KO Matchplay played off Yellow instead White Tees

[doublebogey7]

» If two or more players agree to ignore any Rule or penalty they know applies
and any of those players have started the round, they are disqualified (even
if they have not yet acted on the agreement).

Applying your logic if I have never read any of the Rules of Golf I cannot be penalised for infringing them.

They have not agreed to waive a rule of golf, in fact we don't know even if they have agreed to waive a term of competetion. It sounds to me as if they did not know they should have been playing from the whites and under Rule 1.3b players are only disqualified if they agree not to apply Rules they know applies.

 

[jim8flog]

It sounds to me as if they did not know they should have been playing from the whites

Therein lies the rub none of us know and without the full facts how we we make a full judgement.

I read it as they decided to make a decision to play off the yellows rather than the whites.

The op has not made any further comments since asking the question.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Therein lies the rub none of us know and without the full facts how we we make a full judgement.

I read it as they decided to make a decision to play off the yellows rather than the whites.

We accidentally played a greensomes match off our back tees last year. Both pairs assumed we were off the backs as every other knockout is played from them.

We won and were surprised when our opponents in the following round went to play from the next tees up.

 

[2blue]

Therein lies the rub none of us know and without the full facts how we we make a full judgement.

I read it as they decided to make a decision to play off the yellows rather than the whites.

The op has not made any further comments since asking the question.

I don't know & I haven't asked but I'd guess that they simply thought they could just choose the tee.... simple as that. The final outcome was that the result stands. Thanks for all the inputs!!

 

[4LEX]

Never known any knock out not to be off the white tees, so amazed if both weren't aware of that.

Offer a rematch or DQ them both IMO.

 

[IanMcC]

Handicap Committee interviews both players. If they knowingly used the wrong tees, both DQ'd. If they didnt know the T&C, result stands. Then, move on.

 

[rulie]

Handicap Committee interviews both players. If they knowingly used the wrong tees, both DQ'd. If they didnt know the T&C, result stands. Then, move on.

I see the result as a dq or match stands as played, but no replay option.

 

[Neilds]

I know this won’t be a popular opinion but they haven’t affected the competition in any way so why not just let the competition carry on. Nothing to worry about, then result stands, move on.


But that may just be common sense

 

[woofers]

I know this won’t be a popular opinion but they haven’t affected the competition in any way so why not just let the competition carry on. Nothing to worry about, then result stands, move on.


But that may just be common sense

What would your opinion be if it did “affect the competition in any way”, e.g it was the semi-final or final ?
All we are trying to establish here is what the outcome should be according to the Rules of Golf, and we appear to be struggling to do that.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

I know this won’t be a popular opinion but they haven’t affected the competition in any way so why not just let the competition carry on. Nothing to worry about, then result stands, move on.


But that may just be common sense

Whaaaat. They should have their heads on spikes by the first tee to serve as a warning to others.

 

[Neilds]

What would your opinion be if it did “affect the competition in any way”, e.g it was the semi-final or final ?
All we are trying to establish here is what the outcome should be according to the Rules of Golf, and we appear to be struggling to do that.

Maybe I should have said that it doesn’t affect anyone else in the competition. The match was played with both players using the same tees and one won. Your ‘whataboutery’ is irrelevant as it would never happen in any other round of the competition as they would have had the error pointed out to them - unless the next opponent also played off the wrong tees

 

[Swango1980]

I know this won’t be a popular opinion but they haven’t affected the competition in any way so why not just let the competition carry on. Nothing to worry about, then result stands, move on.


But that may just be common sense

I'd then wonder how far that theory can be taken?

What if they decided to toss a coin as neither could be bothered playing the match at all. Or, what if they were playing at an away course, and decided to play their match there? There are probably a whole host of things that they could do differently to the terms of competition, and ultimately one of them is going to end up going through to the next round, without impacting any of the other matches up to that point.

