Matchplay - incorrect information

Stuart_C said:
Odvan, I'll have your place pm your bank details and I'll send you the money ;)
Click to expand...

Liverbirdie said:
OK, have it your way.

You could have still called me back, still up for another hour.

I've pointed out on here that you are a good man, I've also pointed out that you didnt deliberately mislead me, you were just joking, but it led me to play a different shot because you didnt correct my thinking before I played my shot.

This 3 club wind is a crock of - I maintain that all words were heard in the conversation - you know that. We all know that. No gesturing, no hard of hearing - everything was heard very clearly by all parties.

I put it in the forum to ask a rules question, no names mentioned. No-one has given me a definitive answer, and only give me possible outcomes, including possible disqualification, which I categorically wouldnt want. I also said this thread wasnt about characterisation and just about the rule, if there is one. You have turned this into a personal thing.

I tried phoning you to try to patch up and come to some common ground.

I'm still here.
Click to expand...

Pete,

It was a 20mph wind, minimum. *sighs*

Anyway, you really don't get it do you?

This isn't about the 'circumstances' of the alleged 'offence' (which, by the way has been clarified, to put it bluntly, as 'tough ****' as opposed to 'possible outcomes').

That in itself lets everyone know that you are actually still desperate for a ruling to give you an A/S!! Surely, surely, it doesn't mean that much to you?? Does it???

The Pete I thought I knew and loved would baton down the hatches, win his next 3 matches, and spank my arse if we got drawn together again in the comp!!

But Jesus wept. Please understand, you must see it!!

Its about the very nature of the claim. Its still ridiculous to think, particularly in the way you play our (North West lads) games, that you have actually gone to these lengths, including some independent online rules expert, to cling onto the hope that you'll get a favourable ruling.

And it isn't even a wind up, is it!!

The OOM games are virtually bounce games, that is the whole premise behind them.

You play your bounce games (that are always for cash) with a determination to win, no probs with that, I/we love it and they're fantastic. The OOM is no different, except there's an entry fee and prize pot, either way, we're playing for a bit of cash, some prizes and friendly bragging rights. The scale doesn't matter, the manner in which we set out to play, does. That's why the NW crew are renowned for being the tightest and whereby many a good crack and meets are had. And that's true. It's feckin' ace. Long may it continue...

And then this...

My earlier post tried to tell you that you break the rules in every bounce game you play but because it's banter, it's ok.... The shoe is on the other foot and all of a sudden and as the teenagers would say, "OMG"!!!

You've brought it on here and some replies haven't exactly been favourable about me and my 'reputation' may have been compromised. That isn't on, at all. But I couldn't care less about people who don't know me.

Pete, it's completely unjust and hypocritical for you, yes you, to bring this to the table because you are the main culprit and the main activist, for rule breaking that affects your opponent, banter or not. And as you know, I'm more often than not, the victim ;). The examples were given earlier. How silly and petty of me to compare eh....

And that is why I'm absolutely shocked that you even contemplated to start this thread in the first place.

You're stubborn and so am I.

Linda said you've learned a valuable lesson.

Here's another one, practise what you preach :thup:
 
Just seen ha last post as I was typing war peace whilst sipping my 7th bottle of vodka.

you know what the right thing to do is, matey. You know.

xxx
 
Odvan said:
Pete,

It was a 20mph wind, minimum. *sighs*

Anyway, you really don't get it do you?

This isn't about the 'circumstances' of the alleged 'offence' (which, by the way has been clarified, to put it bluntly, as 'tough ****' as opposed to 'possible outcomes').

That in itself lets everyone know that you are actually still desperate for a ruling to give you an A/S!! Surely, surely, it doesn't mean that much to you?? Does it???

The Pete I thought I knew and loved would baton down the hatches, win his next 3 matches, and spank my arse if we got drawn together again in the comp!!

But Jesus wept. Please understand, you must see it!!

Its about the very nature of the claim. Its still ridiculous to think, particularly in the way you play our (North West lads) games, that you have actually gone to these lengths, including some independent online rules expert, to cling onto the hope that you'll get a favourable ruling.

And it isn't even a wind up, is it!!

The OOM games are virtually bounce games, that is the whole premise behind them.

You play your bounce games (that are always for cash) with a determination to win, no probs with that, I/we love it and they're fantastic. The OOM is no different, except there's an entry fee and prize pot, either way, we're playing for a bit of cash, some prizes and friendly bragging rights. The scale doesn't matter, the manner in which we set out to play, does. That's why the NW crew are renowned for being the tightest and whereby many a good crack and meets are had. And that's true. It's feckin' ace. Long may it continue...

And then this...

My earlier post tried to tell you that you break the rules in every bounce game you play but because it's banter, it's ok.... The shoe is on the other foot and all of a sudden and as the teenagers would say, "OMG"!!!

