Attesting a Score for Handicap

[mikejohnchapman]

It can be "misinterpreted" if desired - but this was true when away scores had to be returned by card.

We had a new member submit is GP score via the MyEG app where his brother - also a member - attested to the score. On the face of it no problem. However, the brother also submitted a GP score on the same day, same time, on a completely different course!

When challenged the player said he thought he only had to get someone to agree with his score!

 

[IanM]

We had a new member submit is GP score via the MyEG app where his brother - also a member - attested to the score. On the face of it no problem. However, the brother also submitted a GP score on the same day, same time, on a completely different course!

When challenged the player said he thought he only had to get someone to agree with his score!

And did the club do anything? I'd be shocked if they did.

 

[rulefan]

And did the club do anything? I'd be shocked if they did.

Did you mean 'surprised'?

 

[IanM]

I think @Lilyhawk has a point.

I know a cheat who'd tell his marker anything he'd get away with. Regardless of what the Rules say, someone could get away with blooming murder in some cases.

 

[rulefan]

I think @Lilyhawk has a point.

I know a cheat who'd tell his marker anything he'd get away with. Regardless of what the Rules say, someone could get away with blooming murder in some cases.

How has this changed since the old UHS?

 

[IanM]

How has this changed since the old UHS?

Significantly. You couldn't key anything on an app and hope it wouldn't need look it.

If it was a comp, it's changed less

 

[rulefan]

Significantly. You couldn't key anything on an app and hope it wouldn't need look it.

If it was a comp, it's changed less

But this hasn't changed in comps or Supplementary Scores

IanM
I know a cheat who'd tell his marker anything he'd get away with. Regardless of what the Rules say, someone could get away with blooming murder in some cases.

 

[IanM]

So, you had an app before the launch of WHS?

I didn't. Maybe you did. Or you have missed the point I was making.

But either way, I don't require a answer

 

[3offTheTee]

You must have misunderstood something? Imo, the definition of "marker" in the Rule book is clear that it is another person, ie, not the player making the score.

You have missed the point I am aware of who the marker is thank you

I stated that at our Club the marker has to attest the score. He is sent a message on EG. If the ‘marker’was “Ronaldo” who was not there how could a message be sent to the member to attest the score? If a message could not be sent to the marker who was not present surely it is open to cheating.

 

[rulefan]

So, you had an app before the launch of WHS?

I didn't. Maybe you did. Or you have missed the point I was making.

But either way, I don't require a answer

Apps are irrelevant.

Without an app and an 'attester' who knows nothing about the game, the player could simply tell him to put down any number without knowing whether any any penalties were due or not.

 

[rosecott]

It can be "misinterpreted" if desired - but this was true when away scores had to be returned by card.

We had a new member submit is GP score via the MyEG app where his brother - also a member - attested to the score. On the face of it no problem. However, the brother also submitted a GP score on the same day, same time, on a completely different course!

When challenged the player said he thought he only had to get someone to agree with his score!

And did the club do anything? I'd be shocked if they did.

Doing a routine check of GP scores a few months ago, I came across an entry for one player playing a very famous Scottish course with a score that was way, way lower than his normal low 20s HI. On checking the submission, his named attester happened to have played a comp with me the day before - a long way from Scotland. I questioned the "attester" who admitted that the player had asked him to attest the score as he had been playing with his father who was unable to attest as he did not have a handicap. Both player and "attestor" - both were in the Young Adult category 18-21 - were given a formal warning and the score was deleted from his WHS record. I felt just a little sorry for the "attestor" as he was a nice genuine lad who was shocked when he realised the seriousness of agreeing to do it under pressure from the player..

 

[mikejohnchapman]

And did the club do anything? I'd be shocked if they did.

The player was spoken to and the view was taken it was a genuine mistake by someone new to membership. The process was explained and the score removed.

 

[IanM]

Proving some clubs are on the ball, and plenty are not.

A chain is as strong as its weakest link

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Doing a routine check of GP scores a few months ago, I came across an entry for one player playing a very famous Scottish course with a score that was way, way lower than his normal low 20s HI. On checking the submission, his named attester happened to have played a comp with me the day before - a long way from Scotland. I questioned the "attester" who admitted that the player had asked him to attest the score as he had been playing with his father who was unable to attest as he did not have a handicap. Both player and "attestor" - both were in the Young Adult category 18-21 - were given a formal warning and the score was deleted from his WHS record. I felt just a little sorry for the "attestor" as he was a nice genuine lad who was shocked when he realised the seriousness of agreeing to do it under pressure from the player..

Once bitten, twice shy.

 

[Swango1980]

They are not required to know the rules, just be able to count to 9.

Would it be OK if a golfer brought their 6 year old child to mark all their GP scores?

 

[rosecott]

Would it be OK if a golfer brought their 6 year old child to mark all their GP scores?

Getting silly now.

"The player’s score is kept on their scorecard by the marker, who is either identified by the Committee or chosen by the player in a way approved by the Committee."

A committee is unlikely to confer approval on a 6-year-old.

 

[rulefan]

Would it be OK if a golfer brought their 6 year old child to mark all their GP scores?

Unlikely but if the committee were to believe that particular 6 year old could form a reasonable basis from which to provide support for a score that has been posted or challenge the player on any anomalies in the posted score, it would be ok.

 

[Swango1980]

Getting silly now.

"The player’s score is kept on their scorecard by the marker, who is either identified by the Committee or chosen by the player in a way approved by the Committee."

A committee is unlikely to confer approval on a 6-year-old.

It isn't silly. It is making a point.

Clearly, the point was being made that the criteria required is not simply that the person could count to 9. If those sorts of remarks are just going to be thrown about to try and make a point, then there should be no surprise if they are challenged.

So a Committee is unlikely to accept a 6 year old child as a marker. Perhaps they won't accept the golfers wife, who has been brought around in a buggy and has no interest in golf? The question is, who would they accept? If a person is being brought around who has no knowledge of golf at all, but just so happened to be with the player at the time, would Committee accept that? Would that person be considered responsible to attest a score, and know that the round was played at least reasonable robustly within the rules? I know I could bring any one of my work colleagues with me for a round of golf, and make up about 20 rules during the round and they'd be non the wiser. Free drops for this and that, pick and choose where I drop, gimmes, mulligans, etc. I could do it all, and they'd never challenge me.

And they can all count to 9.

 

[rulie]

It isn't silly. It is making a point.

Clearly, the point was being made that the criteria required is not simply that the person could count to 9. If those sorts of remarks are just going to be thrown about to try and make a point, then there should be no surprise if they are challenged.

So a Committee is unlikely to accept a 6 year old child as a marker. Perhaps they won't accept the golfers wife, who has been brought around in a buggy and has no interest in golf? The question is, who would they accept? If a person is being brought around who has no knowledge of golf at all, but just so happened to be with the player at the time, would Committee accept that? Would that person be considered responsible to attest a score, and know that the round was played at least reasonable robustly within the rules? I know I could bring any one of my work colleagues with me for a round of golf, and make up about 20 rules during the round and they'd be non the wiser. Free drops for this and that, pick and choose where I drop, gimmes, mulligans, etc. I could do it all, and they'd never challenge me.

And they can all count to 9.

Hopefully that is not an example of your integrity.
See Rule 1.2

 

[Swango1980]

Hopefully that is not an example of your integrity.
See Rule 1.2

Clearly not.

But it is the integrity of others I'd worry about. I'm guessing if it could safely be assumed that 100% of golfers acted with integrity, then there would be no need to have anybody attest their score in the first place.