Pepperell DQ

[Deleted member 1147]

Maybe he has discalculia...like being mathematically dyslexic, and sees the numbers incorrectly as a result

 

[duncan mackie]

I get why the rule is the rule, but previously the rules did not not allow for intent. i.e. if you made a mistake there was nothing taken into account about whether you intended to move the ball, touch the sand in a bunker etc. But the recent rules changes allowed for this and has created some leeway as to whether it was intentional or accidental.

So why not employ the same logic here?

Now appreciate it wouldn't be practical to apply this in the amateur game as it's not fair for volunteers to be chasing people up and asking them about mistakes on their scorecard, but allow for a local rule in pro or elite events if a genuine mistake is spotted after signature it can be rectified as a stroke penalty.

Big instances we saw in terms of Tiger at the 2013 Masters - definitely signed for the wrong score and wasn't DQd.
And Reed last year. Claimed there was no intent to improve his lie and was only assessed a 2 shot penalty.

Difficult to argue that Eddie's punishment fits the crime in the context of these other two incidents.

Neither incident you reference was relevant (and I'm not going to explain the Tiger one again except to point out that he signed for an incorrect score as a result of a committee error) to wrong scorecards in this context.

 

[jim8flog]

It is amazing when you consider they go to a scorers/recorders area and get the opportunity to sit side by side and go through every hole on the card with a tear off copy from the card they marked to compare against before handing the card to the recorder.

 

[patricks148]

in his defence they do use stupid score cards, we got a new CEO/ Club Sec last year who came from Carnoustie and he introduced the same scorecards for the silver throphy's they used in the open... half the old boys didn't have a clue and many were filled out wrong... FYI we went back to the normal ones after that

 

[Grant85]

Neither incident you reference was relevant (and I'm not going to explain the Tiger one again except to point out that he signed for an incorrect score as a result of a committee error) to wrong scorecards in this context.

Referencing them for context. Both were incidents that could have / should have / would have led to a DQ under either a certain interpretation of the rules or a previous version of the rules. In both incidents the player either gained an advantage or intended to gain an advantage.

Both were given a 2 shot penalty and allowed to stay in the event and collect prize money (diluting the prize money that other professionals had available to them).

For context, Eddie shot a 71, signed for a 71 (clearly gaining no advantage and no intent to try and gain an advantage) and had no avenue to correct his mistake and stay in the event and at least try and win some prize money to pay for his flight, hotel and caddie etc.

Also please try and differentiate between what the rules say and how they are applied and what the rules should say and how they should be applied. Once upon a time the golf rules were black and white, but that is no longer the case and nor is their interpretation and enforcement.

 

[Sports_Fanatic]

You can understand it, wasn't his error to begin with and then sadly an extra error made on correction.

I don't think you can compare it with us checking cards, putting them in the system and getting to the bar. They're playing for livelihood so focusing on their game, a lot of distractions on holes with the amount of people and moving between holes. On completion, they've got fans getting upset that they're ignored when players say they want to go in scorers hut first before high fiving/signing autographs, then they've got media duties, recovery ready for next day, perhaps needing to get food as they haven't eaten for 7 hours etc. Time pressure must be quite big, even if in an ideal world they want to study a card 5 times over to make sure it's prefect; it's perhaps not that practical when 99.99% of the time it's right and they thought they had corrected it.

 

[Slab]

Referencing them for context. Both were incidents that could have / should have / would have led to a DQ under either a certain interpretation of the rules or a previous version of the rules. In both incidents the player either gained an advantage or intended to gain an advantage.

Both were given a 2 shot penalty and allowed to stay in the event and collect prize money (diluting the prize money that other professionals had available to them).

For context, Eddie shot a 71, signed for a 71 (clearly gaining no advantage and no intent to try and gain an advantage) and had no avenue to correct his mistake and stay in the event and at least try and win some prize money to pay for his flight, hotel and caddie etc.

Also please try and differentiate between what the rules say and how they are applied and what the rules should say and how they should be applied. Once upon a time the golf rules were black and white, but that is no longer the case and nor is their interpretation and enforcement.

When/what version have we ever seen players DQ'd for an error by the comp committee?

 

[Orikoru]

Haven't read the whole thread but who was the guy marking his card? And why can't he count?

 

[duncan mackie]

Referencing them for context. Both were incidents that could have / should have / would have led to a DQ under either a certain interpretation of the rules or a previous version of the rules. In both incidents the player either gained an advantage or intended to gain an advantage.

Both were given a 2 shot penalty and allowed to stay in the event and collect prize money (diluting the prize money that other professionals had available to them).

For context, Eddie shot a 71, signed for a 71 (clearly gaining no advantage and no intent to try and gain an advantage) and had no avenue to correct his mistake and stay in the event and at least try and win some prize money to pay for his flight, hotel and caddie etc.

Also please try and differentiate between what the rules say and how they are applied and what the rules should say and how they should be applied. Once upon a time the golf rules were black and white, but that is no longer the case and nor is their interpretation and enforcement.

In both incidents the committee ruled, prior to the card being signed, that the player had neither gained an advantage, nor deliberately broken a rule to gain an advantage.

I am afraid I don't understand your last paragraph - there was always scope within the rules for intent in the relevant areas; that has translated to more direct, and wider, permissions within the latest rules. It should not be further extended into a general, for example, "even if the rule states you must not, you may if you neither intended to gain an advantage nor gained one".