You've brought it on here and some replies haven't exactly been favourable about me and my 'reputation' may have been compromised. That isn't on, at all. But I couldn't care less about people who don't know me.

Pete, it's completely unjust and hypocritical for you, yes you, to bring this to the table because you are the main culprit and the main activist, for rule breaking that affects your opponent, banter or not. And as you know, I'm more often than not, the victim ;). The examples were given earlier. How silly and petty of me to compare eh....

And that is why I'm absolutely shocked that you even contemplated to start this thread in the first place.

You're stubborn and so am I.

Linda said you've learned a valuable lesson.

Here's another one, practise what you preach :thup:
Click to expand...

Still writing off for jobs, so this will be responded to tomorrow, if I get a chance.

And you dont have to tell me the spirit of the OOM - I was the eejit that thought of it in the first place, so knobs like you without mates, could get games at fantastic courses like Royal Lee park.

It's part of my community work.;)

Odvan said:
Just seen ha last post as I was typing war peace whilst sipping my 7th bottle of vodka.

you know what the right thing to do is, matey. You know.

xxx
Click to expand...

I am not desparate to have an A/S, but just what the right rule is, thats what I've wanted all along.

If I'm wrong, as I've said all along, I will congratulate on your win.

Night,night.
 
Odvan said:
Pete,

It was a 20mph wind, minimum. *sighs*

Anyway, you really don't get it do you?

This isn't about the 'circumstances' of the alleged 'offence' (which, by the way has been clarified, to put it bluntly, as 'tough ****' as opposed to 'possible outcomes').

That in itself lets everyone know that you are actually still desperate for a ruling to give you an A/S!! Surely, surely, it doesn't mean that much to you?? Does it???

The Pete I thought I knew and loved would baton down the hatches, win his next 3 matches, and spank my arse if we got drawn together again in the comp!!

But Jesus wept. Please understand, you must see it!!

Its about the very nature of the claim. Its still ridiculous to think, particularly in the way you play our (North West lads) games, that you have actually gone to these lengths, including some independent online rules expert, to cling onto the hope that you'll get a favourable ruling.

And it isn't even a wind up, is it!!

The OOM games are virtually bounce games, that is the whole premise behind them.

You play your bounce games (that are always for cash) with a determination to win, no probs with that, I/we love it and they're fantastic. The OOM is no different, except there's an entry fee and prize pot, either way, we're playing for a bit of cash, some prizes and friendly bragging rights. The scale doesn't matter, the manner in which we set out to play, does. That's why the NW crew are renowned for being the tightest and whereby many a good crack and meets are had. And that's true. It's feckin' ace. Long may it continue...

And then this...

My earlier post tried to tell you that you break the rules in every bounce game you play but because it's banter, it's ok.... The shoe is on the other foot and all of a sudden and as the teenagers would say, "OMG"!!!

You've brought it on here and some replies haven't exactly been favourable about me and my 'reputation' may have been compromised. That isn't on, at all. But I couldn't care less about people who don't know me.

Pete, it's completely unjust and hypocritical for you, yes you, to bring this to the table because you are the main culprit and the main activist, for rule breaking that affects your opponent, banter or not. And as you know, I'm more often than not, the victim ;). The examples were given earlier. How silly and petty of me to compare eh....

And that is why I'm absolutely shocked that you even contemplated to start this thread in the first place.

You're stubborn and so am I.

Linda said you've learned a valuable lesson.

Here's another one, practise what you preach :thup:
Click to expand...

In part, I dont recognise the person you're talking about.

Yes, I always like and encourage banter in games I play, its part of the fun of the game for me. I'd hate to play golf without it.

What you did was banter, but I didnt get the joke at the time EVEN THOUGH ALL WORDS WERE HEARD BY BOTH PARTIES - YOU KNOW THIS!!!!! Honest mistakes are made in golf, and most can be brushed off, but not all, especially in matchplay.

As Ive said all along I know there was no way you were trying to INTENTIONALLY mislead me, but misled I was and it had a big saying on the match.

I dont like, at all, some of the insinuation you have made as to my motivations - dont forget the sprinkler head relief I made you aware of and the fact that you placed instead of dropping (but I said I would let that go) - if I was that desparate I would call you on that. You also have glossed over these things I gave you to your benefit (even though I was 1 down at the time).

Dont dare tell me what the "atmosphere" of the NW lads is down to. How many days out have you sorted out? I fully know what we have and have encouraged OOM's, travel arrangements, meets, days out, and 5 day holidays, so think I know some of the reasons that bonds us together. Might start reconsidering.

If your talking character scrutinisation, this has mainly been from your side on this thread.

The stubborness is from both sides, but ok, you win (whatever that means), but I think we are both big losers in this.

