Flooded bunkers

[chrisd]

This scenario happened yesterday

Per RandA

"What can a Committee do when it is known that some bunkers are flooded?

In terms of flooded bunkers, the Committee may not make a general Local Rule providing that all flooded bunkers are ground under repair. Such a Local Rule waives a penalty imposed by the Rules of Golf and would be contrary to Rule 33-8.

However, in exceptional circumstances, where certain bunkers are known to be flooded with casual water and there is no reasonable opportunity for the condition of these bunkers to improve, the Committee may introduce a Local Rule providing relief without penalty from these specific bunkers.

The Committee must be satisfied that the circumstances are exceptional and that providing relief without penalty from these particular bunkers is more appropriate than applying the normal Rules (Rule 25-1b(ii)).

By introducing a Local Rule and declaring the bunker to be ground under repair, this automatically takes away the hazard status of the bunker and allows for relief to be taken without penalty in accordance with Rule 25-1b(i), i.e. through the green.

The following wording is suggested for such a Local Rule:

“The flooded bunker on [insert the location of the bunker(s); e.g. left of 5th green] is ground under repair. If a player’s ball lies in that bunker or if that bunker interferes with the player’s stance or the area of his intended swing and the player wishes to take relief, he must take relief outside the bunker, without penalty, in accordance with Rule 25-1b(i). All other bunkers on the course, regardless of whether they contain water, maintain their status as hazards and the Rules apply according"



The notice at ours just said effectively " any flooded bunker should be treated as GUR and a free drop at the NPR can be taken. If not full flooded then play with a drop inside bunker but drop can be nearer he hole"

It was a qualifying comp - over to you ?

 

[rosecott]

Short term loan of your rule book to your committee.

 

[Imurg]

T
It was a qualifying comp

I think there's a fair chance it shouldn't have been!!

 

[Foxholer]

I think there's a fair chance it shouldn't have been!!

I agree.

Where only few are affected, the LR should be used. Where a significant number are flooded, then the course has changed so significantly that the comp should be cancelled/NQ-ised. County Authority might need to be consulted though.

 

[Colin L]

The notice at ours just said effectively " any flooded bunker should be treated as GUR and a free drop at the NPR can be taken. If not full flooded then play with a drop inside bunker but drop can be nearer the hole"

Apart from what has been said about classifying all flooded bunkers as GUR being explicitly prohibited, the Committee cannot allow a drop nearer the hole from a partially flooded one. That is waiving Rule 25 -1b(ii). Or is it a misprint and the LR says "not nearer the hole"?

 

[chrisd]

Apart from what has been said about classifying all flooded bunkers as GUR being explicitly prohibited, the Committee cannot allow a drop nearer the hole from a partially flooded one. That is waiving Rule 25 -1b(ii). Or is it a misprint and the LR says "not nearer the hole"?

To be honest Colin I had had a bust up a couple of weeks ago when the club messed up a Bogey comp rules, so, when I was told the comp rule with the flooded bunkers I was sceptical but not looking for another argument. The pro shop told us that any flooded bunker was GUR and a free NPOR drop and any bunkers with sand in were a drop which could be nearer the hole. As I did a 12 on the 1st courtesy of a wet compacted splodgy bunker I thought of others who probably took a free drop when maybe they shouldnt

 

[rulefan]

As Qualifying comps have to be played under the Rules of Golf it looks very like a non qualifier.

 

[chrisd]

As Qualifying comps have to be played under the Rules of Golf it looks very like a non qualifier.

Unless I bring it to their attention they won't know of the error (I guess). The last comp that was cocked up was still qualifying!

 

[Imurg]

I wasn't flavour of the month when we had a cock up a while back - the pick and place in the rough as well as the fairway one.

Our lowest handicapper shot something ridiculous like 64 playing off 1 but had his cut taken away thanks to me....Ooops

 

[Foxholer]

Unless I bring it to their attention they won't know of the error (I guess). The last comp that was cocked up was still qualifying!

