rule query re not signing card

bridestream

A player refuses to sign partner's card at end of round because he considers there was visual and oral evidence his playing partner may or was 'pulling'.
Consider the player's handicap was say 13.4 and getting a point one back increases his handicap to 14.
A scratch cup event is coming up and the extra full shot just might make all the difference over a 36 hole comp. In fact in a 36 hole comp it gives him 2 shots extra handicap.
Unknown to the marker the player in question gets one of the other players in the group to sign off the card.
The marker reports to the committee.
What can the committe do?
What is the ruling and can you quote the relevant reference.

Paulusmaximus

bridestream wrote: »

A player refuses to sign partner's card at end of round because he considers there was visual and oral evidence his playing partner may or was 'pulling'.
Consider the player's handicap was say 13.4 and getting a point one back increases his handicap to 14.
A scratch cup event is coming up and the extra full shot just might make all the difference over a 36 hole comp. In fact in a 36 hole comp it gives him 2 shots extra handicap.
Unknown to the marker the player in question gets one of the other players in the group to sign off the card.
The marker reports to the committee.
What can the committe do?
What is the ruling and can you quote the relevant reference.

I'm not sure there is any breach of a rule. I could be wrong, but "not trying" i dont think is an offence. Its very bad sportmanship and goes completely against the integrity of the game but i'd say no rule has been breached.

If however he amended his scorecard so as to avoid being in the bufferzone, now that is an entirely different matter.

Gophur

bridestream wrote: »

A player refuses to sign partner's card at end of round because he considers there was visual and oral evidence his playing partner may or was 'pulling'.
Consider the player's handicap was say 13.4 and getting a point one back increases his handicap to 14.
A scratch cup event is coming up and the extra full shot just might make all the difference over a 36 hole comp. In fact in a 36 hole comp it gives him 2 shots extra handicap.
Unknown to the marker the player in question gets one of the other players in the group to sign off the card.
The marker reports to the committee.
What can the committe do?
What is the ruling and can you quote the relevant reference.

Disqualification. The card was not signed by the "Marker".

Rule 6.6

thelongfellow

bridestream wrote: »

A player refuses to sign partner's card at end of round because he considers there was visual and oral evidence his playing partner may or was 'pulling'.
Consider the player's handicap was say 13.4 and getting a point one back increases his handicap to 14.
A scratch cup event is coming up and the extra full shot just might make all the difference over a 36 hole comp. In fact in a 36 hole comp it gives him 2 shots extra handicap.
Unknown to the marker the player in question gets one of the other players in the group to sign off the card.
The marker reports to the committee.
What can the committe do?
What is the ruling and can you quote the relevant reference.

Covered under rule 6-6. Under rule 6-6b I think the competitior off 13.4 has to be disqualified as the person who marked his score card did not sign it.

Paulusmaximus

thelongfellow wrote: »

Covered under rule 6-6. Under rule 6-6b I think the competitior off 13.4 has to be disqualified as the person who marked his score card did not sign it.

Just saw that rule, but the marker's refusal to sign the card was not based on any ruling. He recorded the scores the individual had, and should sign the card based on this. He could have signed the card and then sent in a letter of complaint to the committee. If the person is known for "pulling" the handicap committee could always cut him on General play...

Paulusmaximus

Found this on the R & A site..should not necessarily be disqualified for refusal to sgn card..

In stroke play, B, who was A's fellow-competitor and marker, refused to sign A's score card on the ground that A had played outside the teeing ground at the 15th hole. A claimed that he played from within the teeing ground.
The Committee decided in favour of A. Despite the Committee's decision, B continued to refuse to sign A's card. Should B be penalised?

