South of Ireland Championship

Sir Shankalot

Is there any live scoring on this today? last 16

AGC

Coverage has been fairly poor.

Anyone know why they only played 27 holes in qualifying?

Sir Shankalot

AGC wrote: »

Coverage has been fairly poor.

Anyone know why they only played 27 holes in qualifying?

Bad fog apparently

goodgolfer64

yeah 27 holes was right thing to do....thought coverage has been appaling even yday even thought they had match scorers every 3 holes????....draw took 1 hour and 20 minutes to print from when last golfer returned card.....had bout 50 guys waiting at the scoreboard...total joke....pen and paper would have been quicker!!!!
not sure who to blame....lahinch golf club or munster gui....no one seems to know whos really running the show...

Sir Shankalot

Hume, Hogan and Cannon have won their matches, pal of mine rang Lahinch

Sir Shankalot

7 of the 8 morn matches now up:

Round 3

N. Grant (Knock) beat I. Murphy (Waterford) 4/3.
A. Hogan (Newlands) beat N. Morrison (Lahinch) 2/1.
J.Hume (Rathsallagh) beat C. Moulds (Lisburn) 2/1.
K.McDonagh (Athlone/NUIM) beat C.O'Rourke(Naas) 21st.
R.Cannon (Balbriggan) beat D.Ruddy (Co.Tipperary) 2/1
C.Selfridge (Moyola Park) beat L.Hutchinson(The Royal Dublin) 1 hole.


S.Walsh (Baltinglass/UCD) beat R. Burke(Castle) 2/1

LuckyGent88

David Ryan beat R.Bridges on the 20th

top half of draw is much harder imo. Watched Jack Hume yesterday against Joe Lyons and he destroyed him and then Selfridge who is another very good player.

Ill go for a Nicky Grant v R. Cannon final

Sir Shankalot

LuckyGent88 wrote: »

David Ryan beat R.Bridges on the 20th

top half of draw is much harder imo. Watched Jack Hume yesterday against Joe Lyons and he destroyed him and then Selfridge who is another very good player.

Ill go for a Nicky Grant v R. Cannon final

Why not Jack Hume for final based on what you said? was the golf good against Joe Lyons?

downthemiddle

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Why not Jack Hume for final based on what you said? was the golf good against Joe Lyons?

Jack is a nice young lad as is Stephen Walsh. Wouldn't mind seeing an all Wicklow final.

Sir Shankalot

downthemiddle wrote: »

Jack is a nice young lad as is Stephen Walsh. Wouldn't mind seeing an all Wicklow final.

McDonagh two up on Hume early on, Cannon also two up after 5 holes

AGC

Why is Robbie Cannon down as Laytown in the strokeplay but Balbriggan in the match play?

LuckyGent88

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Why not Jack Hume for final based on what you said? was the golf good against Joe Lyons?

He has an awful lot of golf played lately and i just think he will tire a bit. Also, Nicky Grant is a fantastic player and is more experienced than Jack.
Jack's golf was very good against Lyons and was never in danger.

Sir Shankalot

A. Hogan (Newlands) beat N. Grant (Knock) 1 Hole.


K.McDonagh (Athlone/NUIM) beat J.Hume (Rathsallagh) 2/1

R.Cannon (Balbriggan) beat C.Selfridge ( Moyola Park) 2/1 S.Walsh (Baltinglass/UCD) beat D. Ryan( The Grange) 5/4

Semi - Finals:

8.30 a.m. A.Hogan (Newlands) v K.McDonagh (Athlone/NUIM)

8.45 a.m. R.Cannon (Balbriggan) v S.Walsh (Baltinglass/UCD)

liam12989

article in indo says cannon offically playing out of ballbriggan. Dont know the story tho

goodgolfer64

liam12989 wrote: »

article in indo says cannon offically playing out of ballbriggan. Dont know the story tho

he got dropped by LnB for senior cup.....

downthemiddle

Hogan and Walsh in the final.

liam12989

bit of a surprize packet this walsh guy. anyone got any info on him...i played boys same time as him and he never did anything?

downthemiddle

Played against him in the Barton Cup this year. A tidy golfer playing off +1 at the time. Not particularly long but no obvious weakness in his game. His distance control is excellent. Nice lad.

