Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Illegal Driver in club matchplay?

Options
1…789101113»

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Even if he had beaten you even while he was illegally gaining 30 yards off the tee?

    I was being a bit tongue in cheek GreeBo ;)

    You said he wasn't using an illegal driver and was 30 yards behind me. Happy days :D

    But yes, if I know for a fact that he's gaining 30 yards with his illegal driver then I'd be calling him on it.


  • Options
    #363
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,031 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Loire wrote: »
    I probably wasn't been clear. Lets say we're both playing well. For me that would be driving the ball 230 yards, so he's at 225 yards with the dodgy club. For him to then drop to 200 yards with his legal club, losing 25 yards, I would like to think that it would be noticeable from the rest of his play...he should be shorter with his irons/woods etc. For example he's probably only hitting his 7 iron 125 yards.

    I totally accept it's not scientific. It was just meant to illustrate how I would handle the situation.

    In any case, I really don't know much about club technoology and would doubt that an average player would gain a material advantage with a non-conforming club - if I felt that the advantage was material I would call him on it, if not then I would have a friendly word with him afterwards.

    Hope this clears my point :)

    Loire.

    And my point is that you cant judge whether its a material advantage or not...hence we follow the rules; all the rules, all the time! ;)


  • Options
    #364
    Loire
    Registered Users Posts: 2,034 ✭✭✭Loire


    GreeBo wrote: »
    And my point is that you cant judge whether its a material advantage or not...hence we follow the rules; all the rules, all the time! ;)

    You're obviously right, but for me it would depend on the match and the breach. If it was the club match-play for example and I didn't think my playing partner was getting any material benefit from using an illegal club I would just say something afterwards. It could after all be totally unintentional - he might have just picked up the club 2nd hand thinking he got a good deal. However, it is was obvious (to me) he was getting away with murder with this club I'd call him on it.

    If I was representing my club at an official level then I would call him on it no question.

    Again, you're obviously right but I'm quite non-confrontational and would rather just carry-on for a non-material breach and try and win the match rather than end up with an enemy within the club.

    I'm going to leave it there if you don't mind. If we ever have a match though I'll turn into a psycho rules Nazi and call you on everything ;):P


  • Options
    #365
    cairny
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭cairny


    GreeBo wrote: »
    And my point is that you cant judge whether its a material advantage or not...hence we follow the rules; all the rules, all the time! ;)

    But you can, in matchplay, not call him on a breach and still "follow the rules; all the rules, all the time". The Rules allow you to make the judgement in these very specific circumstances and with specific limitations (no agreement to waive rule) if you so choose.

    Sorry to harp on about this again but I think it's very important to emphasise that we have the option to make a sporting decision without being open to being accused of playing outside the rules.


  • Options
    #366
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,031 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    cairny wrote: »
    But you can, in matchplay, not call him on a breach and still "follow the rules; all the rules, all the time". The Rules allow you to make the judgement in these very specific circumstances and with specific limitations (no agreement to waive rule) if you so choose.

    Sorry to harp on about this again but I think it's very important to emphasise that we have the option to make a sporting decision without being open to being accused of playing outside the rules.

    And again, how do you know its a sporting decision?

    Also, I would argue strongly that agreeing to let someone use an illegal club for a round is not making a sporting decision to ignore a rules infraction. Its effectively an agreement to waive the rules.
    He decides to use an illegal club and you let him i.e. agree to it.

    The discretion is in place to allow you to ignore someone accidentally moving a ball 1 dimple for example.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    Loire
    Registered Users Posts: 2,034 ✭✭✭Loire


    GreeBo wrote: »
    The discretion is in place to allow you to ignore someone accidentally moving a ball 1 dimple for example.

    If this happened on the green and he then made the putt after the ball doing a complete 360 degree around the cup what would you do? :pac::pac::pac:


  • Options
    #368
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭Russman


    GreeBo wrote: »
    And again, how do you know its a sporting decision?

    Also, I would argue strongly that agreeing to let someone use an illegal club for a round is not making a sporting decision to ignore a rules infraction. Its effectively an agreement to waive the rules.
    He decides to use an illegal club and you let him i.e. agree to it.

    The discretion is in place to allow you to ignore someone accidentally moving a ball 1 dimple for example.

    To be fair, that's going to come down to the individual and what he thinks. One man's "sporting" could easily be another man's "too generous" or "facilitating breaking the rules". In the matchplay scenario there is discretion allowed.

    There is absolutely no element of "agreeing to it" if its a case of a player noticing an illegal club and simply saying nothing. If the player with the illegal club informs the opponent that he has such a club, then of course the opponent is bound by rules to call the infraction.
    Agreeing to it is clearly meant to deal with players conferring or discussing it. You can't criticise or penalise someone for not doing something about something they may or may not have noticed. Surely that's why saying nothing can rarely get you into trouble with the rules....?


  • Options
    #369
    cairny
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭cairny


    GreeBo wrote: »
    And again, how do you know its a sporting decision?

    Also, I would argue strongly that agreeing to let someone use an illegal club for a round is not making a sporting decision to ignore a rules infraction. Its effectively an agreement to waive the rules.
    He decides to use an illegal club and you let him i.e. agree to it.

    The discretion is in place to allow you to ignore someone accidentally moving a ball 1 dimple for example.


    Ah now you can't decide why the Rule / Discretion is in place, all you can / should do is acknowledge that it is place. Everyone makes their own mind up about what is / is not sporting, if a player wishes then they need not be sporting at all.

