Match play, calling out a penalty

[snowyowl]

That's an opinion I don't share...

I have a more than decent rules knowledge. That means in most situations on the golf course I know what I am doing or what another player can or can't do.

Therefore I see a lot of rules breaches - which I draw to people's attention in tournament play, but not social rounds. But I play tournaments with a better standard of golfer, so it is less of a problem then.

In match play I have the right to overlook the breach of an opponent, and I do this often - I like to have a harmonious round, and being petty about the rules doesn't help. Also, I like to win with my clubs.

However, on occasion, I will be forced to use my rules knowledge and invoke something. I do this to opponents, who for some reason I don't like. Probably because they are overly zealous in their demeanour about winning at all costs.

Case in point. In a match I played second from the tee. I hit out to the right into an area of very long grass. I said to my opponent, "I will play a provisional". The instant the club hit the ball, he yelled, "That's a water hazard over there (where the first ball went). You can't play a provisional for that, so you have to play the provisional."

Seeing as though the provisional was a deep duck hook into the opposite side of the fairway, it was a cheap shot. Plain and simple, this guy was a "gamesman" and had gone over the limit with his win at all costs attitude.

I walked up the fairway, and told him that I had not known there was a water hazard to the right, and that my ball may have been lost outside it in the long grass. I also explained that Decision existed (it is in fact 27-2a/2.5) confirming my right to play a provisional in this case.

He wouldn't have any of it. Sniping and being a hardcase about it. Finally, I got to the long grass and found my ball. I turned to him and said "Peter. I know the rules better than you. I've told you what happens here in this situation, and that I was allowed to play a provisional ball. Now I will tell you what will happen. I am going to play my original ball. If you don't like it, you can make a claim under R2-5 and we can notify the committee. They will make a ruling on it. You have until we tee off on the next hole to make this claim."

He stood there and watched me play me shot. We halved the hole. He won the match with his clubs later on. He still tries to lord it over opponents in strokeplay and matchplay. I hear this from other members. When I see him, I just say, "Been reading the rule book Peter." He says "Yes."

I say back, "Not as much as me though."

There is a chance we will meet in a matchplay tournament in a few weeks....like I say, I will try to win with my clubs.

Snowyowl

[pom]

Snowyowl Rule 2-5 clearly states that if a player intends to make a claim he must inform his opponent before either player tees off onthe next hole . not halfway down the next fairway. The club pro got that dead right .The playercan make a later claim if he can prove that his opponant gave him wrong information.

[snowyowl]

Pom,

Rule 2-5 clearly states that if a player intends to make a claim he must inform his opponent before either player tees off onthe next hole

That is what I have stated in my posts

not halfway down the next fairway. The club pro got that dead right .

As said repeatedly, the claim is to be made before teeing off....

The playercan make a later claim if he can prove that his opponant gave him wrong information

I referenced Rule 9 (that deals with wrong information) in my posts to blue3715.

I can't work out if you are disagreeing with me, agreeing with more, or just supplying additional information....I think it's the latter.

Snowyowl

[Fourputt]

Snowyowl Rule 2-5 clearly states that if a player intends to make a claim he must inform his opponent before either player tees off onthe next hole . not halfway down the next fairway. The club pro got that dead right .The playercan make a later claim if he can prove that his opponant gave him wrong information.

Yes, in that he is correct, but he was dead wrong about stopping the match until a ruling is made. As long as the claim is lodged in the correct manner, the match can continue, and the ruling can be made after the round is finished. If the disputed hole doesn't have any impact on the state of the finished match, then it's a moot point.

[snowyowl]

Yes, in that he is correct, but he was dead wrong about stopping the match until a ruling is made. As long as the claim is lodged in the correct manner, the match can continue, and the ruling can be made after the round is finished. If the disputed hole doesn't have any impact on the state of the finished match, then it's a moot point.

Fourputt,

It would be dangerous to let a claim go unadjudicated until after the match. The players have the right to know the state of the match, and this includes disputed points or holes. Rule 34-1a deals with the idea of adjudicating on a claim by stating, "If a claim is lodged with the Committee under Rule 2-5, a decision should be given as soon as possible so that the state of the match may, if necessary, be adjusted...." Snowyowl

[blue3715]

I agree there no reason not to wait until the turn, however had it happened on the 15th or latter, and the match was less than 2 down/up I think it should stop.

nuff said

[Fourputt]

Fourputt,

Rule 2-5 is quite clear. The match must continue without delay if there is no committee representative available to make a ruling. When the rules use the word "must", it means that it is mandatory. The player does not have the option to unduly delay the match just because there is a dispute. 34-1a uses the phrase "as soon as possible". That is trumped by 2-5, and the match must continue if there is no one who can make an immediate ruling.

It is the timeliness of making the claim that is at issue, not the timeliness of the ruling. If the committee is not available for 2 days or more, you can't just suspend the match for that long. This is a very likely possibility in my club, where our match play tournament brackets require the paired players to play their match within a specified window of time, usually 2-4 weeks, and they arrange the time to play on their own during that window. The committee may not meet more often that once a week. As long as the claim is made properly and reported to the committee, the match is not officially over until the ruling is made, however long that may take.

[snowyowl]

Rule 2-5 is quite clear. The match must continue without delay if there is no committee representative available to make a ruling. When the rules use the word "must", it means that it is mandatory. The player does not have the option to unduly delay the match just because there is a dispute. 34-1a uses the phrase "as soon as possible". That is trumped by 2-5, and the match must continue if there is no one who can make an immediate ruling.

Fourputt.

You've been getting no argument from me on the workings of R2-5, nor R34-1a. We try to adjudicate asap. If that means a bit of telephoning, so be it. I think we agree on what we must and should do. We just have different ways of doing it. Blue3715...it has been a good thread for all of us to have a say and learn from. Hope you have more situations to bring up at some time.... Snowyowl