salfordlad
Well-known member
This is missing the really key issue. A team made an invalid claim that they had won the match on the previous hole and walked off the course without knowing the result of their claim. Who is ever justified in doing that? Short answer is no-one with less than perfect knowledge of the relevant rule - and these guys were clearly not that - even though it had been pointed out to them on the course.I feel I need to answer some of the criticism above. First off, its no wonder that M&H Secretaries are looked upon with such derision in some quarters, when common sense is bulldozed out of the way just to let them flex their power hungry muscles at times.
In this scenario, I firmly believe the Rules were not enough to bring about a satisfactory outcome. Last to pick up wins!! Give me a break!
The result here has 4 satisfied customers. Every scathing comment above has no one happy at the outcome.
One of the players who would have won the tie under the Rules was pleading with me, nearly crying, because he did not want his reputation tarred amongst his peers by progressing through when he felt he shouldn't have. Golf is all he has. What right have I to torture him so?
For those saying that both teams should be DQd, I can see no path under the rules to enforce that outcome, because of the frankly ridiculous Interpretation 23.2a/1.
I told all 4 players that it would be a different result under the rules. All 4 have thanked me seperately for reaching a decision that they all deem 'correct'.
I would simply ask the detractors above to consider the human element at times. I know 90% of M&H Secretaries will scoff at that, but remember you have the reputations and sentiments of human beings at stake that could be shattered in a second by your actions.
Moreover, there is no possible argument, rules based or human based, that justifies them being promoted in a competition in which only match winners proceed. By what possible justification can anyone discontinue play invalidly and be treated as the winner of the match? It doesn't matter if all four are "happy", the game is much bigger than that and all competitors need to be protected according to the rules.
If, and I stress if because it is not the facts that emerged eventually, all four players thought (incorrectly) that the match was over, then the correct ruling would be declare the claim invalid, all four players get the one stroke penalty for moving their ball in play and the hole must be resumed at the earliest available opportunity. But the facts are different - one player identified the correct course but it was not followed. Consequently, my ruling is the claiming team get the general penalty under 3.2d(2)/23.8a(2) and so lose the match - they incurred a penalty (lifting ball without authority) and failed to declare it to their opponents which hurt their play by causing them also to discontinue the hole. Like Colin, I don't see the 23.2a/1 interpretation as relevant here.
If the winning team feel so bad about the human issues here, they can give the opponents in the next round a walkover.