Matchplay - incorrect information

Liverbirdie said:
I thought so, it would be whether some other rule, of if a committee ruling comes into it on etiquette etc

It wont be going to a committee, enough damage has been done.

My recent question was are i,ii and iii some examples or only examples, just so I know for any future reference with regards to when using the rule book.
Click to expand...

Did you actually read what I said in Post #2?
 
Colin L said:
Did you actually read what I said in Post #2?
Click to expand...

Probably not as it was post #3 ;)

I don't believe there is a rule that covers this instance, I think the OP needs to take this on the chin(s) and accept he was beaten by the better man on the day.
 
Guys from my gathering the information in this thread your mates!


Give yourself a shake and question why your airing your dirty linen in public? Sportsmanship and a duffed pitch or not get a grip - friendship is worth more than a petty squabble!

Just saying.
 
This thread has confused me from post 1; for much of it I assumed it was part of an elaborate hoax to trick the rest of us into thinking it was real but obviously it is!

From the sounds of things it was a common case of when friends are playing serious rounds and the banter that goes on in bounce games should really be stopped because this sort of thing can happen. I've experienced similar myself when I've had to explain a rule to a friend during a club comp and he said I was being stricter than usual "just for the sake of it" and the rule was "stupid" and he wouldn't see how I needed to tell him to protect the rest of the field.

LB, sounds like you lost in a tough game and that always hurts but from Odvan's explanation it's clear (and you accept) that there was no malice involved.

You two need to get onto a course for a friendly round with a few cans of beer in the buggy and laugh this off. No one died. Don't let the friendship.
 
Odvan said:
Banter ripped out of the heart of the NWOOM as we know it and the comp, for me, has now been soured, massively and I'm considering pulling out. I've even been labelled a cheat in this thread (tongue in cheek is irrelevant with association).
Click to expand...

Haven't been keeping up on this thread until today. I guess this is a reference to my comment. I obviously badly misjudged the nature of the thread, thought it was all just a big joke between you guys and posted in that that vein. I apologise for any negative inference drawn, it certainly wasn't my intent to accuse anyone of cheating.
 
Ha watch out for those flying toys!

I though the answer was given right at the start?
 
FairwayDodger said:
Haven't been keeping up on this thread until today. I guess this is a reference to my comment. I obviously badly misjudged the nature of the thread, thought it was all just a big joke between you guys and posted in that that vein. I apologise for any negative inference drawn, it certainly wasn't my intent to accuse anyone of cheating.
Click to expand...

Karen, since Pete said the thread had ended, despite then carrying on (!), I have tried not to post back into it however on reading your post, felt compelled too.

You have no reason to apologise, I used your words out of the context they were written in. Anyone who's ever played a round with me will know that I couldn't give a monkeys cuss about winning, as it rarely happens :D. It'll be nice though one day if I ever do!

I think for me, the more that Pete has sought out a technicality to somehow get an A/S, it almost goes against the grain of "Odvan is an upstanding citizen"etc so your very loose and tongue in cheek remark, could have persuaded the untrained eye to think ill of me, when combining with Pete's efforts to find a breach. That's all. But I did also say that I didn't care if people got that impression, but that was just bravado :)

Pete has made is clear, as has our host, that nothing I did was intentional/malicious and in fact, it's probably nothing that any of our group wouldn't have done/said themselves in the same circumstances.

To close, I'd hate to see Pete bow out of the comp as would all the other guys and by way of this post, would ask you not too. I too would still like to play at BD as our usual troublesome foursome but if Stuey has paid, so be it.

As I said earlier in the thread, it'd be highly likely that he wins all his remaining games and gets to spank me/or overtake me later on in the comp and I'd be the first to laugh my head off and shake his hand (whilst calling him the usual names). He lives for the game and the social element of it too. I'd also hope and expect, that at the next major NW meet we have, both myself and Pete are ripped to shreds by everyone else.

I'd want and expect, nothing less.

Pete, I know you're up at the Open today (or think you are) but once back, let's go for a game, sooner rather than later. I'm away Thurs/Fri but could play late Sunday.
 
