Winter Comp decision

[rosecott]

I strongly suspect that those who believe the OP was correct in not DQing the player have never been involved in administering comps.

 

[rulefan]

I note that the OP is new to the job

 

[williamalex1]

I strongly suspect that those who believe the OP was correct in not DQing the player have never been involved in administering comps.

I think the DQ was right, but could've been avoided, as suggested in post 60.

 

[rosecott]

I think the DQ was right, but could've been avoided, as suggested in post 60.

Fully agree, Billy. Nobody running comps wants to DQ competitors.

 

[2blue]

Fully agree, Billy. Nobody running comps wants to DQ competitors.

Yes... absolutely agree Jim..... but the lengths one can go to, to 'excuse' folks is endless, but an awkward presidence can be created.
Strangest one I've heard of is when 3 players who'd just played together in a, routine mid-week Comp (long established Club members) entered scores to PSI then they all boxed their cards at the same time but one card wasn't there when the H/cap Sec closed the Comp & it was the 'winning' score.
The group 'swore blind' that it was boxed as they'd done it together & the H/cap Sec reopened the Comp & removed the DQ from the guy as...... "The card must have gone missing somewhere and questioning the word of fellow members wasn't something he could do".
Still waiting for that one to come back & bite at some time.
What's the hardest one you've had to deal with?...... I guess it could be a very interesting thread of it's own really.

 

[duncan mackie]

.
What's the hardest one you've had to deal with?...... I guess it could be a very interesting thread of it's own really.

It could/would; but I don't think I'm going to post any.

Suffice to say that I've uttered more swear words in response to people's unfortunate, and always innocent, actions over roughly 25 years of being involved with rules and comps than I have over any deliberate act.

As someone has said above - 99% of those involved with such situations really don't like having to penalise people. Most spend a lot of time trying to help others avoid such penalties.

Then again there's certainly an argument that some people don't help themselves either...

 

[3offTheTee]

Accept it was a disqualification. End of story.

However if OP was concerned he could have written 15 on the card. Not saying I would have done it though!

 

[rulefan]

Accept it was a disqualification. End of story.

However if OP was concerned he could have written 15 on the card. Not saying I would have done it though!

I thought the omission was only discovered after the card had been returned (officially). But I must admit I don't know what the Terms of Competition were in this case.

 

[rulie]

I thought the omission was only discovered after the card had been returned (officially). But I must admit I don't know what the Terms of Competition were in this case.

Terms of the Competition cannot over-rule the Rules.

 

[rulefan]

Terms of the Competition cannot over-rule the Rules.

Agreed. But they should be used to specify when a card is deemed to have been returned. In this case we don't know when the card was 'returned' and when the omission was noticed.

 

[TheJezster]

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.

Do you really wonder this though!!??? Or are you stating an over the top response to get your point across!?

Because it's nothing like the situation in the OP and you know it. You are 'Boris Johnstoning' your thoughts across ;-)

 

[Swango1980]

I appreciate you're new to the role, and you've tried to do what has felt the right thing to do in you heart. So, I can't criticise that, as you've felt you were trying to do the right thing. However, as a comp secretary, hopefully you'll soon learn that you need to try and rigidly stick to the rules, regardless of how much of an impact they did or didn't play in the score. Otherwise, you lead yourself completely open for criticism for inconsistency. In addition, you said you felt it was fair as it meant that the player could win his first ever comp (at least I think I picked that up somewhere as I scanned through everything)? What would happen if the player had actually won loads of comps over the year, and the guy that was 2nd had never won a comp? Would you have DQ the player then? Fair play though, at least you have come on here to help you for the future.

I know of a comp sec who was a lovely guy, and all in all did a fantastic job for years. However, if players didn't sign their cards he would tend to ignore this, or at least try and find them after they submitted it, so they could sign it. Of course, the criticism of this is that, if a player had already gone, then they wouldn't get the same treatment. Or, if a player who came 2nd complained that the winner hadn't signed the card, the comp sec wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

For your winter comps, you need to really follow the rules just as strictly as you would for your summer qualifiers. If not, you need to specifically let all golfers know beforehand which rules you are going to ignore. If you do that, I suspect you may find that the majority of golfers want you to be consistent all year round.

 

[rulefan]

Because it's nothing like the situation in the OP and you know it.

Just making the point about "Which rules are we ignoring today?" and that it applies to officials as well as players.
Swango1980 makes some good points above