Signing a scorecard

[Steven Rules]

Rules 3.3b(1) and 3.3b(2) require the marker and player to certify the hole scores when the round has ended. The method of cerifying is via physical signature or other electronic means.

 

[chrisd]

Rules 3.3b(1) and 3.3b(2) require the marker and player to certify the hole scores when the round has ended. The method of cerifying is via physical signature or other electronic means.

But no indication/instruction as to at what point the signature has to be applied

 

[bobmac]

But no indication/instruction as to at what point the signature has to be applied

Rules 3.3b(1) and 3.3b(2) require the marker and player to certify the hole scores when the round has ended. The method of cerifying is via physical signature or other electronic means.

 

[chrisd]

I've got that Bob, certifying is the act of checking the score on each hole, the physical signature confirms the scores

But there is no rule as to when that signature need be applied other than prior to submitting. I've written a number of times that the card is handed over having been through the process required and I have not broken the rules because you cant break a rule that doesn't exist.

 

[woofers]

I’d give up Bob.

 

[chrisd]

I’d give up Bob.

So he should

 

[Colin L]

Yes it does. See definition of Scorecard.


Actually the Rules do specify how certification is done and there are a few references to signatures. (e.g. Diagram 3.3b, definition of Scorecard, Committee Procedures 6F(2))

Guilty as charged . The brain stopped at Rule 3.3b but the fingers kept on typing without regard for anything else.

I'm not seeing, however, any of the references to signatures state that a signature is the required method of certifying a physical card. It's a pointless point as it is universally regarded as the requirement and there's no doubt that's the clear assumption in the Rules and the Committee Procedure you point to. Rule 3.3b, however, states the requirement to certify without any statement as to how; the Definition is a direction to the Committee that it must provide a scorecard which allows for the player to add their signature not an instruction to the player; and 6F(2) isn't a Rule and is again directed at the Committee not the player. No matter how strong the implications are, I do think that if signing is the sole possible requirement, that should be explicitly stated. But it's just an academic, nerdy point of no practical value at all. I can't resist asking, however, what you would say if a Committee required player and marker to be present at the scorer's table and make an oral attestation of the scores on a card instead of signatures . Would that be contrary to 6.3b(2)? .

 

[Neilds]

So he should

See the last line in post 32

 

[wjemather]

I've got that Bob, certifying is the act of checking the score on each hole, the physical signature confirms the scores

But there is no rule as to when that signature need be applied other than prior to submitting. I've written a number of times that the card is handed over having been through the process required and I have not broken the rules because you cant break a rule that doesn't exist.

It may seem like pedantry over semantics, but checking and certifying are two distinct actions. Obviously certification cannot be done before checking. Even more obviously, nether can be done before the round has ended.

Logically, and unsurprisingly, the rules very clearly state that both actions must be done when the round has ended (i.e. not before).

Therefore, technically, you are breaking a rule - not by signing the scorecard in advance - but by not certifying it (by signing) when the round has ended.

 

[wjemather]

I'm not seeing, however, any of the references to signatures state that a signature is the required method of certifying a physical card. It's a pointless point as it is universally regarded as the requirement and there's no doubt that's the clear assumption in the Rules and the Committee Procedure you point to. Rule 3.3b, however, states the requirement to certify without any statement as to how; the Definition is a direction to the Committee that it must provide a scorecard which allows for the player to add their signature not an instruction to the player; and 6F(2) isn't a Rule and is again directed at the Committee not the player. No matter how strong the implications are, I do think that if signing is the sole possible requirement, that should be explicitly stated. But it's just an academic, nerdy point of no practical value at all. I can't resist asking, however, what you would say if a Committee required player and marker to be present at the scorer's table and make an oral attestation of the scores on a card instead of signatures . Would that be contrary to 6.3b(2)? .

The R&A and USGA shone a light on this rule, with their COVID clarificationns that explicitly permitted verbal certification (among other methods). However, irrespective of the method, certification cannot be done before the round, and can only be done after.

 

[Colin L]

The R&A and USGA shone a light on this rule, with their COVID clarificationns that explicitly permitted verbal certification (among other methods). However, irrespective of the method, certification cannot be done before the round, and can only be done after.

Indeed it was. So we are agreed that signing a physical scorecard is not the only acceptable method.

Clearly one cannot certify anything before it has been done. At the end of the round I agree the scores my marker has written on my card and hand it in with the two signatures which show that this has been done and that I take responsibility for the returned score's accuracy. At the point of my returning the card my signature is certification of the score on the card and I have fulfilled the requirement to so certify it. If my signature has been there for some time before completion of the round is of no consequence: it does not alter the fact that I have done what I'm supposed to have done and that I attesting that I've done it by this simple act of returning a card with scores and two signatures on it.

