salfordlad
Well-known member
Two brief reactions.This seems the most sensible answer to a rules question, but itself does not say which way the tie should be awarded in committee. There is a hint that A should lose the tie for failure to hole out.
Suggesting that B should lose the tie in future events is interesting. I cannot see the difference in Bs actions here, and in future events where he does the same thing, and its considered a serious breach, and he loses the tie.
If this unfortunate scenario were to cross my desk, and the tie required a resolution, I would DQ Player B under 1.2a, as he acted 'contrary to the spirit of the game'. Why should he get away with it the first time, but be DQ'd the second time after a warning?
Its a great question though.
1. No "hint" is being offered. The facts are not provided to enable a decision - why did the match cease? We are not told how that unfolded. If A ceased play because they didn't like B's behaviour, walking off the course, then A breached 5.7 and the penalty is DQ. But the OP provided no basis for a decision.
2. On your approach of DQing B off the bat, see the 6th bullet point in 1.2a/1. I think that provides direct RB guidance that your proposed approach is not supported by the Rules of Golf in a situation a bit more serious than not attending the flag. (I don't see the stroke play versus match play angle as ground changing.)
Untangling poor behaviour on the course within the constraints of the Rules can be a challenge for any Committee. Fortunately, it is not very common but if/when it happens it is going to test one's mettle, patience and wisdom.
Last edited: