Disqualification under 6.1b (2)

[rulefan]

So no discretion allowed when applying the rules of a game.
How about a policeman who IS allowed to use his/her discretion when applying the laws of the land/road
ie giving you a warning for doing 55 in a 50 limit?
Are the rules of golf more important than the laws of the land?

No, just different. They are rules of a game. No more, no less.

 

[salfordlad]

You call it practice. I don't.
His ball was in a ditch and he teed up a new ball. That's not practice.

If we go by your reasoning, anyone that tees up again without declaring a provisional ball can just claim to be "practicing" and take a general play penalty if they balloon the reload oob and find the first ball. Hence instead of being 5 of the tee they are playing their 2nd shot and add the penalty once hole played.

The DQ was fully justified. I do not believe for a second that both the OP and his FC thought it was ok to do this.

When you are in a hole, stop digging. There is no possible way under the Rules to support that bad decision by the Committee.

 

[doublebogey7]

So no discretion allowed when applying the rules of a game.
How about a policeman who IS allowed to use his/her discretion when applying the laws of the land/road
ie giving you a warning for doing 55 in a 50 limit?
Are the rules of golf more important than the laws of the land?

As many say, golf is just a game and any penalties are restricted to the game therefore they do not effect a citizens ability to earn a living feed their kids etc, you are comparing apples to bananas.

 

[Beedee]

You do realise the "just about" part which you choose not to highlight, in actual fact confirms that he did not carry the ditch from the ladies tee. If I 'just about' hole a putt, it means I've missed the putt. Just about means nearly, so he's back in the ditch a 2nd time.

tbh, until this thread I didn't realise that "just about" means two things that are entirely opposite. I always understood it as "succeeded but only just". You understood it as"failed but only just". And if google is to be believed then both meanings are commonplace.

 

[chrisd]

Two blokes having fun on a golf course. Heavens forbid. It makes golf look a little silly with such rigid responses. Any other sport and the official has a quiet word with the people involved and that's enough.

So , its happened in a competition, the player concerned submits a winning card (without adding the penalty) but it becomes known that he broke the rules in this fashion and pipped you to 2nd place but the trophy and prize money was yours if someone had not just "had a quiet word" with the winner. But you acted according to the rules as did the rest of the field - presumably you'd not question the lack of fairness to the rest of the field?

 

[bobmac]

So , its happened in a competition, the player concerned submits a winning card (without adding the penalty) but it becomes known that he broke the rules in this fashion and pipped you to 2nd place but the trophy and prize money was yours if someone had not just "had a quiet word" with the winner. But you acted according to the rules as did the rest of the field - presumably you'd not question the lack of fairness to the rest of the field?

That's why I suggest discretion.
If he comes in the prizes then he should be penalised or DQ.
If he had a bad day, why kick him while he's down.

 

[chrisd]

That's why I suggest discretion.
If he comes in the prizes then he should be penalised or DQ.
If he had a bad day, why kick him while he's down.

I'd agree to an extent Bob, but the OP wanted to know the rule and potential penalty involved and now it's all gone off at a tangent (as usual), with some posters doing the usual of twisting the story and coming up with their own decisions

 

[bobmac]

I'd agree to an extent Bob, but the OP wanted to know the rule and potential penalty involved and now it's all gone off at a tangent (as usual), with some posters doing the usual of twisting the story and coming up with their own decisions

The OP also said ''so I think he’s been harshly treated''

I was agreeing with him.

 

[rulie]

That's why I suggest discretion.
If he comes in the prizes then he should be penalised or DQ.
If he had a bad day, why kick him while he's down.

So, in a football match, where one side has had a player sent off already, the referee should use 'discretion' and not call any more fouls against that side?

 

[bobmac]

So, in a football match, where one side has had a player sent off already, the referee should use 'discretion' and not call any more fouls against that side?

The offending player has already been sent off, what his team mates do is nothing to do with him/her.
However, referees can use their discression when giving an accidental breach (yellow card) or a intentional breach (red card).

 

[chrisd]

The OP also said ''so I think he’s been harshly treated''

I was agreeing with him.

So the rule was administered and in doing so he was harshly treated??

This isn't football, in football the referee has discretion, in golf rules is rules

 

[Old Skier]

I wonder how many who are arguing against the decision given are or have been members of a committee who have to make these decisions. The flak that you get for not applying the right penalties is far greater than you get from the it’s to harsh brigade.

 

[RichA]

Maybe there's a lesson in it for folks like me in having a chat with a committee member about any queries before I sign my card and hand it in.
Am I right in saying that amendments can be agreed and made before the card is signed and submitted?
Maybe it's more of a communication thing then necessarily a black and white rules are rules thing. Many of us don't know the rules until we've unwittingly broken them.

 

[rulie]

Maybe there's a lesson in it for folks like me in having a chat with a committee member about any queries before I sign my card and hand it in.
Am I right in saying that amendments can be agreed and made before the card is signed and submitted?
Maybe it's more of a communication thing then necessarily a black and white rules are rules thing. Many of us don't know the rules until we've unwittingly broken them.

If you have Rules queries concerning your round just completed, it is entirely accepted and expected that you would discuss them with the Committee before returning your scorecard. This would include queries regarding your personal play and any other queries you witnessed.

 

[rulefan]

Maybe there's a lesson in it for folks like me in having a chat with a committee member about any queries before I sign my card and hand it in.
Am I right in saying that amendments can be agreed and made before the card is signed and submitted?
Maybe it's more of a communication thing then necessarily a black and white rules are rules thing. Many of us don't know the rules until we've unwittingly broken them.

As rulie says above.

At county and national events the recorder will always ask the player if there were any incidents or points he would like to raise or discuss before the card is formally returned. If all the players in the group (normal) are present they will all be asked individually and collectively.

 

[RichA]

Good to know. Like to think I'd discuss any issues with my playing partners as they happened. Certainly wouldn't be worrying about other groups.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

So , its happened in a competition, the player concerned submits a winning card (without adding the penalty) but it becomes known that he broke the rules in this fashion and pipped you to 2nd place but the trophy and prize money was yours if someone had not just "had a quiet word" with the winner. But you acted according to the rules as did the rest of the field - presumably you'd not question the lack of fairness to the rest of the field?

In this example, couldn't give a hoot, wouldn't bother me one jot. He hasn't gained an advantage so I'm not fazed by it. I know that isn't how golf rules work incidentally but it is how my mind processes it. (Before anyone makes the usual comment, I do follow the rules but this is a forum where discussion exists)

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Blimey - it’s a quite simple that the committee were wrong to DQ the player , it should have been a 2 shot penalty and move on.

And golf club committees don’t have “discretion” to ignore golf rules when it comes to qualifying competitions- each card has an affect on results and handicaps.

Just apply the rules - simple

 

[BubbaP]

Odd. I can get all the USGA stuff without any problems.

## off topic post ##
If memory serves I think you often quote USGA items. Not really important but I have been curious about this - I don't think you are US based. Do you just find it easier to navigate or something?

 

[rulefan]

## off topic post ##
If memory serves I think you often quote USGA items. Not really important but I have been curious about this - I don't think you are US based. Do you just find it easier to navigate or something?

I'm not US based but I prefer the parallel columns view.
Each to his own I suppose.