How would you have reacted?

[North Mimms]

I can't see why he conceded (apart from being a jerk)
He could still have chipped it stone dead for a 4, and you two putt for a 4...then he's 2 down, three to play

How can someone be such a sore loser when they haven't lost the match (yet)?

 

[Fyldewhite]

Was there any "previous" earlier in the round? or maybe bad feeling following your attempts to arrange the match? Sounds more like he's been bottling up some feelings and this was the straw that broke the camels back rather than just throwing the toys out over that one incident.....in his mind that is..... I fully agree you did nothing wrong here!!

How would I have reacted? Well, much the same though I wouldn't have played on, never do that in a match if my opponents don't. There's not a lot you can do really except walk in, endure the frosty silence, say thanks for the game and maybe sorry it ended like it did and bugger off safe in the knowledge that you are in the next round. Not nice but these things do sometimes happen unfortunately.

 

[woody69]

I would have absolutely laughed my tits off to be honest.

 

[duncan mackie]

How would you have honestly reacted to this behaviour?

more the situation than the behavior, but absolutely honestly as such things do occur from time to time...

1. I would have given him relief in the first place because I'm not there to win because a committee have failed to implement LR's appropriate to their course set up (we have significant indentations around our sprinkles in the fringe so we have it implemented).
2. The rest of it sounds like you couldn't have done anything to improve the ambiance and spirit of the game anyhow! Chalk it up to experience and hope your next opponents are more 'fun'

 

[woody69]

more the situation than the behavior, but absolutely honestly as such things do occur from time to time...

1. I would have given him relief in the first place because I'm not there to win because a committee have failed to implement LR's appropriate to their course set up (we have significant indentations around our sprinkles in the fringe so we have it implemented).
2. The rest of it sounds like you couldn't have done anything to improve the ambiance and spirit of the game anyhow! Chalk it up to experience and hope your next opponents are more 'fun'

I'm confused. Why would you have given him relief when he isn't entitled to it? I know that clubs have the option to enact a local rule that allows free relief when a sprinkler head is within two club-lengths of the putting surface, but if that isn't stipulated why offer relief? Surely that is a breach of the rules in itself as you are agreeing to waive a rule of golf?

 

[duncan mackie]

I'm confused. Why would you have given him relief when he isn't entitled to it? I know that clubs have the option to enact a local rule that allows free relief when a sprinkler head is within two club-lengths of the putting surface, but if that isn't stipulated why offer relief? Surely that is a breach of the rules in itself as you are agreeing to waive a rule of golf?

Let's not get into another confusing thread about the use of 1-3 in matchplay. The note to rule 2-5 is clear and unambiguous - "Note 1: A player may disregard a breach of the Rules by his opponent provided there is no agreement by the sides to waive a Rule (Rule 1-3)"

If he says 'I get relief from that sprinkler', and I say fine that's it - no issue. Whether I say 'fine I'm sure there's a local rule covering it (whether there is or isn't) or just grant relief etc etc isn't irrelevant.

If we stand on the first tee and agree that we will give relief from sprinklers within 2cl etc despite and knowing that the committee not having implemented that LR then that is a breach of 1-3.

 

[woody69]

Let's not get into another confusing thread about the use of 1-3 in matchplay. The note to rule 2-5 is clear and unambiguous - "Note 1: A player may disregard a breach of the Rules by his opponent provided there is no agreement by the sides to waive a Rule (Rule 1-3)"

If he says 'I get relief from that sprinkler', and I say fine that's it - no issue. Whether I say 'fine I'm sure there's a local rule covering it (whether there is or isn't) or just grant relief etc etc isn't irrelevant.

If we stand on the first tee and agree that we will give relief from sprinklers within 2cl etc despite and knowing that the committee not having implemented that LR then that is a breach of 1-3.

So if you agree to waive a rule of golf in advance, that is a breach. If you both agree to disregard a breach, then that is OK? Well that helps me understand the wording of that, so thanks.

 

[duncan mackie]

So if you agree to waive a rule of golf in advance, that is a breach. If you both agree to disregard a breach, then that is OK? Well that helps me understand the wording of that, so thanks.

no; if the opponent knows he's breaching the rules he would have to call a penalty.

it's only when one party believes his course of action is valid that the opponent may waive the breach he believes exists.

the corollary is that if both parties agree to an incorrect procedure through ignorance then it becomes 'correct' in the context of their match.

an example may help -

you and I are playing and on the second hole you don't like the way the tee marker is aligned with the fairway so you move it.

1. You don't realise/know that it's against the rules to do so. i know but choose to ignore it - all's fine.
2. You suddenly realise the implications of what you did and turn round to me and say ' I shouldn't have done that, what's the penalty?' - I advise you that it's loss of hole as long as you put it back where it was. If you don't put it back you are disqualified. You put it back, but loose the hole. If I say, it's normally loss of hole but I'll waive it this time then we are both disqualified.

I hope this clarifies.

 

[Retread61]

I am totally in the "give him relief and still beat the tw*t" camp.

One of the great things that Golf exposes is our true nature, a bad loser and a bad winner just show what kind of human being you are.

He didnt deserve to share the course with you.

 

[woody69]

no; if the opponent knows he's breaching the rules he would have to call a penalty.

it's only when one party believes his course of action is valid that the opponent may waive the breach he believes exists.

the corollary is that if both parties agree to an incorrect procedure through ignorance then it becomes 'correct' in the context of their match.

an example may help -

you and I are playing and on the second hole you don't like the way the tee marker is aligned with the fairway so you move it.

1. You don't realise/know that it's against the rules to do so. i know but choose to ignore it - all's fine.
2. You suddenly realise the implications of what you did and turn round to me and say ' I shouldn't have done that, what's the penalty?' - I advise you that it's loss of hole as long as you put it back where it was. If you don't put it back you are disqualified. You put it back, but loose the hole. If I say, it's normally loss of hole but I'll waive it this time then we are both disqualified.

I hope this clarifies.

So the moral to this story is if you breach a rule and suddenly realise it, try not to look guilty and hope you get away with it because the other person is too scared to say anything