sawtooth
Tour Winner
If it happened at our place I wouldn't add .1
Should .1 be added?
- Thread starter chrisd
- Start date
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
As part of the handicap and comp committee at our place you wouldn't get a .1 and the round would be discounted.
Clearly it can all fall under the "exceptional circumstances" as well as just plain common sense
Clearly it can all fall under the "exceptional circumstances" as well as just plain common sense
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
I got that, I just don't think damage to the cart (as we call them) is an exceptional circumstance. The committee has discretion tho so If they think it is a reasonable excuse they can adjust. I would just be a negative vote when polled.
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
You miss my point. The facts of the damage are unusual, but it occurred in the normal course of play which is not unusual.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
The player is unable to continue the round of golf due to factors outside of his control - common sense surely needs applying
chrisd
Major Champion
The last time I n/r'd without having .1 added was when I injured myself on the course. According to your view that would be deemed wrong too I guess? As it happened, Golf England agree with me!
I really think that there is a huge difference between something that happens on the course that is just another forseeable incident and someone wrecking your trolley which, having two replacement hips is something I can't do without when I play. I would look very dimly at a committee who didn't think the circumstances as exceptional.
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
You're probably right. I did not read the outcome of your situation. Was the .1 added?
Are you familiar with the casey martin case? He could not walk a course because of a disability and the pga tour, though sympathetic, refused to allow a cart because it alltered the game. He sued and won so their argument failed but it shows how some people view how the game should be played.
Are you familiar with the casey martin case? He could not walk a course because of a disability and the pga tour, though sympathetic, refused to allow a cart because it alltered the game. He sued and won so their argument failed but it shows how some people view how the game should be played.
Last edited:
chrisd
Major Champion
It has been added but I am not sure that the email I sent has been read yet, so, I will ask this week and if I don't get the answer I'm looking for I shall see what's happened and react accordingly
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
When they added the point did they know you stopped the round because your approved cart broke?
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
Common sense is hard to quantify and hard to justify when applying golf rules. If the rules tell us what to do, applying common sense would not be allowed. You are correct that he did not control the wrecking of the cart, but he controlled where it was parked. Even though it was an approved cart he still brought it on the course voluntarily.
A tough case, i would not want to be on the committee.
chrisd
Major Champion
I don't know whether the person who put the cards onto the computer was the club secretary who I sent the email to.
Colin L
Tour Winner
Atticus, you are being astonishingly hard-nosed about this - mainly I fear because you're just not noticing what is being said. So far we have
Chris: As I have a dispensation to use an electric trolley all year round, I couldn't continue my round
Me: because he seems unfortunately not fit in some way to carry his clubs
Me: you are missing the point that it seems Chris is not able to carry his clubs and that his club has given him a dispensation.
Chris: ..... someone wrecking your trolley which, having two replacement hips is something I can't do without when I play
This is not just a matter of someone's trolley being broken and giving up; this is someone with two replacement hips who cannot play golf if he does not have the use of his trolley and you somehow want to apportion blame to him for careless parking of his trolley!
As it happens, I can relate this to a player in my own club who has special permission to use an electric buggie because he cannot walk the course as a result of an old injury. I wouldn't hesitate to set aside an incomplete score that resulted from his cart breaking down. It would be one of the easier calls.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
There seems to be a problem with the system as computers take over the scoring in clubs .== .1 will be added as your card would be incomplete NR .== As far as common sense goes golf clubs seem very lacking in this as they assume everyone is trying it on.=== If you cant get some consideration for losing a wheel on your only mode of carrying your clubs due to medical circumstances there is something wrong with the system.== But you only have to read some of these posts to see the lack of sympathy for golfers who are not as fit as them.
rulefan
Tour Winner
It is not a system problem. It is more likely whoever input the scores into the computer did so on autopilot. Did Chrisd do it himself? The computer cannot read emails to the secretary. The 0.1 would have been added automatically for a NR.
