How would you have reacted? 2

[rosecott]

Nothing hurts like the truth either LP. And the truth is the starter is there to protect the course and the club policy - not the to uphold the progress of matches which according to the rules of golf have completed a stipulated round.

Don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

2-3. Winner of Match

A match is won when one side leads by a number of holes greater than the number remaining to be played.

If there is a tie, the Committee may extend the stipulated round by as many holes as are required for a match to be won.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

2-3. Winner of Match

A match is won when one side leads by a number of holes greater than the number remaining to be played.

If there is a tie, the Committee may extend the stipulated round by as many holes as are required for a match to be won.

Surely your quote shows him to be correct? By saying "may extend the stipulated round", this signifies that if it isn't extended, it has finished....

 

[nemicu]

Correct. At the completion of 18 holes, there was no winner at that time. And the committee may (i.e. they have the discretion to, but not always necessary) extend the match to a conclusion.

 

[rosecott]

Surely your quote shows him to be correct? By saying "may extend the stipulated round", this signifies that if it isn't extended, it has finished....

Correct. At the completion of 18 holes, there was no winner at that time. And the committee may (i.e. they have the discretion to, but not always necessary) extend the match to a conclusion.

Look at the Conditions of Competition of any Matchplay knockout and you will see that the committee, at any club I have ever played (and there have been many), will always decree that that the stipulated round is extended until the conclusion of the match.

 

[nemicu]

Look at the Conditions of Competition of any Matchplay knockout and you will see that the committee, at any club I have ever played (and there have been many), will always decree that that the stipulated round is extended until the conclusion of the match.

That may well be true, but cannot be assumed to mean immediately after completion of 18 holes. It would appear that this opinion was not held by the starter (i.e. with immediate effect) and consequently the extension of a match need not be immediately after the round finishes. The OP had options to wait or reschedule, but his PP chose instead to concede. End of story.

 

[Fish]

where does everyone get "have the right" from?

I haven't read all the replies but the fact that your 'in play' still and the others waiting on the tee aren't is a significant fact.

At my old club it is written that if you are holing out on the 9th or 18th greens, you are not allowed to tee off in front of that group if they are playing through, subsequently if a match goes to the 19th hole and people are on the tee, they would have right of passage, not just because of the local rule but again, they are seen as being 'in-play'.

If another group was behind them, it is said they have to then alternate to be fair to those on the tee waiting to start.

 

[GB72]

At my club it is one group allowed to tee off the 1st 10th or 19th tee ahead of a group already playing a round. Makes sense to me

 

[nemicu]

It ALL circumstances, the committee should comply with rule 33-6 (which means posting the process in advance).
Decision 33-6/1 applies - as does rule 2-5.
At the time in question, the starter is a duly appointed representative of the committee and his decision should be final.
Understand that rule 2-3 concerning settling ties, the term may rather than shall (as in rule 33-6) is used. For the committee and players involved, there is a distinct difference between "may" and "shall" as per the rules of golf.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Cant believe this is still being dragged on.

One easy way around the starter is the groups waiting allowing the people finishing the comp to play through them - ie as per etiquette - allowing a quicker group to play through - simple - and that is once again using common sense.

 

[nemicu]

I can't believe it's going on either, but since everybody wants to split hairs over a match that has been concluded by concession, it's fair to say that common sense seems to have gone out of the window.

 

[North Mimms]

If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?

 

[GB72]

If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?

Nope

 

[chrisd]

I can't believe it's going on either, but since everybody wants to split hairs over a match that has been concluded by concession, it's fair to say that common sense seems to have gone out of the window.

We're only splitting hairs because you won't accept what would and should happen, and does at most of our clubs, and you want to argue pedantically about the answer that most of the club members and sane people on here gave, which was that the starter was a complete numpty and it was obvious that they should have been allowed to play through and complete their match at which point the PP wouldn't have cleared off!

 

[nemicu]

Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much?
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.

 

[North Mimms]

If this is a contest to see who can get the last word, can I play?

I like this game....

 

[chrisd]

Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much?
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.

I've read some claptrap on the forum over the years and this is certainly up for this years award entitled CLEARLY MISSING THE POINT

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Here we go again with the would and should brigade - and those who think they knew and understood the situation above anyone else.
I cannot accept what should or would happen, simply because I am not a member of that club and have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation. Some clubs for instance do not use sudden death for ties and require another 18 holes for matches. As stated, that is a matter for the committee - or in their absence, a matter for the players involved.
The OP had numerous options in which to remain in the match, but for reasons which are equally unknown the PP opted to concede. That is not the fault of the starter, but solely lies with the PP - and their apparent lack of nous. Trying to alter the fact that the match ended when the PP conceded much?
The OP asked for an opinion of reaction and I gave it on page one. Then everybody piled on the the starter like it was his fault - pretty soon you'll uncover the starter was guilty of the Kennedy assassination.

Tosh and your replies on here smack of fishing trips looking for reactions

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I've read some claptrap on the forum over the years and this is certainly up for this years award entitled CLEARLY MISSING THE POINT

Chris - it appears that there are some golfers who will not accept anything that is not written down - which is a bit of a problem in golf as so much of our etiquette and aspects of courtesy to other players has evolved over time and is not explicitly written down - even although it may generally be accepted the world over. Maybe we take an old-fashioned view of things and must accept the new order - that is along the lines of - if it ain't written down and it doesn't suit me then I will choose whether to bother about it - and if I choose to ignore it then tough - I've paid my money and that's it.

 

[chrisd]

Chris - it appears that there are some golfers who will not accept anything that is not written down - which is a bit of a problem in golf as so much of our etiquette and aspects of courtesy to other players has evolved over time and is not explicitly written down - even although it may generally be accepted the world over. Maybe we take an old-fashioned view of things and must accept the new order - that is along the lines of - if it ain't written down and it doesn't suit me then I will choose whether to bother about it - and if I choose to ignore it then tough - I've paid my money and that's it.

Quite likely that's right SILH and nemicu, like some other posters we see from time to time, just ignores what reasonable and rational arguments are spelt out and insist that we are all marching out of step except him and Slab, the evolving of etiquette and protocol being what sensible people arrive at through years of experience!

This issue is getting more stupid than the recent "bigger holes for people with the yips" nonsense, a while back!

 

[nemicu]

Evolving etiquette? Ignores rational arguments? Using reason? Protocols?
Am I missing something here?
Presumably, these are the same etiquette and protocols you are using when you choose to totally ignore or respect the decision of a representative of club policy? (that's the starter for those of you who don't know)
Etiquette, courtesy and common sense are all fine qualities to possess, but when you're being selective in their application to suit your own ends, then I'm afraid you've missed the point.
Anybody with the slightest amount of etiquette would have accepted the decision of the starter and moved on.