No. A marker is not obliged to sign a card he believes to be incorrect, notwithstanding the determination of the Committee. However, the marker must report the facts and authenticate those scores which he considers correct.
The Committee should accept certification of A's score at the 15th hole by anyone else who witnessed the play of the hole. If no witness is available, the Committee should accept A's score without certification.

thelongfellow

Paulusmaximus wrote: »

Just saw that rule, but the marker's refusal to sign the card was not based on any ruling. He recorded the scores the individual had, and should sign the card based on this. He could have signed the card and then sent in a letter of complaint to the committee. If the person is known for "pulling" the handicap committee could always cut him on General play...

But surely they can't cut him cos one guy thought he was pulling? Think the committee can accept his score 'without certification' which would essentially mean the score still counts.

Think it is less to do with the competitor and more to do with the refusal of his partner to sign the card.

Paulusmaximus

thelongfellow wrote: »

But surely they can't cut him cos one guy thought he was pulling? Think the committee can accept his score 'without certification' which would essentially mean the score still counts.

Think it is less to do with the competitor and more to do with the refusal of his partner to sign the card.

If there were numerous incidents of the guy pulling then GP cut, one complaint would most definitely not justify it.

From my reading there is no rules broken and scores count.

Riskymove

Paulusmaximus wrote: »

No. A marker is not obliged to sign a card he believes to be incorrect, notwithstanding the determination of the Committee. However, the marker must report the facts and authenticate those scores which he considers correct. .

but the card here is correct...it accurately reflects the score taken

its a belief by the marker that the other guy played worse than he could have deliberately....imo you cant have such things based on beliefs or opinions...how can either side prove such a concept

the marker should have made his opinion known to powers that be if he wanted...but I cant see how he can refuse to sign

Russman

IMO the marker should be sanctioned somehow for not signing the card. Its nothing whatsoever to with him whether or not the guy was "pulling". He's there to record the score nothing more or nothing less.

This pulling thing really irritates me I have to say. When, for example, Rory McIlroy shoots 63 followed by an 80 is there any doubt that he was trying ? No. He's one of the best players in the world, yet when a mid handicapper screws up a back nine or a few holes, somoene usually says like "aww the handbrake went on there alright". Now I don't doubt it happens on occassion but not nearly as much as is made out.

Rant over

Sandwlch

The non-signer is wrong not to sign the card and should be asked to do so and it explained to him that he is wrong not to do so. If he still refuses, at the request of competition committee, then it is OK for one of the other players to validate that the card is correct and sign it instead.

The marker is not signing that the score is 'honest' from a handicap perspective, he is signing that the shots taked on each hole are as recorded on the card.

Lots of pulling does go on - but you have no jurisdiction to take the law into your own hands. I estimate about 5 percent of our club 'manage' their handicaps. A lot of honest golfers therfore, but the bandits have a high profile due to the success of their actions. There is really nothing you can do about it at the moment. The handicapping system is not setup to catch them - it is based on the assumption that everyone is playing honestly. If you want to cheat it - you can get away with it. Its the sad flaw inherent in a handicapping system, but overall does work to the benefit of our enjoyment of golf. Now and again we can feel as if we won - where really all we did was play well relative to our normal game. The bandits artifically distort thier normal game to get that winning feeling more often than the rest of us.

Gophur

Sandwlch wrote: »

The non-signer is wrong not to sign the card and should be asked to do so and it explained to him that he is wrong not to do so. If he still refuses, at the request of competition committee, then it is OK for one of the other players to validate that the card is correct and sign it instead.

........................

You are contradicting yourself? How can it be "wrong" for someone to refuse to sign a card when he is convinced cheating has taken place, yet it is OK for someone else, who did not witness the scores, to sign the card as marker?

Why bother with markers, if that's acceptable?

thelongfellow

Gophur wrote: »

You are contradicting yourself? How can it be "wrong" for someone to refuse to sign a card when he is convinced cheating has taken place, yet it is OK for someone else, who did not witness the scores, to sign the card as marker?

Why bother with markers, if that's acceptable?

He got one of the other guys in his playing group to sign it.

I'd say there is probably more to this than meets the eye. Maybe the guy is a bandit, has had a run in with his marker cos for a guy to flat out refuse to sign someones card based on one round is very, very unusual.