If they could just decide what tees to play off, is there any actual point is the Terms of Competition stating the tees at all? The terms could be more broad, like competitors can choose what tees they want to play off, and if no agreement can be made, play of the longer tees.

It seems to make sense that both players should be DQ for ignoring the Terms of Competition, and they've only themselves to blame. Of course, if this happened to be the final, I'm not sure what the ultimate outcome of the competition would be. No winner that year? Ask the beaten semi finalists to play? Seems messy.

 

[clubchamp98]

I'd then wonder how far that theory can be taken?

What if they decided to toss a coin as neither could be bothered playing the match at all. Or, what if they were playing at an away course, and decided to play their match there? There are probably a whole host of things that they could do differently to the terms of competition, and ultimately one of them is going to end up going through to the next round, without impacting any of the other matches up to that point.

If they could just decide what tees to play off, is there any actual point is the Terms of Competition stating the tees at all? The terms could be more broad, like competitors can choose what tees they want to play off, and if no agreement can be made, play of the longer tees.

It seems to make sense that both players should be DQ for ignoring the Terms of Competition, and they've only themselves to blame. Of course, if this happened to be the final, I'm not sure what the ultimate outcome of the competition would be. No winner that year? Ask the beaten semi finalists to play? Seems messy.

As you say “chose your tees but if no agreement you must play the white tees!” Seems logical.

My only concern is playing the yellows might change how many shots one player gets off his op.

 

[D-S]

Was this the first round of the knockout? If so, then ignorance of the rules by both parties is a legitimate excuse. If not, and one of them played off the correct tees in the first round (and for example the other had had a bye) then I’d be asking questions.

 

[CountLippe]

I'd then wonder how far that theory can be taken?

What if they decided to toss a coin as neither could be bothered playing the match at all. Or, what if they were playing at an away course, and decided to play their match there? There are probably a whole host of things that they could do differently to the terms of competition, and ultimately one of them is going to end up going through to the next round, without impacting any of the other matches up to that point.

If they could just decide what tees to play off, is there any actual point is the Terms of Competition stating the tees at all? The terms could be more broad, like competitors can choose what tees they want to play off, and if no agreement can be made, play of the longer tees.

It seems to make sense that both players should be DQ for ignoring the Terms of Competition, and they've only themselves to blame. Of course, if this happened to be the final, I'm not sure what the ultimate outcome of the competition would be. No winner that year? Ask the beaten semi finalists to play? Seems messy.

To be fair, on more than one occasion i've decided a knockout match by tossing a coin when we couldn't agree a suitable date before the deadline. I've also played a knockout at a different course (our course was closed so we took advantage of a reciprocal at a local course). I've also had a match determined by who got the lowest comp score, and played a 4BBB knockout as singles. All were satisfactory to the competition commitee. Bascially, if you can't play the match by the deadline, agree who goes through by other means or alternatively noone goes though.

 

[clubchamp98]

I'd then wonder how far that theory can be taken?

What if they decided to toss a coin as neither could be bothered playing the match at all. Or, what if they were playing at an away course, and decided to play their match there? There are probably a whole host of things that they could do differently to the terms of competition, and ultimately one of them is going to end up going through to the next round, without impacting any of the other matches up to that point.

If they could just decide what tees to play off, is there any actual point is the Terms of Competition stating the tees at all? The terms could be more broad, like competitors can choose what tees they want to play off, and if no agreement can be made, play of the longer tees.

It seems to make sense that both players should be DQ for ignoring the Terms of Competition, and they've only themselves to blame. Of course, if this happened to be the final, I'm not sure what the ultimate outcome of the competition would be. No winner that year? Ask the beaten semi finalists to play? Seems messy.

Yes my mate and me were drawn against each other in the KO
We had a day out to Birkdale and played it over 36 holes.
I won 5&4.

 

[rulefan]

Conceding the Match is allowed any time before the result of the match is decided, including before the players start the match. It would seem the players may make some sort of agreement (eg tossing a coin or playing Snakes & Ladders) to determine who will concede the match before they start the actual match.