Player Penalties for repeat Non Return of Cards

bunkerblaster

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2020
Messages
85
Visit site
I think Rulefan is spot on here, clubs need a code of conduct, and need to educate players regarding WHS rules. I DQd a player last week, he was shown as a competitor on the start sheet, obviously had a poor round and NRd. He was marker for a group of 3. He then filled in a second card with the other two players scores but failed to sign the card. His score line read No Return. Not on. Had to ask another player in the group for a signed checker card. Accepted the signed checker card scores matched the markers for the two players. DQd the marker not signed the card. Marker asks for a penalty score to keep his HI up!!!! No chance, actual score input from checker card.
 

Billysboots

Falling apart at the seams
Moderator
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
5,781
Visit site
My view, and I stress I am in no way involved in administering either comps or handicaps at my club, is that bans have to be used in addition to penalty scores.

Every club has them - serial offenders who repeatedly fail to submit cards unless there is a benefit to them in them doing so. We have one guy at our place who has been known to openly say to playing partners as early as the 6th or 7th tee, more than once, that he has no intention of submitting a card.

Such an attitude shows a breathtaking lack of consideration to those who give up their spare time to administer comps and handicaps, and to every member who participates in events, who waits patiently for results to be published.

I’ve been lobbying our committee now for some time to deal with the repeat offenders. A three week competition ban would stop their behaviour in its tracks.
 

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
14,685
Location
Yeovil
Visit site
I think Rulefan is spot on here, clubs need a code of conduct, and need to educate players regarding WHS rules. I DQd a player last week, he was shown as a competitor on the start sheet, obviously had a poor round and NRd. He was marker for a group of 3. He then filled in a second card with the other two players scores but failed to sign the card. His score line read No Return. Not on. Had to ask another player in the group for a signed checker card. Accepted the signed checker card scores matched the markers for the two players. DQd the marker not signed the card. Marker asks for a penalty score to keep his HI up!!!! No chance, actual score input from checker card.

Tell him he can have have a penalty score- a score equal to the best of score of his 20.
 

FourPutt

Head Pro
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
520
Location
Haggs Castle GC
Visit site
I had a 136 appear on my EG/IG apps last week. After some confusion, I discovered that I had entered the club stableford via the IG app, had completely forgotten and had not played in the comp (I had played golf and submitted a general play card that day, which is also showing on the app). As a result of not returning a card I was shown on the comp results as a DQ and the round, I assume, was entered either by the committee or automatically by the IG app?

Do I have any means to have the 136 removed? I haven’t actually done anything with it yet as it has had no effect on my HI other than it will be one of my first 20 cards (I think I am on 11 now) and therefore will simply be one of the 12 non-counters.
 

wjemather

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
3,010
Location
Bristol
Visit site
I had a 136 appear on my EG/IG apps last week. After some confusion, I discovered that I had entered the club stableford via the IG app, had completely forgotten and had not played in the comp (I had played golf and submitted a general play card that day, which is also showing on the app). As a result of not returning a card I was shown on the comp results as a DQ and the round, I assume, was entered either by the committee or automatically by the IG app?

Do I have any means to have the 136 removed? I haven’t actually done anything with it yet as it has had no effect on my HI other than it will be one of my first 20 cards (I think I am on 11 now) and therefore will simply be one of the 12 non-counters.
You should contact your handicap committee to have the rogue score deleted.

While the score will be non-counting, it still affects your index; initially due to the number of best scores that are used until you get to 20 total scores, and then by pushing scores out of your most recent 20 earlier than they should be until it drops out.
 

rulefan

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
14,484
Visit site
I had a 136 appear on my EG/IG apps last week. After some confusion, I discovered that I had entered the club stableford via the IG app, had completely forgotten and had not played in the comp (I had played golf and submitted a general play card that day, which is also showing on the app). As a result of not returning a card I was shown on the comp results as a DQ and the round, I assume, was entered either by the committee or automatically by the IG app?

Do I have any means to have the 136 removed? I haven’t actually done anything with it yet as it has had no effect on my HI other than it will be one of my first 20 cards (I think I am on 11 now) and therefore will simply be one of the 12 non-counters.
Not sure what facilities the ISV systems provide but it can easily be removed using the WHS portal.
 

moogie

Tour Winner
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
3,787
Location
Newcastle upon Tyne
Visit site
Penalty score is usually enough to deter offenders, once they realise what it does to their Index. The guidance document states:

A score equivalent to the current Handicap Index should be submitted to the WHS Platform (i.e. an Adjusted Gross Score which would be equivalent to the Course Rating + Course Handicap).