Gophur

With respect, to ask someone who has been in your group for 18 holes to sign a card, for which he has had no input into verifying the scores, is disingenuous.

Facts are, as outlined, that the person who signed the card, as marker, was not the person who "marked" the card.

thelongfellow

Gophur wrote: »

With respect, to ask someone who has been in your group for 18 holes to sign a card, for which he has had no input into verifying the scores, is disingenuous.

Facts are, as outlined, that the person who signed the card, as marker, was not the person who "marked" the card.

I think OP has left a few of the facts out. It may be disingenuous but is it covered under rule 6-6?

Russman

It does sound like there is more to this than meets the eye alright. But I still think the marker should be obliged to sign the card as long as the number of strokes is correct, whether he thinks the player could have done better is completely irrelevant (and a very dangerous path to go down). The player could play every hole with a putter and, as long as the numbers are correct, the card should be signed. Or am I missing some part of the story ?

Unless there are other facts we don't know, the marker should worry about his own game and stop trying to be judge and jury on someone else. Its the committee's job to implement any Rule 19 cut, which shouldn't be based on hearsay anyway.

mike12

Hi,
If he just put the card in unsigned he would have DQ and got his .1 back anyhow so why go to the bother of getting someone else to sign it if he was a bandit.
Mike

Sir Shankalot

sand-bagging or pulling is one of the great mysteries of golf - when do people come around to the conclusion that they'll be better off letting their handicap drift upwards purposely - where is the satisfaction in that? Getting handicap as low as possible has ALWAYS been my goal at start of every year, others seem more concerned about making sure they win a half dozen hampers or turkeys for Christmas, when everyone in Club knows and despises what they are doing. We had a well know guy in our club, guy I know refused to sign his card and the matter was taken to committee, one-month ban from comps

bridestream

Thanks for input 'guys & gals'.

I agree with 'Russman' - there is 'more to this than meets the eye'.
I cannot say anything too specific because the matter is presently 'sub judice'. But I can state the 'major' competition over 36 holes has been played and I will let you guess what the result of it was! Murphy's law and all of that is the alleged winner!!!

Meanwhile, my understanding is the player's marker allegedly did NOT sign his card and the matter was reported to the Committee BEFORE the major comp was played. (Allegedly, the player got someone else in the 4ball to sign the card). And the Committe allegedly did talk to the relevant persons before the 'major' comp was played.
(My apologies for all the 'allegedly's but one has to be careful nowadays).

I agree with those who say Rule 6-6 is the relevant one and he could be disqualified thus preventing him getting his .1 back and preventing him playing off 13.5/14. If disqualified he would still be off 13.4/13.

But can the Committee retrospectively do this now and on what basis would he be disqualified? They do not want to finish up in the courts!!

And Golf is supposed to be our leisure period!

Glencarraig

This just highlights the rampant abuse of the handicap system. I know of a group of 4 golfers who NEVER feature in a singles competition, and have been cleaning up in the last 3 months in 4 ball and team competitions, one of them has 3 wins, 4 seconds and 1 third place to his "credit" and has not been cut by his club, one reason I believe is because they are still representing the club on inter club teams and the h/cap sec is turning a blind eye to their cheating, yes cheating is what it should be called, not "managing their handicap". I do believe that it time we got rid of this virus that is .1 and come up with some system whereby if you win, you get cut, and have a 3 or 6 month review by the clubs, the results of which must be forwarded to the GUI.

thelongfellow

bridestream wrote: »

Thanks for input 'guys & gals'.

I agree with 'Russman' - there is 'more to this than meets the eye'.
I cannot say anything too specific because the matter is presently 'sub judice'. But I can state the 'major' competition over 36 holes has been played and I will let you guess what the result of it was! Murphy's law and all of that is the alleged winner!!!