 

[Grant85]

In both incidents the committee ruled, prior to the card being signed, that the player had neither gained an advantage, nor deliberately broken a rule to gain an advantage.
.

That's not the case with Tiger. He had signed the card and the issue only became an issue after post-round interviews when he said he'd gone back 2 yards for the drop.

 

[Swango1980]

You can understand it, wasn't his error to begin with and then sadly an extra error made on correction.

I don't think you can compare it with us checking cards, putting them in the system and getting to the bar. They're playing for livelihood so focusing on their game, a lot of distractions on holes with the amount of people and moving between holes. On completion, they've got fans getting upset that they're ignored when players say they want to go in scorers hut first before high fiving/signing autographs, then they've got media duties, recovery ready for next day, perhaps needing to get food as they haven't eaten for 7 hours etc. Time pressure must be quite big, even if in an ideal world they want to study a card 5 times over to make sure it's prefect; it's perhaps not that practical when 99.99% of the time it's right and they thought they had corrected it.

Just to point out, despite all these distractions the pros have, we golfers also have distractions (we are hungry, we are thirsy for a pint, we are having to deal with other members banter after the round in asking how we got on etc.). However, the professionals go through a much more vigorous process in going through the scorecards with the scoreres after the round. If you've played in an amateur event run by England Golf, you'll get an insight into the process. The cards are also designed to facilitate this rigorous process. So, as Duncan said, these sorts of errors are often very unlikely to happen, and it seems to be a very unfortunate sequence of events that led to it in this case.

 

[Swango1980]

in his defence they do use stupid score cards, we got a new CEO/ Club Sec last year who came from Carnoustie and he introduced the same scorecards for the silver throphy's they used in the open... half the old boys didn't have a clue and many were filled out wrong... FYI we went back to the normal ones after that

I'm pretty sure golfing professionals are well used to the cards, so they probably don't have the same problem as the old boys at your club

 

[patricks148]

I'm pretty sure golfing professionals are well used to the cards, so they probably don't have the same problem as the old boys at your club

except eddie of course

 

[tugglesf239]

Maybe he has discalculia...like being mathematically dyslexic, and sees the numbers incorrectly as a result

Think I have that. Genuinely. Always petrified of simple basic calculations but only when another person is present if that makes sense.

I get the cold shivers when my PP is stood waiting for me to tot up stableford points etc

Mad eh?

 

[Swango1980]

Think I have that. Genuinely. Always petrified of simple basic calculations but only when another person is present if that makes sense.

I get the cold shivers when my PP is stood waiting for me to tot up stableford points etc

Mad eh?

I worked out a best fit relationship between Course / Bogey Rating and course yardage as follows:

Course Rating = 0.0046*(Course Yardage) + 41.718
Bogey Rating = 0.0068*(Course Yardage) + 52.784

I hate mathematics as well

But, I'm also easily distracted in the office.

If Eddie Pepperell suffers from discalculia, perhaps he can accuse the R&A of discrimination?

 

[fundy]

Does beg the question, why do they need to mark their own scorecards, does it happen in any other sport at the highest level? Surely in this day and age they should have scorers at PGA level!

Can just see them coming off at the end of a days play and asking Virat Kohli how many he scored lol

 

[SteveJay]

Does beg the question, why do they need to mark their own scorecards, does it happen in any other sport at the highest level? Surely in this day and age they should have scorers at PGA level!

Can just see them coming off at the end of a days play and asking Virat Kohli how many he scored lol

I agree, with every event being covered live on TV, why do they need to do this. The scores are broadcast and shown on live leaderboards. It is a bit odd compared to other professional sports!

 

[Crow]

Does beg the question, why do they need to mark their own scorecards, does it happen in any other sport at the highest level? Surely in this day and age they should have scorers at PGA level!

Can just see them coming off at the end of a days play and asking Virat Kohli how many he scored lol

That way lies bifurcation, and you know how that upsets some people!

 

[Grant85]

I agree, with every event being covered live on TV, why do they need to do this. The scores are broadcast and shown on live leaderboards. It is a bit odd compared to other professional sports!

There's a difference between every event being covered live on TV and every shot by 130 players being shown to the level that a few scorers could just record the scores as they are happening.

I think from a practicality point of view, there's no issue with each player recording their playing partners score - but there should just be a bit of flexibility in the rules to account for genuine errors and to make the punishment fit the crime.

 

[Jacko_G]

Referencing them for context. Both were incidents that could have / should have / would have led to a DQ under either a certain interpretation of the rules or a previous version of the rules. In both incidents the player either gained an advantage or intended to gain an advantage.

Both were given a 2 shot penalty and allowed to stay in the event and collect prize money (diluting the prize money that other professionals had available to them).

For context, Eddie shot a 71, signed for a 71 (clearly gaining no advantage and no intent to try and gain an advantage) and had no avenue to correct his mistake and stay in the event and at least try and win some prize money to pay for his flight, hotel and caddie etc.

Also please try and differentiate between what the rules say and how they are applied and what the rules should say and how they should be applied. Once upon a time the golf rules were black and white, but that is no longer the case and nor is their interpretation and enforcement.

Sign for an incorrect score at the hole and don't rectify it equals disqualification. No matter how many paragraphs you want to put in your replies it's still a DQ.