I wish any committee members who seek to penalise a member who has returned a signed card with the correct scores on it good luck in the venture. They will need the luck and probably a hard hat.

But there are more important things to contemplate this evening .......... like England 23 Scotland 29.

 

[chrisd]

I'll bung in my tuppence to that too Colin

 

[chrisd]

Indeed it was. So we are agreed that signing a physical scorecard is not the only acceptable method.

Clearly one cannot certify anything before it has been done. At the end of the round I agree the scores my marker has written on my card and hand it in with the two signatures which show that this has been done and that I take responsibility for the returned score's accuracy. At the point of my returning the card my signature is certification of the score on the card and I have fulfilled the requirement to so certify it. If my signature has been there for some time before completion of the round is of no consequence: it does not alter the fact that I have done what I'm supposed to have done and that I attesting that I've done it by this simple act of returning a card with scores and two signatures on it.

I wish any committee members who seek to penalise a member who has returned a signed card with the correct scores on it good luck in the venture. They will need the luck and probably a hard hat.

But there are more important things to contemplate this evening .......... like England 23 Scotland 29.

I was with you all the way until the last line Colin

 

[salfordlad]

It is difficult to see how a scorecard signed before the round commences complies with the requirement to certify the hole scores via physical signature or electronic means when the round has ended.

I agree.

For precisely this reason I took an available opportunity to ask an RB person whether they considered it a problem that it is not an uncommon practice in places for people to sign the card before the round. The answer was a pragmatic no, key requirements are card is certified AND the final contents are checked as correct, as stated in 3.3.

 

[Colin L]

Thanks for that. Helpful as always.

 

[Swango1980]

I know loads of people sign before the round, and I never have an issue with it from a practical sense. Although, given a player is signing to certify the scores, it always feels it is not technically the correct thing to do. If the scorecard has already been signed, then what other method is there to certify that the player has confirmed the scores written on the card. From this discussion, all you have is people saying "I do this verbally after the round, after we sway cards". So, the only certification can only be a player saying this verbally to anyone in Committee, given that the signature was done at a time before confirmation could occur.

Has anyone been involved with running official top amateur / professional events, and the scoring process? When I played in one arranged by England Golf, after finishing the round we went into the scorers room, and everything was done very officially and professionally. The cards were designed to have a tear off, all players could cross reference scores and then we signed for them. There was no messing around from the scorer, made sure we did everything absolutely accurately in terms of the process. Had someone simply signed for the scores before the round, and somehow managed to walk out of the room before verbally agreeing the scores with their marker, would the official accept their scores have been certified?

 

[rulefan]

I know loads of people sign before the round, and I never have an issue with it from a practical sense. Although, given a player is signing to certify the scores, it always feels it is not technically the correct thing to do. If the scorecard has already been signed, then what other method is there to certify that the player has confirmed the scores written on the card. From this discussion, all you have is people saying "I do this verbally after the round, after we sway cards". So, the only certification can only be a player saying this verbally to anyone in Committee, given that the signature was done at a time before confirmation could occur.

Has anyone been involved with running official top amateur / professional events, and the scoring process? When I played in one arranged by England Golf, after finishing the round we went into the scorers room, and everything was done very officially and professionally. The cards were designed to have a tear off, all players could cross reference scores and then we signed for them. There was no messing around from the scorer, made sure we did everything absolutely accurately in terms of the process. Had someone simply signed for the scores before the round, and somehow managed to walk out of the room before verbally agreeing the scores with their marker, would the official accept their scores have been certified?

In my experience with EG and the county, the group of players and markers all attend the recorder's desk at the same time. Cards are read over and checked and both player and marker verbally agree that all is correct. I can't remember seeing or hearing a recorder (including myself) enquiring if cards had been signed before or after play.

 

[rulie]

Doesn't a recorder's responsibility begin only after the cards are officially returned?

 

[rulefan]

Doesn't a recorder's responsibility begin only after the cards are officially returned?

IMO they are responsible for assisting/ensuring players return their scores correctly. No different to a referee assisting/ensuring a player doesn't breach a rule.
I can't imagine an officially appointed recorder allowing a player fail the process. However, I must admit I have never really known what the official title or job specification is of those people behind the desk at these elite events. Are they 'Returning Officers'?

 

[rulie]

Imo, as you have stated, they are there to assist the players in complying with Rule 3.3b. However, I don't believe that they have any authority (unless they are also designated as a referee).