Goldenjohn

According to the indo website he's a "dab hand with a guitar"

mag

pity they dont have live scoring (like for the west) on gui.ie

mag

liam12989 wrote: »

bit of a surprize packet this walsh guy. anyone got any info on him...i played boys same time as him and he never did anything?

he seems to have pi$$ed off robbie cannon this morning anyway, he just tweeted

"...played really well hard to win when guys are claiming holes off you wrongly #badsportsmanship"

anyone know what happened there?

Goldenjohn

Hogan 1 up after 10

Goldenjohn

A.s after 11 on the gui website now

royalcarlowgc

liam12989 wrote: »

bit of a surprize packet this walsh guy. anyone got any info on him...i played boys same time as him and he never did anything?

Won the Ulster Youths last year I think.

On the Leinster Senior Interpros this year too, has performed pretty well in most of the championships in the past two years.


He's also the best soccer player ive ever seen!

royalcarlowgc

Walsh 2 UP thru 15

AGC

Walsh won 3/2

Henry Ford III

mag wrote: »

he seems to have pi$$ed off robbie cannon this morning anyway, he just tweeted

"...played really well hard to win when guys are claiming holes off you wrongly #badsportsmanship"

anyone know what happened there?

Yep. I was nearby, and was told thus:-

Cannon picked up his opponents ball when it was teetering over the hole. Apparently he should have waited 10 seconds before doing so to give it a chance to drop on it's own.

The decision was a GUI one, and Cannon might be unwise to have challenged it publicly after the event I think.

p.s. I was following the earlier semi final so the above is all 2nd hand info.

Benicetomonty

Pretty childish reaction imo, v petulant

mag

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Yep. I was nearby, and was told thus:-

Cannon picked up his opponents ball when it was teetering over the hole. Apparently he should have waited 10 seconds before doing so to give it a chance to drop on it's own.

The decision was a GUI one, and Cannon might be unwise to have challenged it publicly after the event I think.

p.s. I was following the earlier semi final so the above is all 2nd hand info.

from cannons tweets hes not putting the blame on the gui

"To the winner of the title today. You will have no luck going forward from your unsporting behaviour today #heretoplaygolf"

LostPassword

Benicetomonty wrote: »

Pretty childish reaction imo, v petulant

Depends on what happened though, doesn't it. The law equally covers some very different situations:

1. Ball stops on cusp of hole, opponent immediately picks up ball and concedes the following putt as a pretence of grace to prevent the ball falling in.

2. Ball stops an inch away from hole, opponent concedes putt immediately and tosses ball back to player. Player then claims hole on the basis of 10 second rule despite the fact that there was no physical way, bar a comet impact, that the ball was going to actually fall in the hole.

Now if what actually happened was 2. he has every right to be pissed off - if somebody did that to me, I would consider them the biggest low life on the planet and while I would normally shut up about it regardless, I would not be entirely unsypmathetic to somebody else showing less restraint.

Impossible to judge if you weren't there, but it's a bit facile to just write it off as petulance.

liam12989

itsa hard one to call..both players will probaly say differently.. 1 will say it had no chance of dropping while the other will say otherwise

a point i taught of it obv took robbie a fair few seconds to get to hole from his standing position so even then the chances of it dropping would hav been silm...

Benicetomonty

LostPassword wrote: »

Depends on what happened though, doesn't it. The law equally covers some very different situations:

1. Ball stops on cusp of hole, opponent immediately picks up ball and concedes the following putt as a pretence of grace to prevent the ball falling in.

2. Ball stops an inch away from hole, opponent concedes putt immediately and tosses ball back to player. Player then claims hole on the basis of 10 second rule despite the fact that there was no physical way, bar a comet impact, that the ball was going to actually fall in the hole.

Now if what actually happened was 2. he has every right to be pissed off - if somebody did that to me, I would consider them the biggest low life on the planet and while I would normally shut up about it regardless, I would not be entirely unsypmathetic to somebody else showing less restraint.