I'll respectfully bow out of the OOM, not because of a flounce, but because I'm sure this is becoming embarassing for the organisers too, never mind us two. I'll still come along to finals day, and can still play next Tuesday at Wallasey, but if duffers wants to play his match against someone else on that night, I'll pass the spec onto him.

End of conversation regarding the match.

I have far bigger things to concentrate on in my life at the moment than crap like this.

Am I sorry I brought this up - bloody right, it will be very expensive. Don't know if its your "right thing", dont care TBH.

My sincere apologies to the NW lads on this whole matter.
 
Last edited:
Good grief! 7 pages ago I answered a query about how a particular situation might be ruled. The answer was the same whether Player B was just joking or spoke with intent to mislead - the outcome was to mislead his opponent and should a claim have been made, the Committee would have has to consider a DQ under Rule 33-7. Rulefan concurred.

I do wish the thread had finished there. It's a rules forum. Could you guys not have your barney elsewhere - preferably in private?
 
Last edited:
Colin L said:
Good grief! 7 pages ago I answered a query about how a particular situation might be ruled. The answer was the same whether Player B was just joking or spoke with intent to mislead - the outcome was to mislead his opponent and should a claim have been made, the Committee would have has to consider a DQ under Rule 33-7. Rulefan concurred.

I do wish the thread had finished there. It's a rules forum. Could you guys not have your barney elsewhere - preferably in private?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...

For obvious reasons, I think this should be kept to the rule/ruling.

Yes, on the actual green being played, once both had holed out, I made player B aware that it may be a loss of hole situation. We carried on the rest of the match with me informing that it may be me down 1 or 2 holes etc. Not up for discussion is intent (it wasnt a deliberate misleading, just a joke, that wasn't picked up on,).

The reason it didnt go to play off holes is that we have a scoring system in the NW OOM were you get 5 points for winning a hole, 2 points for a half and 20 points for winning the match. Your points in your 4 matches get totalled for a finals day, a bit like the fedex cup. We dont have a committee as such but do have organisers, not that it matters much now.

I read the rule the other day, and just as a general interest, and for future reference, does the (i), (ii) and (iii) mean that these are the ONLY examples, or just SOME examples:-

9-2

a. Information as to Strokes Taken
An opponent is entitled to ascertain from the player, during the play of a hole, the number of strokes he has taken and, after play of a hole, the number of strokes taken on the hole just completed.
b. Wrong Information
A player must not give wrong information to his opponent. If a player gives wrong information, he loses the hole.
A player is deemed to have given wrong information if he:
(i) fails to inform his opponent as soon as practicable that he has incurred a penalty, unless (a) he was obviously proceeding under a Rule involving a penalty and this was observed by his opponent, or (b) he corrects the mistake before his opponent makes his next stroke; or
(ii) gives incorrect information during play of a hole regarding the number of strokes taken and does not correct the mistake before his opponent makes his next stroke; or
(iii) gives incorrect information regarding the number of strokes taken to complete a hole and this affects the opponent's understanding of the result of the hole, unless he corrects the mistake before any player makes a stroke from the next teeing ground or, in the case of the last hole of the match, before all players leave the putting green.
A player has given wrong information even if it is due to the failure to include a penalty that he did not know he had incurred. It is the player's responsibility to know the Rules.

So are the 3 above examples are they only examples or just some of them? And is this the same throughout the rule book?
 
Old Skier said:
My mistake then, I thought at the beginning you stated that there was one other player but it was a long time ago.
Click to expand...

There were 3 of us playing golf together, only two were playing a match though.

Anyway, this is getting away from the rules question, again.
 
Last edited:
As I said, Rule 9-2 is not applicable. Wrong information is solely to do with information about the number of strokes taken which was not the case here.
 
Colin L said:
As I said, Rule 9-2 is not applicable. Wrong information is solely to do with information about the number of strokes taken which was not the case here.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...

Does rule rule 9-2 say they are "examples", no it doesn't so they are not "examples", but specifics.

As has been said on many occasions on this forum, the rules are written in precise terms so there is never a reason to try and see between the lines as such space does not exist.
 
doublebogey7 said:
Does rule rule 9-2 say they are "examples", no it doesn't so they are not "examples", but specifics.

As has been said on many occasions on this forum, the rules are written in precise terms so there is never a reason to try and see between the lines as such space does not exist.
Click to expand...

I'm not au fait with the exact terminology, so if they are specifics rather than examples, fair enough.

We've established that rule 9-2 isnt in play here, it was more of a general question, anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mikejohnchapman
Backstopping - Enforcing a Player to Mark Their Ball
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
SwingsitlikeHogan
SwingsitlikeHogan
PaulMdj
Testing The Green
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
PaulMdj
PaulMdj
D
Provisional Ball Confusion
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
SwingsitlikeHogan
SwingsitlikeHogan
E
Greensomes wrong ball
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Steven Rules
S
C
Recreating original lie
Replies
7
Views
744
salfordlad
S
Top