For particularly naughty girls and boys, it goes on to state this:

Possible attempt to keep handicap low
A score equivalent to the Adjusted Gross Score of the highest return in the last 20 scores should be submitted to the WHS Platform.

Possible attempt to build a handicap
A score equivalent to the Adjusted Gross Score of the lowest return in the last 20 scores should be submitted to the WHS Platform.


The above mentioned penalties.
How are these applied?
Automatically when closing a comp, or does it have to be done manually?

I've a friend that's stepping up to handicap committee
The non return of comp scorecards after signing in, seems to be quite rife and he's unsure how to go about changing this culture.

Any help on this would be appreciated.
Thanks
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
Your approach does not follow CONGU's guidance (G7.1b), which states "a score equivalent to the current Handicap Index should be submitted..." for all players unless there are "possible" ulterior motives. There is no reason for low or high handicappers be treated differently.
That seems a bit daft to me. While it won't affect the player's handicap immediately, it will likely distort the 'best 8 of 20' list (maybe not immediately, but from the next logged round), as will be somewhere in the middle of those, where it could possibly/likely to be higher or lower.
The 'ulterior motives' would be a pain to check out.

I'd sooner a penalty score equivalent to of highest of last 20 be registered.
 
Last edited:

rulie

Head Pro
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,836
Visit site
That seems a bit daft to me. While it won't affect the player's handicap immediately, it will likely distort the 'best 8 of 20' list (maybe not immediately, but from the next logged round), as will be somewhere in the middle of those, where it could possibly/likely to be higher or lower.
The 'ulterior motives' would be a pain to check out.

I'd sooner a penalty score equivalent to of highest of last 20 be registered.
That seems daft, and ineffective. In most cases, bandits want their handicap to go up, not down. I would suggest that a penalty score equal to the lowest of the best 8 of 20 would be appropriate in the vast majority of cases and would lead to fewer NR.
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
That seems daft, and ineffective. In most cases, bandits want their handicap to go up, not down. I would suggest that a penalty score equal to the lowest of the best 8 of 20 would be appropriate in the vast majority of cases and would lead to fewer NR.
We are tackling the perceived problem from 2 different perspectives...me from the pov that it's a bad round by a player gives up on that wants it 'ignored' and you from the pov that it's a good round that the bandit wants ignored - which I did also consider.
I believe my approach/pov is more likely, as the bandit has a far easier way to produce the same/desired result - simply deliberately play badly!
Your approach could result in a deliberate action by someone with the intent to reduce HI succeeding by subterfuge - as opposed to a no-change for mine.
While my approach means no immediate penalty through the scoring mechanism, the fact that it's the latest result means that it will have an effect, however small and indirectly, for the next 19 rounds.
 

rulie

Head Pro
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,836
Visit site
We are tackling the perceived problem from 2 different perspectives...me from the pov that it's a bad round by a player gives up on that wants it 'ignored' and you from the pov that it's a good round that the bandit wants ignored - which I did also consider.
I believe my approach/pov is more likely, as the bandit has a far easier way to produce the same/desired result - simply deliberately play badly!
Your approach could result in a deliberate action with the intent to reduce HI - as opposed to a no-change for mine.
While my approach means no immediate penalty through the scoring mechanism, the fact that it's the latest result means that it will have an effect, however small and indirectly, for the next 19 rounds.
As noted above, it all depends on the ulterior motive, if any, of the player, and that is up to the discretion of the Committee. There is no firm and fast correct answer.
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
As noted above, it all depends on the ulterior motive, if any, of the player, and that is up to the discretion of the Committee. There is no firm and fast correct answer.
The difference is my approach does no 'damage to the integrity of the system' - that can't be manufactured in a fully returned round, whereas yours potentially does.
 

rulie

Head Pro
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,836
Visit site
The difference is my approach does no 'damage to the integrity of the system' - that can't be manufactured in a fully returned round, whereas yours potentially does.
It's meant to be a "penalty" score. Imo, your idea does meet that standard, it's only appeasement.
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
It's meant to be a "penalty" score. Imo, your idea does meet that standard, it's only appeasement.
How can giving someone a score they don't deserve be a 'penalty'! It's more like a bonus! It might actually increase the number of repeats of cards not returned, and won't prevent banditry - as the bandits will simply return complete cards, but with poor scores!
 