Can someone come and pick up all these toys and dummies and put them back in their respective prams before someone trips over them and does themselves an injury!!!:ears:
 
Hope you's do play soon boys, and clear the air :thup:



However, I wouldn't be holding your breathe for an offer of a host... :rofl:
 
Odvan said:
Karen, since Pete said the thread had ended, despite then carrying on (!), I have tried not to post back into it however on reading your post, felt compelled too.

You have no reason to apologise, I used your words out of the context they were written in. Anyone who's ever played a round with me will know that I couldn't give a monkeys cuss about winning, as it rarely happens :D. It'll be nice though one day if I ever do!

I think for me, the more that Pete has sought out a technicality to somehow get an A/S, it almost goes against the grain of "Odvan is an upstanding citizen"etc so your very loose and tongue in cheek remark, could have persuaded the untrained eye to think ill of me, when combining with Pete's efforts to find a breach. That's all. But I did also say that I didn't care if people got that impression, but that was just bravado :)

Pete has made is clear, as has our host, that nothing I did was intentional/malicious and in fact, it's probably nothing that any of our group wouldn't have done/said themselves in the same circumstances.

To close, I'd hate to see Pete bow out of the comp as would all the other guys and by way of this post, would ask you not too. I too would still like to play at BD as our usual troublesome foursome but if Stuey has paid, so be it.

As I said earlier in the thread, it'd be highly likely that he wins all his remaining games and gets to spank me/or overtake me later on in the comp and I'd be the first to laugh my head off and shake his hand (whilst calling him the usual names). He lives for the game and the social element of it too. I'd also hope and expect, that at the next major NW meet we have, both myself and Pete are ripped to shreds by everyone else.

I'd want and expect, nothing less.

Pete, I know you're up at the Open today (or think you are) but once back, let's go for a game, sooner rather than later. I'm away Thurs/Fri but could play late Sunday.
Click to expand...

No worries mate, I've not paid so as you were.
 
Colin L said:
Misleading his opponent as to which of the two balls was his is not "wrong information" in terms of Rule 9 since it is not about how many strokes B had taken. You have to look for a different Rule to apply. As far as I can see, there is no Rule or Decision that applies in particular to this situation. However, whether "joking" or not, Player B deliberately misled Player A to the extent that it made him play a riskier shot than he would have had he known B was in fact further away from the hole. Player A has,the choice of ignoring it or making a claim. In my view, the Committee would need to consider whether this was a serious enough matter for a DQ under Rule 33-7.

(Have I missed an applicable Rule, anyone?]
Click to expand...

Sorry all, I drove up to the open and back (from Liverpool) on the same day on Monday, had tonnes of stuff to do on Tuesday, as well as play a match and I was preparing for a trip away all day today.

I'll reply to some of the points made, in this post, and hopefully none of it is controversial, so Odvan wont need to reply, but hopefully it puts everything to bed, without any further recriminations.

This was the very first cogent reply, and yes I did read it. It did however, have an "however" in it, so still felt that it was slightly up in the air. I'll elaborate later. Thanks for the reply BTW, you rule guys provide a good service to the people on here, when clarification is needed.:thup:

Junior said:
Just to add.....there was certainly no deliberate deviousness or underhandedness here.....and all 3 of us knew that. It was just misunderstanding. The game was played in great spirit !!!
Click to expand...

Yes, the rest of the match, after that hole still carried on in the same spirit and we still had a pint afterwards.

FairwayDodger said:
Player B either a lying cheating scumbag or a misunderstood scamp, Player A chucking toys out his pram, Player C laughing his head off....

... or something like that!

:whistle:
Click to expand...

Karen, I've met you, I'm not sure Matt has, as I have since found out from the lads last night, and others on here, many people thought it was a wind up at first.

I know you are a decent person and no way would you pour oil onto the flames, and I know that what you said was said as a joke (Matt needs to learn when people are joking:)).

duncan mackie said:
This is the problem with a correct answer - and with rulefan agreeing there wasn't a whole lot of point adding more.

The clear issue remaining, but referenced neither in what was written to "ask Linda" nor (surprisingly) mentioned in the reply, is whether a valid timely claim was made ie before teeing off at the next hole did the player advise the other that he was claiming the hole because of the misinformation or not, and if he did was the situation referred to the committee properly? In one way I suspect it wasn't handled correctly as there's a suggestion that it could have been AS on one ruling - if the match has to be played to a result they should have continued to a result under both possible rulings.