If you've told them enough times, simply notify the Area Authority. I'd suggest you warn the Club that that is what you intend doing so first and give them sufficient time to get it right - but not so long as the result becomes a fait accompli!

As the Club is only delegated the authority to manage handicaps by the Area Authority, the Area Authority (also delegated authority from the appropriate Union) will get the club to sort it out very smartly.

It doesn't take much of a 'threat' from that source to get a club that has adopted the 'we can do anything we want' attitude to be brought back to reality.

Have you considered volunteering to help out - even just to set out a few procedures for the Pro Shop? It can take a fair amount of time, but can be rewarding too.

 

[chrisd]

I wasn't flavour of the month when we had a cock up a while back - the pick and place in the rough as well as the fairway one.

Our lowest handicapper shot something ridiculous like 64 playing off 1 but had his cut taken away thanks to me....Ooops

I pointed out to the secretary that he and the pro had got the comp wrong rules and it certainly isn't the way to win friends and influence people. Do I want to go the same route again when the pro was simply trying to do what he could to gt the comp played?

 

[Foxholer]

I pointed out to the secretary that he and the pro had got the comp wrong rules and it certainly isn't the way to win friends and influence people. Do I want to go the same route again when the pro was simply trying to do what he could to gt the comp played?

If you know for certain that they got it wrong, then it's tantamount to seeing someone cheat imo.

It has to be handled diplomatically, which is why I suggest the 'last chance' notification. And maybe personal delivery and a chat. Worth stressing that there shouldn't any specific criticism, as the various (vested interest) parties were attempting to do the right thing. However a club that is not applying the Congu rules is virtually equivalent to a player not applying Roles of Golf! The fact that it has a fairly visible effect may be embararssing, but that's tough really. In this case, it seems they need a bit of a wake-up call!

And as Rulefan posted, latest comp was not played using Rules of Golf, so automatically NQ imo.

 

[rulefan]

I pointed out to the secretary that he and the pro had got the comp wrong rules and it certainly isn't the way to win friends and influence people. Do I want to go the same route again when the pro was simply trying to do what he could to gt the comp played?

Hasn't the club got a comps committee? It is required to have one in order to comply with CONGU requirements. 6.1 Act as the Handicapping Authority for all Members for whom it is the Home Club subject to the
overall jurisdiction of the Union.
6.2 Ensure that the spirit and intent of the UHS is properly applied in the club. Failure by a club to comply
with this requirement may lead to a Union withdrawing the club’s right to act as a Handicapping
Authority or imposing such conditions as the Union considers appropriate. (See Note below)
6.3 Appoint a Handicap Committee comprised of a minimum of three persons, the majority of whom
must be Members.

 

[chrisd]

If you know for certain that they got it wrong, then it's tantamount to seeing someone cheat imo.

.

I think that's a bit strong Fox. The pro made a decision that he thought was right, everyone played, as far as I know, to the same rule. Ok the rule was wrongly applied but only as a technicality, it was ok to rule the water filled bunkers GUR but which ones should have been specifically detailed and not a blanket "any completely filled bunker" as the rule. Most people wouldn't know the rule and the RandA explanation that I read was not something the pro would probably have found just before the comp started.

I think accusations of cheating by anyone is too strong but an error was made and I am still pondering whether to bring the matter up

 

[chrisd]

Hasn't the club got a comps committee? It is required to have one in order to comply with CONGU requirements. 6.1 Act as the Handicapping Authority for all Members for whom it is the Home Club subject to the
overall jurisdiction of the Union.
6.2 Ensure that the spirit and intent of the UHS is properly applied in the club. Failure by a club to comply
with this requirement may lead to a Union withdrawing the club’s right to act as a Handicapping
Authority or imposing such conditions as the Union considers appropriate. (See Note below)
6.3 Appoint a Handicap Committee comprised of a minimum of three persons, the majority of whom
must be Members.

