Fighting Words

1.Facts  (Too Many Clubs)

The stakes were enormously high in a scintillating match play competition recently at BMCC. Foremost, determined to get off to a better start, unfortunately had to disqualify himself on the first hole after finding in the fairway that the extra club he had left with the bag room for regripping had been placed in his bag with no forewarning. This sad tale should serve as a cautionary reminder to all players as the season begins, as players regrip and replace. The bag should be checked to make sure the player is not in violation of R4-4a, the 14-club rule.

F, of course, immediately advised his opponents of the violation and his disqualification for the hole. He was delighted, however, when his partner, Reader LB, managed to halve the hole.

Ruling

The hole was scored incorrectly. A “Side” is penalized for a breach of R4 “by any partner.” R30-3d. F offers a belated apology to opponents Sandwich and BM, who eventually lost the match by a narrow one hole margin … oh well…

Commentary: Slow Play

The most serious rules issue of the day, however, involved slow play … no surprise with the participation of the fiercely competitive, Sandwich (BMCC’s own JB Holmes), who takes so much time on the putting greens and in his shot preparation that other participants have to almost hit their shots on the run to keep the group moving.

The Committee, to its credit, made every attempt to keep this group on pace, advising on three occasions, on the front nine alone, that the group was lagging in pace of play and holding up the entire golf course, as this group was the first off on the day’s tee sheet. After a fourth stern warning at the turn, F challenged the Committee to put the group and its players on the clock, a sanction F was certain had never been imposed in BMCC’s long history, at least in weekend golf. The Committee advised that each player needed to play his shot in 40 seconds. He (the Committee) then returned to the clubhouse, to F’s dismay.

Somehow, the Committee’s failure to impose actual penalties inspired a conversation on the failure of gun control, and the question of the week … why would anyone need an AR-15?

Arguments raged and ranged from mental health concerns and the possibility of involving psychiatrists in gun permitting, to school security, to the general breakdown of societal morality and norms. What were we going to do about the 5 to 10 million automatic rifles already in circulation, one asked. Wasn’t gun confiscation by the government and it’s ramifications one of the lessons of the holocaust? Perhaps the FBI should follow up and investigate, ventured another player, when accusations are made of deranged individuals making gun threats. And shouldn’t a student who is expelled for violent threats and intimidation find his name flagged on buy list?

All of these answers, of course, required deep and thoughtful analysis as one had to weigh 2nd Amendment rights against civil rights, the bill of rights,  and common sense. Fortunately, our group did have plenty of time to weigh and ponder these issues as Sandwich lined up his putts, checked his distances, etc.

Ultimately, F has concluded that the issue of gun control for automatic rifles is much like the issue of enforcement of R6-7 for slow play. Despite all the conversation, nothing is ever really done.

F would add, however, that at the turn the group agreed to play “Ready Golf” to improve the pace of play. F agreed to this proposal despite his reservations that, in doing so, the players may be agreeing to waive a rule of golf, particularly R10 “Order of Play.” (While one has the option in match play to not require a player to replay a shot played out of turn, does one have the option to collude (love to get to use this word!) with other players to waive R10 completely?)

F actually researched this question and found an R and A manual suggesting that while Ready Golf might be encouraged in stroke play to assist pace of play, it should be avoided in the match play format where strategy might depend upon an opponent’s shot. (F would submit that no one at the R and A has ever played with Sandwich in match play).

2. Facts (Player Fails to Assess Handicap Implications in Concession)

A specific example of the issue referenced above took place on the #1 handicap 7th hole. F and opponent BM were both in their pockets early and simply observing the battle between Sandwich and LB. (The Reader might do the math here and conclude that with only two participating players, this would be a speedy hole…right?)

In fact, Sandwich agonized for several minutes over a two-putt for a quad bogey 8, carefully analyzing and aligning the last four feet of the putt as the following group stood in the fairway shifting their weight back back and forth on their feet, hands on their hips. Sandwich made the putt. As LB was finally able to step in to finish off his 2 1/2 footer, F suggested Sandwich concede this short putt as a courtesy to the following group.

“What is the putt for?”, asked Sandwich.

“It’s for a 6″, F replied.

Sandwich furrowed his brow in thought and then graciously conceded the putt. Walking to the next tee, however, he exploded stating that he had been”snookered.”  He remembered  that he had a stroke on hole#7 and would have tied the hole had LB missed his putt. He blamed F for not reminding him of his stroke, a reminder which would have given him the opportunity to fully consider the implications of a concession.

Issue

Sandwich stated the ROG must impose a penalty for “snookering.”

Ruling

There was no violation of R9-2a “Information as to Strokes Taken” as F gave correct information in response to Sandwich’s query, “What is that putt for?”

It is the Player’s responsibility to know the holes at which handicap strokes are to be given or received. See, Note, R6-2. Where a Player forgot about his handicap stroke, “he must suffer the consequences.” Dec.6-2a/4.

As usual, all comments and corrections are welcome!

Respectfully submitted,

F