Penalty for not signing card

[fenwayrich]

I understand that with effect from 1st January, Competitions Committees have the option to mitigate the penalty for a player or marker not signing the physical card from disqualification to two strokes (applied to the final hole) if Local Rule L-1 is in place and they consider a lighter punishment more appropriate. Am I right in assuming that for handicap purposes the increased score would count, whereas with disqualification it would be the actual number of strokes taken?

 

[jim8flog]

I would expect that the handicap authorities have yet to catch up with this change and issue a ruling.

As an aside I would wonder in what circumstances a committee might go for a 2 shot penalty and rather than DQ.

 

[salfordlad]

I would expect that the handicap authorities have yet to catch up with this change and issue a ruling.

As an aside I would wonder in what circumstances a committee might go for a 2 shot penalty and rather than DQ.

It needs to be one or the other for a specific or all competitions. And the 2 shot version may be preferred by a Committee that believes that DQ should not apply to a simple, forgetful administrative error. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and views are likely to differ.

 

[Colin L]

I understand that with effect from 1st January, Competitions Committees have the option to mitigate the penalty for a player or marker not signing the physical card from disqualification to two strokes (applied to the final hole) if Local Rule L-1 is in place and they consider a lighter punishment more appropriate. Am I right in assuming that for handicap purposes the increased score would count, whereas with disqualification it would be the actual number of strokes taken?

The Model Local Rule [MLR L1] mitigates the penalty for returning a scorecard without the hole scores being certified by the player, the marker or both. To be precise, the term scorecard is not limited to physical cards and certifying a score is not limited to signing such a card. It applies equally to electronic return of scores.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

The Model Local Rule [MLR L1] mitigates the penalty for returning a scorecard without the hole scores being certified by the player, the marker or both. To be precise, the term scorecard is not limited to physical cards and certifying a score is not limited to signing such a card. It applies equally to electronic return of scores.

How would this work with electronic input. Having entered your scores you press submit and the score is registered. If you don't do this then the score isn't submitted and it's a no return.

Not sure the electronic version of an unsigned card can exist.

 

[wjemather]

How would this work with electronic input. Having entered your scores you press submit and the score is registered. If you don't do this then the score isn't submitted and it's a no return.

Not sure the electronic version of an unsigned card can exist.

It certainly can, since submitting is not the same as certifying. Whether it should be possible is a different question.
Many (if not most, but probably not all) apps allow for signatures, which (sometimes dependant on settings) may or may not be required for the player, before seeking similar attestation from a marker.

 

[bobmac]

Rather than signing a card, the marker could check the scores then enters his own unique PIN

 

[B1gd0g]

If you apply MLR L-1 where is the general penalty applied in a Stableford Comp if the last hole played is already marked as 0 points?

 

[salfordlad]

If you apply MLR L-1 where is the general penalty applied in a Stableford Comp if the last hole played is already marked as 0 points?

Duplicate answer to this question that is duplicated in a different thread.

Good question. According to the last sentence in 21.1c, failure to sign has no impact on the total score if the player has already wiped the hole. Similarly, the MLR may mean no or reduced impact in par/bogey or maximum score events. This is an outcome of the RBs' decision to remove penalties that apply to the total score. Simplicity may not be the friend of equity.
Personally, I think DQ for admin errors never made sense.

 

[rulie]

What do you (or did you) consider "admin errors" that warranted dq?

 

[bobmac]

Would it make a difference if the card was not signed before or after the round was completed

 

[rulie]

No. It only has to have the signature when it is returned - doesn't matter when it was signed, just as long as it is when returned.
returned = handed in to scoring as per the notice to players

 

[salfordlad]

What do you (or did you) consider "admin errors" that warranted dq?

1.3c points to DQ for issues where the potential advantage is too significant for the player's score to be considered valid. For regular club golf, I would prefer to see general penalty for such non-golf related things as returning a card without signature. But for the folk playing the game for a living, the current approach is appropriate, IMO.

 

[rulie]

1.3c points to DQ for issues where the potential advantage is too significant for the player's score to be considered valid. For regular club golf, I would prefer to see general penalty for such non-golf related things as returning a card without signature. But for the folk playing the game for a living, the current approach is appropriate, IMO.

I don't consider that failing to sign your scorecard is a minor issue. It's your attestation that the card represents your score for the round. Maybe two strokes doesn't cover the difference, but dq certainly does. It's a major error by the player, but certainly not a major inconvenience, nor is it hard to confirm before returning your personal scorecard. Imo, it's equivalent to signing a cheque.

 

[Neilds]

I don't consider that failing to sign your scorecard is a minor issue. It's your attestation that the card represents your score for the round. Maybe two strokes doesn't cover the difference, but dq certainly does. It's a major error by the player, but certainly not a major inconvenience, nor is it hard to confirm before returning your personal scorecard. Imo, it's equivalent to signing a cheque.

You seem to be contradicting what you said in your earlier post when you said it doesn’t matter when it was signed. (Even though I suspect Bob was on a bit of a wind up with his post) How can you attest the score is correct by signing it before you play? Also would you sign a check and then give it to someone to fill in the rest?

This has been discussed to death in previous threads so don’t want it go down the same rabbit hole

 

[bobmac]

(Even though I suspect Bob was on a bit of a wind up with his post)

Who me? never.
But it did highlight the importance of reading what's written.

 

[Steven Rules]

This has been discussed to death in previous threads so don’t want it go down the same rabbit hole

Phew. I agree. Let's not rehash that.

But for those with an affinity for rabbit holes:

Signing a scorecard

Is it acceptable and within the rules for a player to sign their blank scorecard before the round has commenced and then pass it to the marker for completion during the round?

forums.golfmonthly.com

 

[salfordlad]

It's not surprising that opinions vary on this card-signing penalty issue and I suspect there will be some generational change going on. The interesting thing for me here is whether MLR L-1 gets rolled into the Rules default from 2027. Time will tell. My Committee has supported adoption.

 

[rulie]

You seem to be contradicting what you said in your earlier post when you said it doesn’t matter when it was signed. (Even though I suspect Bob was on a bit of a wind up with his post) How can you attest the score is correct by signing it before you play? Also would you sign a check and then give it to someone to fill in the rest?

This has been discussed to death in previous threads so don’t want it go down the same rabbit hole

I didn't say that personally I would sign the card (or cheque) before it was filled out - not my style. Just said that in the case of a scorecard and the Rules, it doesn't matter.