If a timely claim wasn't made it can't be subsequently made once a possible ruling is established unless new facts emerge - which they clearly don't here. Therefore the result of the hole would stand as played, and the match concluded on that basis.
Click to expand...

I sent the "ask Linda" reply to Matt via e-mail (before putting it on the forum), thinking he would see the funny side, as her reply was "you should keep an eye on your opponents ball at all times". He didnt this time, and it only made him into more of an ogre.:whoo:

Colin L said:
Did you actually read what I said in Post #2?
Click to expand...

Yes I did, as mentioned above.

Kellfire said:
This thread has confused me from post 1; for much of it I assumed it was part of an elaborate hoax to trick the rest of us into thinking it was real but obviously it is!

From the sounds of things it was a common case of when friends are playing serious rounds and the banter that goes on in bounce games should really be stopped because this sort of thing can happen. I've experienced similar myself when I've had to explain a rule to a friend during a club comp and he said I was being stricter than usual "just for the sake of it" and the rule was "stupid" and he wouldn't see how I needed to tell him to protect the rest of the field.

LB, sounds like you lost in a tough game and that always hurts but from Odvan's explanation it's clear (and you accept) that there was no malice involved.

You two need to get onto a course for a friendly round with a few cans of beer in the buggy and laugh this off. No one died. Don't let the friendship.
Click to expand...

Very sensible post, and yes it was similar to the situation with your friend. Some rules arent enforced in bounce games that are in competition games - (I know this is against the rules BTW). I did actually inform him of relief on an earlier hole that he wasnt aware of, so playing it fair.

FairwayDodger said:
Haven't been keeping up on this thread until today. I guess this is a reference to my comment. I obviously badly misjudged the nature of the thread, thought it was all just a big joke between you guys and posted in that that vein. I apologise for any negative inference drawn, it certainly wasn't my intent to accuse anyone of cheating.
Click to expand...

I know you didnt Kaz, no problems at all.

My honest post was wondering if a rule had been broken, as I had read rule 9 after I got in and it didnt mention this situation. The default position on rule 9 was loss of hole, but at the same time this situation wasnt mentioned. No problem.

Someone said that the rules are made to be really clear, but after skimming through the R and A's decisions booklet on the many rulings they get asked on, this clearly isnt the case.

No matter, as someone has said on here, if someone cant point to the rule broken, then you cant pull someone on it. I can't.

I appreciate the time and effort that some did to get involved in the ruling, though - thats all I was looking for at the time.

And separately........
 
Last edited:
Odvan said:
Karen, since Pete said the thread had ended, despite then carrying on (!), I have tried not to post back into it however on reading your post, felt compelled too.

You have no reason to apologise, I used your words out of the context they were written in. Anyone who's ever played a round with me will know that I couldn't give a monkeys cuss about winning, as it rarely happens :D. It'll be nice though one day if I ever do!

I think for me, the more that Pete has sought out a technicality to somehow get an A/S, it almost goes against the grain of "Odvan is an upstanding citizen"etc so your very loose and tongue in cheek remark, could have persuaded the untrained eye to think ill of me, when combining with Pete's efforts to find a breach. That's all. But I did also say that I didn't care if people got that impression, but that was just bravado :)

Pete has made is clear, as has our host, that nothing I did was intentional/malicious and in fact, it's probably nothing that any of our group wouldn't have done/said themselves in the same circumstances.

To close, I'd hate to see Pete bow out of the comp as would all the other guys and by way of this post, would ask you not too. I too would still like to play at BD as our usual troublesome foursome but if Stuey has paid, so be it.

As I said earlier in the thread, it'd be highly likely that he wins all his remaining games and gets to spank me/or overtake me later on in the comp and I'd be the first to laugh my head off and shake his hand (whilst calling him the usual names). He lives for the game and the social element of it too. I'd also hope and expect, that at the next major NW meet we have, both myself and Pete are ripped to shreds by everyone else.

I'd want and expect, nothing less.

Pete, I know you're up at the Open today (or think you are) but once back, let's go for a game, sooner rather than later. I'm away Thurs/Fri but could play late Sunday.
Click to expand...

