to put my case that I was 'in play' and I should not be 'unduly delayed' but he disagreed and stated that they had booked tee times and everything was on time and as such it was not their fault we had gone round the front 9 so quickly and as a consequence we'd have to wait, irrelevant of how many groups still had to tee off! 

I disagreed with him but had to wait obviously but I will never tee off that early again.

I know the Pro's are not ideal in asking about rules, even club local rules but I can't find anything to support my argument other than the fact I should not be 'unduly delayed'.
		
Click to expand...

AgHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! not now Robin !


----------



## Slab (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



*I don't recall anyone claiming a right to an immediate start. *The majority said that a good starter would have either done that, as it's often best to, or filtered the match in after the first group had teed off
		
Click to expand...

Then that's why you find it difficult to agree with me


----------



## Fish (Jul 16, 2014)

chrisd said:



			AgHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! not now Robin !  

Click to expand...


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 16, 2014)

Gil_Emott said:



			I don't know what is written down & I don't really care. All I know is that in my opinion, something in which I hold much stock, the starter was in the wrong - he should have let the foresomes matchplay playoff filter onto the first tee amongst those waiting, and the majority of golfers would have been totally accepting of it if they had the situation explained to them.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly


----------

