DQ'd from Competition under rule 3.3b

rulefan

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
11,734
"The Committee MAY request that players assist the Committee by completing scorecard related tasks that are the Committee's responsibility. The Committee must not apply a penalty to a player under the Rules of Golf if he or she fails to comply with these requests or makes a mistake in doing so, but the Committee may provide a disciplinary sanction for a player who fails repeatedly to comply with such a request"
 

tobybarker

Active member
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
206
I was pointing out that there is a rule that Says the committee may do something but that it isn't binding..... Not much of a rule.
 

Foxholer

Major Champion
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
23,466
Location
Wasting away again in Margaritaville
"The Committee MAY request that players assist the Committee by completing scorecard related tasks that are the Committee's responsibility. The Committee must not apply a penalty to a player under the Rules of Golf if he or she fails to comply with these requests or makes a mistake in doing so, but the Committee may provide a disciplinary sanction for a player who fails repeatedly to comply with such a request"
So?
It then goes on to define what can happen if the player doesn't do so.
 

Foxholer

Major Champion
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
23,466
Location
Wasting away again in Margaritaville
I was pointing out that there is a rule that Says the committee may do something but that it isn't binding..... Not much of a rule.
Simply irrelevant if the circumstance described doesn't happen - just like many other Rules. In fact there are relatively few actual direct (what you must do) Rules but plenty of such indirect (what happens if...?) ones.
 

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
11,299
Location
Yeovil
All our scorecard and labelling is done by volunteers and we still manage it - why would the number of holes matter or who runs the club 🤷‍♂️
One of the things for us is that a lot of the comps are optional and players can decide when they turn up if they want to play in it.

I have always maintained it comes down to the old phrase of "teach a man to fish..." if players are in the habit of usually having the card done for them that are much more likely to make mistakes if they have to do it for themselves occasionally. We had first hand experience of this in our seniors comps pre WHS they were always done for them the night before and left with them sign in book at 7 am the next morning. When I pointed out to the person he would have to start to do the cards in the early hours or very early in the morning he stopped doing it.

One of the things I do like with the recent change though is if the committee make a mistake on the card the player is not responsible for the mistake.

2. Interpretation 3.3b(4)/2 – Player May be Exempt From Penalty When Committee Provides a Scorecard With an Incorrect Handicap Until further notice, a National Association (Authorized Association as defined in the Rules of Handicapping) may adopt a policy that alters the provisions in Interpretation 3.3b(4)/2. With such a policy in place, it means that if a Committee provides a player with a scorecard containing the incorrect handicap and the error is not corrected before the player returns the scorecard, this will be treated as an administrative mistake by the Committee. This means that the player is not penalized if the incorrect handicap on the returned scorecard is the handicap provided by the Committee. There is no time limit for correcting the mistake.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,531
Location
Edinburgh
What's your issue with that? We've just ordered the same so that folks understand what is being asked for.
Neither Handicap Index nor Playing Handicap are asked for. What's the point of the the boxes - especially for Playing Handicap which in a medal in our part of the world would mean working our 95% of the exact value of your Course Index Handicap, not only an unnecessary task but also a wholly unreasonable one.

I argued at my own club that the card should only have a box for what is required of the player by the Rules - Course Handicap. Keep it simple and avoid creating opportunities for error.
I lost :)
 
Last edited:

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
4,500
Neither Handicap Index nor Playing Handicap are asked for. What's the point of the the boxes - especially for Playing Handicap which in a medal in our part of the world would mean working our 95% of the exact value of your Course Index Handicap, not only an unnecessary taks but also a wholly unreasonable one.

I argued at my own club that the card should only have a box for what is required of the player by the Rules - Course Handicap. Keep it simple and avoid creating opportunities for error.
I lost :)
Interesting. England Golf strongly recommended having all 3 when I asked, and I strongly agree. They may not all be required, but they certainly make it a hell of a lot clearer for club golfers, many of whom struggle to distinguish between index, course handicap and playing handicap.
 

Banchory Buddha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2021
Messages
1,046
All our scorecard and labelling is done by volunteers and we still manage it - why would the number of holes matter or who runs the club 🤷‍♂️
It's very unusual indeed for a 9 holer to have a pro, or any paid staff - was my point.

There's absolutely no need for volunteers to be doing this, is it really so hard for a member to fill in half a dozen words on a piece of paper?
 

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
11,299
Location
Yeovil
Neither Handicap Index nor Playing Handicap are asked for. What's the point of the the boxes - especially for Playing Handicap which in a medal in our part of the world would mean working our 95% of the exact value of your Course Index Handicap, not only an unnecessary task but also a wholly unreasonable one.

I argued at my own club that the card should only have a box for what is required of the player by the Rules - Course Handicap. Keep it simple and avoid creating opportunities for error.
I lost :)
Strokes Allowed (playing handicap) has been on virtually every card I have ever seen in over 40 years of playing. Remember is a card is not just for singles medal/stblfrd play. I do not think repeatedly asking an opponent in match play "how many shots are you getting" would do go down well.

What would have been simpler is if the National Authority had said it is Handicap Index that must be on the card.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,531
Location
Edinburgh
Strokes Allowed (playing handicap) has been on virtually every card I have ever seen in over 40 years of playing. Remember is a card is not just for singles medal/stblfrd play. I do not think repeatedly asking an opponent in match play "how many shots are you getting" would do go down well.

What would have been simpler is if the National Authority had said it is Handicap Index that must be on the card.
Plenty of good reasons were giving for not taking my advice. But strokes given/received in a match isn't a playing handicap and so that wasn't one of them. ;)

I must say, though, that I've never written down the number of strokes I'm getting or giving in a match. I just circle the SI of the holes where the strokes occur. Which hasn't much to do with anything.
 
Last edited:

Old Skier

Tour Winner
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
9,432
Location
Instow - play in North Devon
Interesting. England Golf strongly recommended having all 3 when I asked, and I strongly agree. They may not all be required, but they certainly make it a hell of a lot clearer for club golfers, many of whom struggle to distinguish between index, course handicap and playing handicap.
I think they suggest all three in the hope that players put all three in avoiding all the “what’s required “ questions.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,531
Location
Edinburgh
I'm not pushing the matter as there are, I recognise, other reasons for including the ones that are not required, just curious about the thinking. On this point alone of avoiding the "what's required" question , doesn't a single box for your handicap, labelled Course Handicap, better avoid it by indicating the one and only figure to be entered? There are, after all, six different ways in which you can order three numbers in three boxes, only one of which is correct.

Just asking, as they say.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
180
Location
Inverurie Aberdeenshire
I'm not pushing the matter as there are, I recognise, other reasons for including the ones that are not required, just curious about the thinking. On this point alone of avoiding the "what's required" question , doesn't a single box for your handicap, labelled Course Handicap, better avoid it by indicating the one and only figure to be entered? There are, after all, six different ways in which you can order three numbers in three boxes, only one of which is correct.

Just asking, as they say.
I suspect the comp sec would end up getting lots of queries from players who lose a shot under 95% for individual strokeplay competitions complaining they’d scored a shot/point better than the results show!
 
Top