    All I'm saying is that you need not make the claim and still be perfectly within the Rules and there was a an implicaton in this thread that there was something wrong with that.

    Whether or not the driver was a material advantage is not really the point, it is for his opponent to let it go or call him on it. You can't imply an agreement, I would argue (strongly) that the Rules give me the right to ignore the breach and I would argue (strongly) that you cannot imply an agreement where none was made.


  • Options
    #370
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,031 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Russman wrote: »
    To be fair, that's going to come down to the individual and what he thinks. One man's "sporting" could easily be another man's "too generous" or "facilitating breaking the rules". In the matchplay scenario there is discretion allowed.

    There is absolutely no element of "agreeing to it" if its a case of a player noticing an illegal club and simply saying nothing. If the player with the illegal club informs the opponent that he has such a club, then of course the opponent is bound by rules to call the infraction.
    Agreeing to it is clearly meant to deal with players conferring or discussing it. You can't criticise or penalise someone for not doing something about something they may or may not have noticed. Surely that's why saying nothing can rarely get you into trouble with the rules....?
    I wasnt clear, I mean you cant decide to use discretion until you know what you are being discrete about.
    You cant know how much of an advantage an illegal club is giving someone.


    Not knowing the rules isnt a good enough excuse to not penalise someone though. So not knowing you are using an illegal club isnt an excuse (and I would guess rarely is an issue?)
    Once you notice I think the onus is on you to do something. Ignoring a repeated rule breach for a round doesnt sit right with me.
    Its not like leaving them off for having an extra/15th club, that they didnt use.


  • Options
    #371
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,031 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    cairny wrote: »
    Ah now you can't decide why the Rule / Discretion is in place, all you can / should do is acknowledge that it is place. Everyone makes their own mind up about what is / is not sporting, if a player wishes then they need not be sporting at all.

    All I'm saying is that you need not make the claim and still be perfectly within the Rules and there was a an implicaton in this thread that there was something wrong with that.

    Whether or not the driver was a material advantage is not really the point, it is for his opponent to let it go or call him on it. You can't imply an agreement, I would argue (strongly) that the Rules give me the right to ignore the breach and I would argue (strongly) that you cannot imply an agreement where none was made.

    And I think ignoring a repeated breach is against the intent of the rule.

    Agree to (strongly) disagree?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    cairny
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭cairny


    GreeBo wrote: »
    And I think ignoring a repeated breach is against the intent of the rule.

    Agree to (strongly) disagree?


    Done (with the tiny caveat / concern that looking at intent is a slippery slope).


  • Options
    #373
    Trumspringa90
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭Trumspringa90


    Similar thing happened me, he denied ever having used it then told his father ( he's in his 30's himself by the way ) who I played with regularly that I had called him a cheat, which I didn't, haven't spoken to either of them in months.

    As you say, it all depends on their integrity.


  • Options
    #374
    Golfnut77
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭Golfnut77


    Trumspringa90 wrote: »
    Similar thing happened me, he denied ever having used it then told his father ( he's in his 30's himself by the way ) who I played with regularly that I had called him a cheat, which I didn't, haven't spoken to either of them in months.

    As you say, it all depends on their integrity.

    Was that in matchplay? Strange that he would involve his father?

    Absolutely, no point in taking it any further if he's just going to keep lying I'm going to leave it as it is, he knows he used it and I know he used it.


  • Options
    #375
    Trumspringa90
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭Trumspringa90


    Golfnut77 wrote: »
    Was that in matchplay? Strange that he would involve his father?

    Absolutely, no point in taking it any further if he's just going to keep lying I'm going to leave it as it is, he knows he used it and I know he used it.

    No it wasn't match play.

    Not sure but his father made it worse, accused me of calling his son a cheat, I had the texts to prove I didn't, he then said

    "my only issue was whether the word 'cheat' was used, which I'm happy to report it wasn't".

    No apology for the false accusation or anything. Then about a month later he wanted to meet up to talk it out, he didn't show up. A few weeks after that I saw him at the golf club, standing 10 feet away and he just walks away.

    I want nothing to do with people like that. Your situation is a bit different since it seems that you didn't know the guy before hand? But I'd say you're right in just dropping it, it'll always be your word against his, after all this he's not going to turn around and say "yeah I did use the Cobra actually".


  • Options
    #376
    Golfnut77
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭Golfnut77


    Trumspringa90 wrote: »
    No it wasn't match play.

    Not sure but his father made it worse, accused me of calling his son a cheat, I had the texts to prove I didn't, he then said

    "my only issue was whether the word 'cheat' was used, which I'm happy to report it wasn't".

    No apology for the false accusation or anything. Then about a month later he wanted to meet up to talk it out, he didn't show up. A few weeks after that I saw him at the golf club, standing 10 feet away and he just walks away.

    That's an awful situation, especially for him not to show up then. Any text or anything to say he wouldn't make it?
    Trumspringa90 wrote: »
    I want nothing to do with people like that. Your situation is a bit different since it seems that you didn't know the guy before hand?

    No didn't know him at all only to see and heard a few things about him around the club that he was a bit arrogant etc but found him to be sound enough during the match up until the 10th of course. In hindsight I would definitely have left it until after the round.
    Trumspringa90 wrote: »
    But I'd say you're right in just dropping it, it'll always be your word against his, after all this he's not going to turn around and say "yeah I did use the Cobra actually".

    That was my thinking too and the primary reason why I'm going to leave it as is, the further it goes and the longer he denies it the more he has to lose by going back on the lie.


Advertisement