Hard Cards and the Rules of Golf

[Fourputt]

A quote from one of Ignorant's earlier posts:

"Here we have a difference of opinion. IMO the task of a Committee is to organize the event, set the frames to it and enforce the Rules (so to say) during the event. Educating competitors in Rules is not Committee's task."

He's interested in enforcing the Rules, not helping competitors understand and apply the Rules. I'll give him some credit, he's consistent with that aged approach, even though I entirely disagree with it. Imo, the Committee, particularly the Rules officials, are there to help the competitors play within the Rules.

Bingo!  When I worked for the CGA we were taught there we were there not only to make rulings after the infraction, but to assist the players on rules issues before they made a mistake.  That meant being visible and helpful on the course and off.  By helping the players with correct information on the rules, we give something back to the game we love.

Just standing around waiting for a player to breach a rule is mean spirited.  By being proactive we help improve the game for everyone.  And by doing that, we as rules officials are viewed as more than just course cops.  I try my best to be approachable and helpful in my official capacity.

[Ignorant]

A quote from one of Ignorant's earlier posts:

"Here we have a difference of opinion. IMO the task of a Committee is to organize the event, set the frames to it and enforce the Rules (so to say) during the event. Educating competitors in Rules is not Committee's task."

He's interested in enforcing the Rules, not helping competitors understand and apply the Rules. I'll give him some credit, he's consistent with that aged approach, even though I entirely disagree with it. Imo, the Committee, particularly the Rules officials, are there to help the competitors play within the Rules.

Rogolf, that is why I wrote 'so to say' as I was being brief. We teach all referees that we are on the course to help the players, not to punish them. Besides the Committee really enforces certain Rules such as 6-2, 6-3, 6-6, 6-7 and 6-8, just to name some.

AFA educating the player is concerned one can twist the issue (and other posters' words) as one wants. I have said that it is not the Committee's task to educate the players, and by that I mean and have meant by writing regular Rules on Hard Cards or any other paper distributed to players prior to a competition. It is an entire different matter when a player asks the referee for a ruling or what are his options in a certain situation.

It is truly sad if the situation in USA is what you and fourputt have described and I can only sympathize you for that. In my country virtually every golfer belongs to a club and a substantial portion of that lot has at least once attended a short rules seminar organized by their club, quite many do that regularly (in fact, practically everybody has got a brief introduction to the Rules when starting to play golf, that is a standard here). Maybe that is why I have so hard time to envisage a situation where someone actually would think it is allowed to replace one's ball in play whenever one pleases. Just wouldn't happen here.

[Ignorant]

I think I finally figured out what it is you're saying.  My hard card says:

However, you are pointing out that the language is not consistent with the Rules.  It should say:

The difference that bothers you being: "...if permitted under rule 15-2"  replacing  "..., whether or not a substitution is permitted (see Rule 15-2)."

The only problem that I can see being caused by this discrepancy is something like this:

A player unknowingly substitutes a ball illegally at some point during the hole, thus violating Rule 15-2.  He plays it once, making it the ball in play.  Another player notices the breach (after all, he can't possibly know because he's the one that voluntarily made the switch) and tells him he incurs a 2-stroke penalty.  However, neither of them know what happens next, so instead of checking the rule book directly, they see that the hard card specifically says that a player must hole out with a ball if permitted by Rule 15-2.  They already know that his ball was not permitted by Rule 15-2, therefore they make the assumption (remember, the hard card doesn't say what you are supposed to do with an illegally substituted ball at all) that since it says you have to hole out with a legally substituted ball, it must stand to reason that you can't hole out with an illegally substituted ball, so they agree that he needs to switch back, and that basically repeats the original infraction ... and now he has to add 4 strokes to his score for that hole.

Is that basically what you were thinking could happen?  I guess I (finally) get where you are coming from, however,

A) Somebody still has to know Rule 15-2 to know that it applies, and if they know rule 15-2, well, then they know rule 15-2, and it clearly says right in there that once you substitute a ball, illegally or not, it becomes the ball in play.

and B)They still have to make assumptions.  The hard card doesn't say what you do if you substitute a ball illegally so you have to be careless enough to not know the rule in the first place, and careless enough to not check with the actual rule book once it comes up, and just guess on your next course of action.  If you're that stupid then you probably deserve a 4 stroke penalty.

Now you got the picture. And in the worst case, he might think he will be disqualified and picks up his ball.

The bottom line here is that once there is incorrect or contraddictory information distributed to the players more or less anything can happen. If and when the players in your competitions are as ignorant of the Rules as I have been told here they couldn't possible find anything from the Rule Book let alone be bold enough to say that their Hard Card or whichever CoC/LR they have been distributed is incorrect.