Happy 4th of July!

As fireworks exploded high in the skies across America in celebration of our great nation’s independence, fireworks on a more personal and emotional level, equally combustible, exploded on the otherwise serene and tranquil grounds of the BMCC golf course. The cause of this latter excitement was the play of music by Player and Reader, WD, during a stipulated round of four-ball competition.

A Hushed Allegation

The caller, opponent BC, advised Foremost that he had recently completed a match with WD who carried a radio, or phone, or some other kind of electronic device in his golf bag which he conspicuously played and adjusted regularly to serenade the players with song selections. While some of the musical choices, he noted, were quite good, the totality of the concert was somewhat disruptive to orderly and concentrated play.

BC states he had never encountered this particular conduct on a golf course, he was absolutely shocked, and he had simply tracked down F to see if this novel and outrageous behavior constituted a violation of the Rules. F was traveling, and while he quickly assured BC the conduct did constitute an infraction, he couldn’t cite the Rule # off the top of his head with absolute assurance, but he knew it had to do with striking the ball fairly without the assistance of unusual equipment or an electronic device.

Shortly thereafter, F called BC back, and suggested BC reference F’s book “I Think That’s a Penalty”* which, as F recalled, presented this same scenario on the 17th hole of this fictional account. BC advised F that he, indeed, kept this reference book handy and at his fingertips, and quickly finding the appropriate passage, read the cited Decision back to F aloud.

In short, Dec 14-3/17 states that R14-3 prohibits the use of “an artificial device or unusual equipment” which might assist a player in making a stroke. It says further that listening to music for “a prolonged period” might assist a player in making a stroke by eliminating distractions, or promoting tempo, or reducing stress. The penalty for violation of R14-3 is rather harsh…disqualification.**

(Whether the play of music is “prolonged” and of the nature to assist the swing are factual questions for the Committee. A brief reference to a broadcast between holes to find a score of “another sporting event” or “traffic information” are examples where no violation would be found. Ibid.)

An Effort at Diplomacy

BC wished to handle this matter privately and with some delicacy, and cognizant of F’s stellar reputation in this regard, asked F if he would kindly call this violation to the attention of WD. F agreed to do so, and without mentioning the name of the complainant, sent forthwith to WD a polite notice of the allegation and findings as stated herein. F thought this would be the end of the matter.

A Spirited Defense

WD did not accept F’s verdict.

After stating he was truly honored to be sanctioned for a Rules violation by F, and after savagely blasting Reader CK (who had only a minor role in this inquiry) for reporting the violation to F, WD said F’s Ruling was totally wrong in that it was not supported by a proper understanding of facts or motives, which he wished to clarify.

Yes, it was true, WD conceded, that he had played music continuously for a prolonged period. And yes, the music was not always appreciated. He acknowledge that even his own partner, MT, had tried to swap places with an opponent and ride in the opponents’ golf cart after being held captive to his “Old School” playlist.

Nevertheless, rather than playing music for the purpose of assisting his own swing by REDUCING his own stress (as contemplated by Dec14-3/17), WD stated that his intent was actually to create distractions and “INCREASE” the stress in his opponents. In fact, he offered that this strategy worked quite well as otherwise rock-steady Opponent CK*** had faltered down the stretch under a bombardment of songs whispered in the background from WD’s “Hip-Hop Rap” playlist.

New Testimony Places Prior Ruling in Different Light

This candid revelation by WD does, in fact, require that F revisit his earlier Ruling. R14-3 clearly was not directly on point.

Ruling

While the penalty for playing music with an electronic device, when limited to a R14-3 violation, is disqualification for the match, the appropriate penalty, in light of this broader confession may be suspension, or even banishment or exile, as the Committee deems appropriate.

An action to increase stress in an opponent would fall under Section 1 of the Rules which deals with “Etiquette: Behavior on the Course.” Players should not make “unnecessary noise”; and they should ensure that electronic devices they bring to the course do not “distract other players.” (See, “Section 1, Etiquette, Consideration for Other Players. No disturbance or distraction”).

While a “serious breach” of the Etiquette guidelines might warrant disqualification by the Committee (citing R33-7), “consistent disregard” might require stricter disciplinary measures such as “prohibiting play” for a limited time or during certain competitions.

After due consideration of all the facts of this case, and the credibility of the various witnesses (and not at all swayed by WD’s patronizing statement that he actually bought a copy of F’s book off Amazon), F would argue for lenience in this case.

If and when consulted, as he surely will be after an incident of this magnitude and notoriety, F would recommend that the Committee allow WD to continue play through the summer, and that it withhold suspension until the fall, when WD will be off the course anyway, following his beloved Vanderbilt Commodores. Readers know that at that time of year, WD can be found parked in the shade off Natchez Trace, sipping lemonade, and playing his all-time favorite playlist song, “Dynamite,” a song which does, in fact, induce distraction, fear, and stress in opponents. It, of course, begins with those stirring, immortal, and yes… explosive words, “Dynamite, dynamite…when Vandy starts to fight…”

As usual, all comments or corrections are welcome!

Respectfully submitted,
F

*”I Think That’s a Penalty”, now available in print and Kindle editions on Amazon.com

** In his review of the case at hand, F finds an error in the above-referenced book scenario. The Loss of Hole penalty assessed by the Committee against the Windsor/Forsythe Team was incorrect, as the penalty for violation of R14-3 is disqualification.

***As noted previously, Reader CK had only a small role in this inquiry, one in which he simply confirmed WD’s playing of music during a competition. Upon hearing F’s preliminary finding that the activities presented a violation of R14, CK asked F if the transport of an alignment rod in the golf bag during a competition also constituted a violation of R14. While the “use” of a rod during a competition would be a violation, having it in the bag is not a violation. (See, Dec14-3/10.3).