Wow, just wow.

I did intend to end the thread (for obvious reasons), but someone mentioned a few things (like if we discussed it before teeing off on the next hole etc, so just sought to clarify some points).

I wasn't trying to seek out a "technicality" and honestly thought that there would have been a loss of hole situation. If you had been in for 5 and I'd got an 8, I'd have let it go TBH, but as it led to a half instead of a win, it was a crucial part of the game (and in the end the result), which is why I kept on informing you that 2 potential results were still in play. The reason I kept on saying that you were an honest guy, and no underhandedness was in play was because I didnt want you being demonised. I said it a few times and will always stand by that that you are a top man and sportsman. Even when it took the turn for the worse, I still maintained this, and it was not a loose or cheap remark.

OOM - I honestly thought it would be better (for all concerned) if I bowed out. As you know I have just been made redundant in work, and I need to concentrate on getting a job 100%. Due to potential embarassment for Birchy and Val, Junior being in the crossfire, a souring of the comp potentially and from my side possibly not being able to finish all my matches I thought its better to sack it.

I think you also received a kind and proper e-mail from the Skem Jem knocking our heads together and advising that sacking it would be a bad thing, so I changed my mind. I tried to get a replacement for me, but he couldnt enter at short notice, so decided to stay in it, but cant promise to fulfil all my fixtures, but I'll try.

Yes, we'll play at BD, but can I have Glyn as my partner, (things must be bad);).

The thread didnt start too bad, but after you had used your "kestrel super strength" vouchers:whistle: it quickly went downhill. At that point I tried ringing you, and also left a message, but after that it generated even further. Maybe a conversation at that point may have stopped it. I went back on the attack as I felt that my integrity and fair play was being called into question, and that is something that I do hold dear. I am competitive and too proud at times, but as you know I am always a sportsman and congratulate people who beat me sincerely. This was what got my goat.

I fully expect and hope that the NW lads give us absolute pelters at our next meet, and we will absolutely deserve it, and we will laugh along with them, becuase we were both an absolute pair of gonks.

We'll get a game in, we'll have a pint and we can have a "who looks the most sheepish" comp off scratch.

Good to have a quick chat today, and everythings mended, as far as I'm concerned, mate. If not for one thing, we have kept the forum entertained.

Your a good mate, a good chap and when I said that this would prove expensive, I expected the loss of our friendship, but long may it continue.

I'll leave the thread up for a day, but if after that the mods can lock it, I'd appreciate it.

And to finish, guess who I bumped into within 5 minutes of being on the course at Monday's open - you couldn't make it up, could you:-




And before anyone asks, no I didn't ask!:angry:
 

Attachments

  • Paromor.jpg
    Paromor.jpg
    16 KB · Views: 105
Did you bore Mr Parrimor with your ruling as well and get him to insert Peters rules into the 2016 edition :D

Did you mention the fact you had to have someone else in the singles matchplay tagging along coz he is signing you on at a cheaper rate at guest fees and your too tight to pay full whack ;)

Anyway cant carry on as much as I would like to take the mickey out of you even more as I am never going to stop looking, never going to stop looking for Lindaaaaaaaaaa :whoo:
 
Liverbirdie said:
This was the very first cogent reply, and yes I did read it. It did however, have an "however" in it, so still felt that it was slightly up in the air. I'll elaborate later. Thanks for the reply BTW, you rule guys provide a good service to the people on here, when clarification is needed.:thup:
Click to expand...

That's appreciated, thanks. As you saw, Linda was in agreement about the etiquette consideration. Her additional advice to be aware of your opponent's ball at all times is of course sound but I'm sure she didn't mean that a player is exonerated from deliberately misinforming his opponent about something when he had taken his eye off the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Views on Florida scramble rule please
Replies
9
Views
592
Hxck
H
Skytot
Kicking ball
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
salfordlad
S
Kennysarmy
What's the ruling if two moving balls collide?
Replies
3
Views
579
rulie
R
C
Proper drop water hazard
Replies
3
Views
746
jim8flog
jim8flog
dazzler
Wrong Handicaps in Matchplay.
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
Colin L
Colin L
Top