One rule for one ...

[rudebhoy]

We've got a rule that players are not allowed to jump on at the 10th if there is someone playing the 9th. The done thing is you wait for them to play through the 10th before starting.

Was playing the other day with a mate, we were heading up the 9th when I spotted someone walking behind the green in the direction of the 10th. It was late in the afternoon, only enough time to play 9 holes, and he had obviously taken one look at the first where a 4 ball had just teed off, and another was waiting to start, and thought "sod that, I'll go to the 10th".

Imagine my surprise when I recognised the guy as a committee member!

In fairness, it didn't hold us up at all, he is a low handicapper and was playing on his own, and by the time we got to the 10th tee, he was well out of range and we never saw him again. If he had even just asked us if it was ok to jump in front, I would have said yes, but for a committee member to brazenly break the rules like that just made me laugh.

 

[duncan mackie]

He clearly authorised himself to proceed on the basis that he wouldn't interfere with your round...and sounds like he made the right decision.

Btw that's a pretty standard etiquette rule applicable to anyone starting on any hole other than the first where more specific local rules apply.

 

[Orikoru]

I don't see the problem here, I think he used common sense which should be encouraged. If you were halfway up the 9th, he knew he'd be well out of the way before you got to the 10th.

If he'd have waited for you that would have delayed his round, then you probably would have had to wave him through at some point, delaying your round as well.

 

[rudebhoy]

I don't see the problem here, I think he used common sense which should be encouraged. If you were halfway up the 9th, he knew he'd be well out of the way before you got to the 10th.

If he'd have waited for you that would have delayed his round, then you probably would have had to wave him through at some point, delaying your round as well.

It didn't cause us a problem as I stated earlier.

However, what's the point in having rules set by the committee, if committee members are going to brazenly flout them? You might not agree with the rule, but that doesn't mean you can pick and choose which ones you follow.

the 9th is a par 3, he was only 30-40 yards from us when he went past. I would have thought the right thing would have been for him to shout over and ask if we minded him going ahead of us.

 

[Orikoru]

Well they obviously put the rule in to cover the case of disagreements, i.e. two sets of golfers arrive at the 10th at the same time, and it saves arguing about who should play first. But common sense such as that exhibited here should mean a ruling isn't necessary. If you were holing out on the 9th green I'm sure he may have waited for you.

One man's 'brazenly flouting the rules' is another man's 'using common sense to bypass a rule that was unnecessary'.

 

[IanM]

That was my thought.... it covers the issue when a problem arises....if he had been in a fourball, different story. Looks like he saw where you were and thought, I am not going to interrupt their game so I'm good to go.

A you say, you never saw him again...

 

[clubchamp98]

I think just a gesture to the players on the 9th hole that he was going to play would have saved any confusion.

Lets be honest he could be sitting in a disaplinary meeting punishing a player who did the same thing .
If it was someone who knew he did the same , that could be brought up.

This happens all the time at my club .
we have a rule allowing players to mingle between games on the tenth tee.

Imo this should be changed to "Nobody to tee off if someone is visible over the hill playing the 9th hole"

This causes problems where I play and it's mostly the ladies but not always who do it , as the back nine is not so hilly.

Its very annoying when you can come to a halt halfway round because people are mixing in and slowing everything down when the first tee is usually empty.

 

[Deleted member 23270]

We've got a rule that players are not allowed to jump on at the 10th if there is someone playing the 9th. The done thing is you wait for them to play through the 10th before starting.

Was playing the other day with a mate, we were heading up the 9th when I spotted someone walking behind the green in the direction of the 10th. It was late in the afternoon, only enough time to play 9 holes, and he had obviously taken one look at the first where a 4 ball had just teed off, and another was waiting to start, and thought "sod that, I'll go to the 10th".

Imagine my surprise when I recognised the guy as a committee member!

In fairness, it didn't hold us up at all, he is a low handicapper and was playing on his own, and by the time we got to the 10th tee, he was well out of range and we never saw him again. If he had even just asked us if it was ok to jump in front, I would have said yes, but for a committee member to brazenly break the rules like that just made me laugh.

Erm.....I don't understand what your issue is? He is only cutting in if he holds you up.

 

[Kellfire]

Erm.....I don't understand what your issue is? He is only cutting in if he holds you up.

He clearly broke a rule that is within his remit to enforce.

What part of that aren't people reading? :/

 

[rudebhoy]

He clearly broke a rule that is within his remit to enforce.

What part of that aren't people reading? :/

absolutely!

I already stated twice previously that it didn't cause us a problem, it's more a point of principle.

 

[Deleted member 23270]

He clearly broke a rule that is within his remit to enforce.

What part of that aren't people reading? :/

I thought cutting in in front of people didn't bother you?

 

[Deleted member 21258]

absolutely!

I already stated twice previously that it didn't cause us a problem, it's more a point of principle.

Personally don't really see a problem and principal are great to have when there is a real point to being right or wrong.

Jobsworth coming to mind, he didn't hold you up, lifes to short to be worrying about the minor things, like :-

Someone started from the wrong tee whos on the committee but didn't cause me or anyone any problems.

What are you suggesting is done, he is told off, have his membership cancelled, called in front the committee, put in the stocks/eggs thrown at him:ears:

 

[jmf1488]

Report him. He should have waited on the 10th for you to give him permission to proceed. The rules are there for a reason. He should know better.

 

[ruff-driver]

What are you suggesting is done, he is told off, have his membership cancelled, called in front the committee, put in the stocks/eggs thrown at him:ears:

He should be tied to the flagpole and have members birch him with alignment sticks

 

[Kellfire]

I thought cutting in in front of people didn't bother you?

Oh, I do it when the rules allow it and in fact encourage me to... x

 

[Deleted member 23270]

I think in this instance common sense prevailed. Otherwise Orikoru has it right and you end up messing about calling through etc.

 

[rudebhoy]

Personally don't really see a problem and principal are great to have when there is a real point to being right or wrong.

Jobsworth coming to mind, he didn't hold you up, lifes to short to be worrying about the minor things, like :-

Someone started from the wrong tee whos on the committee but didn't cause me or anyone any problems.

What are you suggesting is done, he is told off, have his membership cancelled, called in front the committee, put in the stocks/eggs thrown at him:ears:

I'm not suggesting anything happens to him, I was merely pointing out the irony of a committee member brazenly flouting rules that he has helped set.

Like I have said a number of times on this thread, all it needed was some common courtesy from him, shouting over to ask if we were ok with him jumping in.

I've also got a fair idea what would happen if roles were reversed and I jumped in like that in front of a couple of committee members coming down the 9th.

 

[Orikoru]

Report him. He should have waited on the 10th for you to give him permission to proceed. The rules are there for a reason. He should know better.

Rubbish. Common sense should conquer all. Obeying rules for the sake of rules would have delayed everybody in this scenario, what's the point of that? So that you can say no rules were broken? Great.

As I said, the only 'reason' the rule is there is to save disagreements in the sake of two sets of golfers arriving at the same time, clearly. In this case he used common sense and no ruling needed to be made.

 

[cliveb]

General principle for living: Rules are for the guidance of the wise and blind obedience of the foolish.

 

[Hobbit]

General principle for living: Rules are for the guidance of the wise and blind obedience of the foolish.

Beat me to it by minutes. Strange how people bleat on about breaking dress codes but are sharp to play by the rules in this case.

Common sense seems to be missing in many responses.