IanMcC

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
890
Visit site
The above mentioned penalties.
How are these applied?
Automatically when closing a comp, or does it have to be done manually?

I've a friend that's stepping up to handicap committee
The non return of comp scorecards after signing in, seems to be quite rife and he's unsure how to go about changing this culture.

Any help on this would be appreciated.
Thanks
It's done manually, preferably the day after closing the comp, on the National database of the governing body (England Golf/Wales Golf etc.)
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
It's done manually, preferably the day after closing the comp, on the National database of the governing body (England Golf/Wales Golf etc.)
And what is the 'Penalty'?
If it's a 'free low round score' as Rulie describes above, I'm not surprised it's 'quite rife'!:eek:
Ha! Found it - oddly enough, int this aptly named doc! https://www.englandgolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/WHS-Rules-Reference-Guide.pdf
So Committee to determine reason and act accordingly - blunder/circumstances - same as existing; banditry attempt - lowest of last 20; attempt to keep low - highest of last 20.
As if (some) Committees hasn't got enough to do - educating players as to which handicap to write in the Handicap box! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
5,269
Location
Edinburgh
Visit site
And what is the 'Penalty'?
If it's a 'free low round score' as Rulie describes above, I'm not surprised it's 'quite rife'!:eek:

I think you may be overlooking that the CONGU guidance is to match the penalty to whether the player is innocently remiss, trying to build a higher handicap or trying to maintain an artificially low handicap. It isn't a one solution fits all matter. This is what a committee can do (the bits in blue are my own comments, not something actually said in the guidance document):

A score equivalent to the highest return in the last 20 can be assigned to a player who is perceived to be trying to keep his handicap too low. He has avoided returning a high score and so cops a high score as the penalty.

A score equivalent to the lowest return in the last 20 can be assigned to a player who is perceived to be trying to build his handicap. He has avoided returning a low score that would keep his handicap down and so cops a low score as the penalty.

A score equivalent to the player's current Handicap Index can be assigned to a player who is forgetful, didn't realise he had to return a card when he hadn't completed all the holes for some reason or other - in short has no ulterior motive. He gets a "neutral score" which isn't really a penalty but maintains the turnover of the last 20 as would have been the result of his returning the score in the first place.

It all seems well worked out to give committees a response to each different situation.
 

yandabrown

Newbie
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
1,090
Visit site
I think you may be overlooking that the CONGU guidance is to match the penalty to whether the player is innocently remiss, trying to build a higher handicap or trying to maintain an artificially low handicap. It isn't a one solution fits all matter. This is what a committee can do (the bits in blue are my own comments, not something actually said in the guidance document):

A score equivalent to the highest return in the last 20 can be assigned to a player who is perceived to be trying to keep his handicap too low. He has avoided returning a high score and so cops a high score as the penalty.

A score equivalent to the lowest return in the last 20 can be assigned to a player who is perceived to be trying to build his handicap. He has avoided returning a low score that would keep his handicap down and so cops a low score as the penalty.

A score equivalent to the player's current Handicap Index can be assigned to a player who is forgetful, didn't realise he had to return a card when he hadn't completed all the holes for some reason or other - in short has no ulterior motive. He gets a "neutral score" which isn't really a penalty but maintains the turnover of the last 20 as would have been the result of his returning the score in the first place.

It all seems well worked out to give committees a response to each different situation.
Which is all well and good but this requires the handicap committee to now be a team of Sherlock Holmes sleuths trying to deduce someones intent. I am at a loss as to how to find out someones intent. I guess that one option is to ask the person what was scored and get confirmation from the playing partners (who may well be colluding if someone is doing either of the first activities). It all starts falling into the "hard and difficult bucket" that tends to then get ignored and that's not right either.
 

wjemather

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
3,010
Location
Bristol
Visit site
Which is all well and good but this requires the handicap committee to now be a team of Sherlock Holmes sleuths trying to deduce someones intent. I am at a loss as to how to find out someones intent. I guess that one option is to ask the person what was scored and get confirmation from the playing partners (who may well be colluding if someone is doing either of the first activities). It all starts falling into the "hard and difficult bucket" that tends to then get ignored and that's not right either.
It's usually very obvious what is going on, and the (EG) WHS management platform provides reports to highlight anomalous scoring patterns.
 
Top