It does have a Golf Committee and a full time Secretary but on competition days as in most clubs, the pro looks after matters. I know of other local clubs where errors occur in running comps and mercifully it is pretty rare

 

[Foxholer]

I think that's a bit strong Fox. The pro made a decision that he thought was right, everyone played, as far as I know, to the same rule. Ok the rule was wrongly applied but only as a technicality, it was ok to rule the water filled bunkers GUR but which ones should have been specifically detailed and not a blanket "any completely filled bunker" as the rule. Most people wouldn't know the rule and the RandA explanation that I read was not something the pro would probably have found just before the comp started.

I think accusations of cheating by anyone is too strong but an error was made and I am still pondering whether to bring the matter up

I'm not saying it is cheating, nor that the intentions weren't good, just that they were simply wrong!

But you have seen a breach of the Rules that has been ignored.

Unless something gets done, it will continue to happen. The Pro simply wants comps played - it's a hassle to him/her - and the Secretary doesn't want the hassle either.

Btw. Nothing wrong from a Competition point of view; just as a Qualifier.

It seems to me that some sort of pre-comp check is required to ensure nothing untoward has arisen - HCap Secy may need to be consulted if there is. And some clear instructions for the Pro for any 'different' comps, like Bogey ones, would solve most problems. Doesn't guarantee success, but each step closer helps. Once found a comp course was about 250 yards shorter than the Measured one!

 

[Old Skier]

Short term loan of your rule book to your committee.

Clubs must have a handicap committee. I cannot find anything about a requirement for a comps committee. In a diplomatic way the pro should be informed of the mistake if you feel a genuine mistake has been made if only to stop it happening again.

 

[chrisd]

But you have seen a breach of the Rules that has been ignored.

Unless something gets done, it will continue to happen. The Pro simply wants comps played - it's a hassle to him/her - and the Secretary doesn't want the hassle either.

Btw. Nothing wrong from a Competition point of view; just as a Qualifier.

I was only sure today when I checked the rules. It is a breach but actually a very very minor breach. I don't believe that I have a responsibility to tell anyone but probably will do tomorrow as it can't be allowed to happen again. I am concerned that I will be seen as someone who nitpicks every situation and frankly I don't want that.

To be honest, had the sign been done correctly then everyone would have played precisely the same as they did on the day so it's a technical error really

 

[Foxholer]

I was only sure today when I checked the rules. It is a breach but actually a very very minor breach. I don't believe that I have a responsibility to tell anyone but probably will do tomorrow as it can't be allowed to happen again. I am concerned that I will be seen as someone who nitpicks every situation and frankly I don't want that.

To be honest, had the sign been done correctly then everyone would have played precisely the same as they did on the day so it's a technical error really

I can understand that approach. I'm not sure what I'd do in your position.

Depending how many were affected, taking bunkers out of play can have a significant effect on comp scores.

I'd certainly encourage you to prompt the Committee to improve the process - recognising that it's their responsibility, not the Pro's.

 

[chrisd]

I can understand that approach. I'm not sure what I'd do in your position.

Depending how many were affected, taking bunkers out of play can have a significant effect on comp scores.

I'd certainly encourage you to prompt the Committee to improve the process - recognising that it's their responsibility, not the Pro's.

Thanks Fox

My understanding is that at most golf clubs that on a Sunday morning at 7.30 am when people are about to start booking in for the days comp, that the pro shop usually represents the committee in making the immediate decisions, like, say, a delayed start for fog, there is generally very few committee members around at the time decisions are needed, also our pro sits on the golf committee. The problem seems to me that pros seem to know very few of the rules of golf and, particularly when they are more obscure and are in danger of getting them wrong whilst meaning well at the time.

At our place the Secretary runs the competitions but is never there at that time at weekends and I guess most clubs have a similar issue. I think that clubs should put a selected few people through rules courses and ask that one be on standby when a comp is being played. We play finals of knockout comps and play offs for ties in gold letter comps and I think that a qualified rules official would be useful to walk with players in that scenario, we had a former secretary/ rules man walk in a 4bbb final I was in and he had 3 issues to decide and advise on, all three being matters that would have lead to a bust up at the time had he not been there.