Winter Comp decision

[rosecott]

Firstly can I thank all the posters who took the trouble replying to my query.


After much deliberation, and a couple of change of minds after being led astray with a couple of postings, rulie’s #29 post is a clincher for me. It is a DQ, as I originally thought.


Regarding my post at #24, The Committee obviously only applies the handicap, which has been written at the top by the player, if the final deduction has not been applied by the player/marker before submission. That seems fine.


I know that DQ is correct, but there is no other way to read rulefan’s posting at #6 other than ‘player not penalised’. I will just have to put that down to poor syntax by CONGU, or me being too dense to understand the whole phrase. I can live with either. Lets face it, if someone as experienced as rulefan can be confused for a while, then the text cannot be as plain as it could be.


Would I DQ the guy if I marked the cards tomorrow? Of course not. As stated in my original post, if it was a qualifier I would not hesitate to DQ the player, as I have had to do in a number of comps this summer. In this instance, the greater good of golf is served by letting a guy have his first win, with a minor slap on the wrists to be more vigilant next time. I know that will not sit well with most on here, but I stand by it.


I thought it was an interesting topic, and has proved to be so. I really like the forum.

Much more effective than a minor slap on the wrists is what should have happened - a DQ. The fact if it not being a qualifier is a complete red herring - an organised comp, the rules of golf apply. Players learn even more quickly to make sure the card has been signed and the correct handicap entered if they think they have won and the prize is dashed from their grasp.

 

[williamalex1]

Did the player involved enter his score on the club computer system ?

 

[IanMcC]

Did the player involved enter his score on the club computer system ?

Winter comps at our club are non qualifiers and do not get electronically entered.

 

[2blue]

Much more effective than a minor slap on the wrists is what should have happened - a DQ. The fact if it not being a qualifier is a complete red herring - an organised comp, the rules of golf apply. Players learn even more quickly to make sure the card has been signed and the correct handicap entered if they think they have won and the prize is dashed from their grasp.

Absolutely THIS ^^
Yes, it's nice to be nice, however the chance to reinforce an important lesson, has been missed.

 

[williamalex1]

Winter comps at our club are non qualifiers and do not get electronically entered.

Is there any particular reason why they're not put on the system ?.
I'm sure we have a few non qualifiers that are entered on our system.

 

[IanMcC]

Is there any particular reason why they're not put on the system ?.
I'm sure we have a few non qualifiers that are entered on our system.

Its 15 holes, not 9 or 18, preferred lies in general area, and rake and place in bunkers. I dont think logging these rounds electronically would achieve anything, do you?

 

[williamalex1]

Its 15 holes, not 9 or 18, preferred lies in general area, and rake and place in bunkers. I dont think logging these rounds electronically would achieve anything, do you?

It would show and verify his handicap.

 

[IanMcC]

It would show and verify his handicap.

And would that magically make it appear on the card?

 

[Old Skier]

Its 15 holes, not 9 or 18, preferred lies in general area, and rake and place in bunkers. I dont think logging these rounds electronically would achieve anything, do you?

I try to get sections to enter as many comps as possible on the system as they give a complete overview of players ability in all circumstances

 

[williamalex1]

And would that magically make it appear on the card?

No, but it would show he'd verified his H/C, and save some poor soul having to check every card and he might not even get DQ .
Just a thought and only trying to help .

 

[IanMcC]

No, but it would show he'd verified his H/C, and save some poor soul having to check every card and he might not even get DQ .
Just a thought and only trying to help .

The body of this thread proves that if no handicap written on the card, regardless of any computer entries, should mean dq. I still don't see what a computer entry achieves. Sorry.

 

[williamalex1]

The body of this thread proves that if no handicap written on the card, regardless of any computer entries, should mean dq. I still don't see what a computer entry achieves. Sorry.

When we entered a comp on our system, name date comp and H/C was printed out on a sticker that you attached to your card .

 

[sev112]

And there’s the wonder of golf (and potentially why so many people see golf as an out dated anachronism)

People want to apply a rule which has nothing to do with who played the best, and when the correct handicap was applied the correct winner was generated

But no, get the pitch forks out to teach people hard lessons ?! Just so that a rule can be applied

The point here that it is an administrative error, which did not mean a wrong person won in this case

Blimey, and we wonder why Memberships are falling

 

[rosecott]

When we entered a comp on our system, name date comp and H/C was printed out on a sticker that you attached to your card .

That won't excuse you, Billy, if the printed handicap is too high - it happens.

 

[williamalex1]

That won't excuse you, Billy, if the printed handicap is too high - it happens.

Golf but not as we know it Jim , there's gonna be a lot of fun when the new WHS kicks in..

 

[rosecott]

And there’s the wonder of golf (and potentially why so many people see golf as an out dated anachronism)

People want to apply a rule which has nothing to do with who played the best, and when the correct handicap was applied the correct winner was generated

But no, get the pitch forks out to teach people hard lessons ?! Just so that a rule can be applied

The point here that it is an administrative error, which did not mean a wrong person won in this case

Blimey, and we wonder why Memberships are falling

No, it's not an error of administration. As far as the player and the scorecard are concerned, the player has only 2 responsibilities - to enter his correct handicap and to sign to the effect that the gross scores have been checked and agreed. This cannot be blamed on the administration if he fails on one or more of those responsibilities.

 

[rulie]

Whaaa......where's my nanny?

 

[NeilG]

And there’s the wonder of golf (and potentially why so many people see golf as an out dated anachronism)

People want to apply a rule which has nothing to do with who played the best, and when the correct handicap was applied the correct winner was generated

But no, get the pitch forks out to teach people hard lessons ?! Just so that a rule can be applied

The point here that it is an administrative error, which did not mean a wrong person won in this case

Blimey, and we wonder why Memberships are falling

Agree with this completely.
There is clearly no intent on the part of the player to mislead or gain an advantage, & no advantage was gained.
I think the OP handled it fine.

 

[rulefan]

I am still amazed by the number of posters on a Rules forum who express their agreement with ignoring the rules.
I wonder if they would ignore their opponent's unintentional breaches during the final of the club championship.

 

[RulesGuy]

If you do not DQ in this scenario you are potentially opening a can of worms. If next week you DQ a player for not signing his card or for failing to record the gross score for a hole then you would find it difficult (if not impossible) to justify the inconsistency.

We sign in electronically and a sticker is printed with our name, handicap etc which we place on our card. Since it's introduction we have had no issues with incorrect handicaps being entered. At the end of the round we enter our score electronically. The only thing missing is the option to record and verify our scores electronically.