Meanwhile, my understanding is the player's marker allegedly did NOT sign his card and the matter was reported to the Committee BEFORE the major comp was played. (Allegedly, the player got someone else in the 4ball to sign the card). And the Committe allegedly did talk to the relevant persons before the 'major' comp was played.
(My apologies for all the 'allegedly's but one has to be careful nowadays).

I agree with those who say Rule 6-6 is the relevant one and he could be disqualified thus preventing him getting his .1 back and preventing him playing off 13.5/14. If disqualified he would still be off 13.4/13.

But can the Committee retrospectively do this now and on what basis would he be disqualified? They do not want to finish up in the courts!!

And Golf is supposed to be our leisure period!

Be interesting to hear a view from any other boards.ie memeber who have served on committees.

From my time on one I think the player might not have as much to answer for as the guy who refused to mark his card.

Retrospective action is a no-go imo

SARZY

Sandwlch wrote: »

The non-signer is wrong not to sign the card and should be asked to do so and it explained to him that he is wrong not to do so. If he still refuses, at the request of competition committee, then it is OK for one of the other players to validate that the card is correct and sign it instead.

The marker is not signing that the score is 'honest' from a handicap perspective, he is signing that the shots taked on each hole are as recorded on the card.

Lots of pulling does go on - but you have no jurisdiction to take the law into your own hands. I estimate about 5 percent of our club 'manage' their handicaps. A lot of honest golfers therfore, but the bandits have a high profile due to the success of their actions. There is really nothing you can do about it at the moment. The handicapping system is not setup to catch them - it is based on the assumption that everyone is playing honestly. If you want to cheat it - you can get away with it. Its the sad flaw inherent in a handicapping system, but overall does work to the benefit of our enjoyment of golf. Now and again we can feel as if we won - where really all we did was play well relative to our normal game. The bandits artifically distort thier normal game to get that winning feeling more often than the rest of us.

You have summarised this very well here and have demonstrated to me that you know what you are talking about. Well done.

BoardsMember

Glencarraig wrote: »

This just highlights the rampant abuse of the handicap system. I know of a group of 4 golfers who NEVER feature in a singles competition, and have been cleaning up in the last 3 months in 4 ball and team competitions, one of them has 3 wins, 4 seconds and 1 third place to his "credit" and has not been cut by his club, one reason I believe is because they are still representing the club on inter club teams and the h/cap sec is turning a blind eye to their cheating, yes cheating is what it should be called, not "managing their handicap". I do believe that it time we got rid of this virus that is .1 and come up with some system whereby if you win, you get cut, and have a 3 or 6 month review by the clubs, the results of which must be forwarded to the GUI.

You're right here. They are cheating.

And the handicap secretary is also failing to dispense his duties honestly. Time and again guys in our club (including me) are pulled at end of year having got to semi-finals or finals of club matchplay comps, both singles and 4 ball/somes.

It often results in them not being eligible for the teams the following year that they would have played on during that year. But the decision is made without taking that into account. From reading posts on here, there a plenty of clubs that would not do this.

Mexihalo

how does an extra shot help in a scratch cup?

PhilipMarlowe

An extra shot might mean you are big fish in a Junior/Intermediate rather than small fry in a Senior/Junior for starters! Also, some of these have nett prizes too...

SARZY

Played in a singles some years ago in a 3 ball stroke competition.
On the 1st tee one of the guys suggested a liitle wager on the score.
At the end of the round I had the worst score.
I signed the card I was marking and got my signed card back.
Handed over the Fiver and went home.
Got a call later in the evening from the club to inform me that I had finished 3rd.
Aware that both my playing partners had better scores than me I was expecting to meet them at the presentation.
But they were not there. 2 other guys were 1st and 2nd.
I made an enquiry and found that my 2 partners had re-written their cards and had reduced their score by some 10 points and had signed for one another and qualified for point one.

I confronted these golfers and they informed me as follows;

"we broke no rule of golf as we did not sign for a score at any hole lower than what we had"

Believe it or not they had a technical point as it is not an offence to sign for a score higher than what you acyually had at any hole.