The CONGU system makes specific provision for such exceptional circumstances and I would hope the handicap committee/secretary recognises this and remove the record.
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
Colin, I understand exactly everything you said. I am not unsympathetic to Chris's situation, but I am trying to express that this is a situation that should be decided on the HC rules, not the sympathies of the committee.
To me the situation is that equipment of the player that he needs to play with was damaged. This means he cannot play thereafter. Ultimately that comes down to the question: is that an exceptional circumstance that would justify an exception.
I mentioned the casey martin case because there are similarities. He could not play without a cart. Is that a situation that should be overlooked so he can compete against able bodied people? The case was decided on a law that favored martin, but the decision of the golfing world employing only considerations of golf was that he should be allowed to play only if he could compete under the same conditions as the other players.
I guess I do come across as harsh. I come from a school of rules enthusiasts known as hardliners. We believe the clear text or reasonable inferences should be all there is when applying golf rules. Otherwise decisions based on the feelings or sympathies of officials reduces the game to a level of unpredictability that leads to inconsistent result and damages the game.
I'm a coward though. and would probably vote to rescind Chris's point. :blah:
To me the situation is that equipment of the player that he needs to play with was damaged. This means he cannot play thereafter. Ultimately that comes down to the question: is that an exceptional circumstance that would justify an exception.
I mentioned the casey martin case because there are similarities. He could not play without a cart. Is that a situation that should be overlooked so he can compete against able bodied people? The case was decided on a law that favored martin, but the decision of the golfing world employing only considerations of golf was that he should be allowed to play only if he could compete under the same conditions as the other players.
I guess I do come across as harsh. I come from a school of rules enthusiasts known as hardliners. We believe the clear text or reasonable inferences should be all there is when applying golf rules. Otherwise decisions based on the feelings or sympathies of officials reduces the game to a level of unpredictability that leads to inconsistent result and damages the game.
I'm a coward though. and would probably vote to rescind Chris's point. :blah:
atticusfinch
Challenge Tour Pro
I may not have understood all of this. He was given the point because he did not return a score card? Why did he not? Surely that is not connected to the cart damage?
Colin L
Tour Winner
But these very handicapping rules by which of course the situation should be decided , tell the committee to give sympathetic consideration to the circumstances. In short, the decision has to be made according to the sympathies of the committee according to the rules.
His handicap is automatically increased by 0.1 because he did not complete the round.
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
On reading through this morning this is the point that still struck me as unclear. It appears there was no card submitted. So which event takes priority on deciding on the application of 0.1 (incomplete round due to unable to continue or no scorecard submitted)
chrisd
Major Champion
The circumstances at the time meant that
I was trying to work out whether I could continue
I didn't want to hold up the field
I was a little shocked as the ball was only inches away from hitting me
I needed to sign the card for a FC up to that point
Work out how i was to get back to the clubhouse
Surprisingly I forgot to get my card from MashleyR7 at that time, so I emailed the Secretary at a time before he was due to process the cards (the next day) and advised hi of the matter
I don't think that CONGU say that the non return of a card is an automatic .1 addition but I do think that it's entirely possible that the Secretaries assistant may have put the cards through and therefore not have seen my email, or that the Secretary may wish to speak to the Committee and deduct the .1 if they agree
I was trying to work out whether I could continue
I didn't want to hold up the field
I was a little shocked as the ball was only inches away from hitting me
I needed to sign the card for a FC up to that point
Work out how i was to get back to the clubhouse
Surprisingly I forgot to get my card from MashleyR7 at that time, so I emailed the Secretary at a time before he was due to process the cards (the next day) and advised hi of the matter
I don't think that CONGU say that the non return of a card is an automatic .1 addition but I do think that it's entirely possible that the Secretaries assistant may have put the cards through and therefore not have seen my email, or that the Secretary may wish to speak to the Committee and deduct the .1 if they agree
Colin L
Tour Winner
I think that the CONGU rules are actually more concerned to prevent people from building a handicap than with someone who genuinely doesn't want to have an increase.