But they are warped individuals and golf is plagued by this kind of thinking.

My fiver was returned by the way after much argument.

They continue to partake in the game and still dont accept that they did anything wrong.

PhilipMarlowe

SARZY wrote: »

Played in a singles some years ago in a 3 ball stroke competition.
On the 1st tee one of the guys suggested a liitle wager on the score.
At the end of the round I had the worst score.
I signed the card I was marking and got my signed card back.
Handed over the Fiver and went home.
Got a call later in the evening from the club to inform me that I had finished 3rd.
Aware that both my playing partners had better scores than me I was expecting to meet them at the presentation.
But they were not there. 2 other guys were 1st and 2nd.
I made an enquiry and found that my 2 partners had re-written their cards and had reduced their score by some 10 points and had signed for one another and qualified for point one.

I confronted these golfers and they informed me as follows;

"we broke no rule of golf as we did not sign for a score at any hole lower than what we had"

Believe it or not they had a technical point as it is not an offence to sign for a score higher than what you acyually had at any hole.

But they are warped individuals and golf is plagued by this kind of thinking.

My fiver was returned by the way after much argument.

They continue to partake in the game and still dont accept that they did anything wrong.

That's just f***ed.
I'd argue that since the guy whose card you marked altered the card after you signed it then he should be DQ'ed anyway but what's the point.

BoardsMember

Licksy wrote: »

That's just f***ed.
I'd argue that since the guy whose card you marked altered the card after you signed it then he should be DQ'ed anyway but what's the point.

+1

I had to re-read that to make sure I had not got the wrong end of the stick. They should be banned from club competitions for a lengthy period, crazt stuff.

SARZY

So my point is, that the current system gives control to the player and all he or she has to do is connect with like minded individuals, and decide what handicap they would like to play off.
The automatic awarding of point one immediately on completion of the competition is the real problem with the current system.
An individual who desires a shot or 2 can achieve this within a short period of time and has total control of this.
Golf as a game puts itself on a high pedestal with regard to cheating but this false handicap thing is exactly that, Cheating.
The powers that be are ignoring this and have ignored this since the CONGU scheme was introduced quite a few years ago now.
It seems that they either cant do anything about it or are unwilling to do anything about it.
In the meantime the game is being destroyed by this.

Paulusmaximus

BoardsMember wrote: »

+1

I had to re-read that to make sure I had not got the wrong end of the stick. They should be banned from club competitions for a lengthy period, crazt stuff.

An elderly member of our club did this a number of years back... he was getting on, struggling to complete 18 holes and struggled off his handicap.. one day he had 35/36 points and altered his score downwards so that he'd get a .1 back... anway weather conditions deteoriated and his "real" score became very good and would have won the competition. Anyway, it was found out he changed his card and after investigation he was suspended for 6 months....

maybe a bit harsh, but it does set an example and precedent..

gary29428

For me the increase in Am-Am's has a part to play in these people fixing there handicaps. Most weekends several clubs have Am-Am's taking place all of which have a great spread of prizes. A group of 4 bandits can do serious damage during a year at these events and more often them not the home club of these players are totally oblivious to the wins and prizes being picked up. I played in one last weekend which had top of the range power caddy's for first, the winning team were 11 shots better then anyone else and it was there third time winning it in the four years this particular comp was taking place. The home clubs should be informed of any prizes being picked up and then cut on GP accordingly.

BoardsMember

Agreed toe the amateur opens. I played in one of the Volvo classics recently,on a difficult day on a difficult course. I played well, fought hard for a 34, very happy with myself. The winner posts a 42. We were having a drink after, and I was speaking to the fella with the 42. He was not overly proud/happy, said he played ok, and that it was a decent enough score. WTF??? Anyone playing off a fair and honest handicap that shoots 42 should be over the moon. I'd be fairly certain that score wont be affecting his handicap any time soon either....