Impossible to judge if you weren't there, but it's a bit facile to just write it off as petulance.

You're right, I'm probably jumping the gun in assuming it was the former circumstance that happened.

If, however, the second scenario was what actually happened, I'd be very surprised if the referee (I assume-again- there was one consulted) would've sided with the accuser..especially with a gallery present, which there must have been. It's fairly obvious within reason whether a ball has a chance to go in or not and I hugely doubt any of this would've arisen if the ball did not have a genuine chance of dropping. Walsh must be aware of what knowledgeable spectators would think if they felt he was trying to pull a fast one, and I'm sure someone unbiased would've spoken up in protestation if it was warranted. I just feel he would've been doing very significant damage to his reputation, far more than it was worth at the end of it all.

This is all obviously speculation of course and there's a fair amount of liberty-taking with regard to the rules on my part here, but I have to believe Cannon moved just a little too quickly to concede that shot..

shabalala

I was greenside, and walshs ball was hanging over the hole, he stood for a few secs frustrated it hadn't fallen and cannon quickly moved in to pick it up, Walsh was informed by his caddy the ball was hanging over the edge at which point he asked the referee was he entitled to 10sec to allow the ball to drop, the referee consulted other referee and they awarded the hole to Walsh, Walsh did not claim the hole, I'm a neutral spectator and cannons twitter reaction is embarrassing only to himself, Walsh seems like a gent. Regardless of this incident there was only gonna ve one winner of that match anyway, congrats to Steven Walsh.

Sir Shankalot

shabalala wrote: »

I was greenside, and walshs ball was hanging over the hole, he stood for a few secs frustrated it hadn't fallen and cannon quickly moved in to pick it up, Walsh was informed by his caddy the ball was hanging over the edge at which point he asked the referee was he entitled to 10sec to allow the ball to drop, the referee consulted other referee and they awarded the hole to Walsh, Walsh did not claim the hole, I'm a neutral spectator and cannons twitter reaction is embarrassing only to himself, Walsh seems like a gent. Regardless of this incident there was only gonna ve one winner of that match anyway, congrats to Steven Walsh.

Your first ever post on boards, you are a "neutral spectator" and there was "only gonna be one winner of that match anyway" in a match that finished on the 17th hole.....hmmmmmmmmm...........

shabalala

I'm sorry for posting my first comment, I'm a member of the GUI actually, and as an observer it's what I saw, mr cannon will be contacted re the incident I'd imagine, but there was other incidents in the other semi final that shadow this small situation. So apologies for interfering in your thread,
Regards
D

Sir Shankalot

shabalala wrote: »

I'm sorry for posting my first comment, I'm a member of the GUI actually, and as an observer it's what I saw, mr cannon will be contacted re the incident I'd imagine, but there was other incidents in the other semi final that shadow this small situation. So apologies for interfering in your thread,
Regards
D

I am 99% sure a member of the GUI would not post something like this in first place and would certainly not follow-up as you have. I am friends with a couple of people who were "greenside" as you call it. They admit to being "biased" observers but I find it interesting that a member of GUI as you claim to be would omit a key piece of information relating to this incident.

The way in which you describe the events was that when Cannon picked ball up that Walsh consulted with caddy, then the referee. Then the referee consulted with another ref before awarding hole to Walsh. I find it very starnge that you neglect to mention that Cannon had a putt on the hole, was allowed to make this stroke, had his subsequent putt conceded and that the match referee declared loudly "Hole halved in 5, Walsh remains 2 up".

The players and referee then proceeded to the next tee before there was a clear issue. Some time passed and the referee declared "player did not allow enough time to elapse before picking up ball...Walsh wins hole, Walsh is 3 up"

If you were an eye-witness observer can you please clarify if what I describe is true or not, and if so why you failed to mention these details.

Johnny_Fontane

hmm this is interesting.....if the ball has any chance of finally dropping, you 'd want to have some pair of ballacks to pick it up and toss it back.

I've always been of the opinion in matchplay that its bad luck to touch another mans ball.

What happened in the semi that will overshadow this?

shabalala

The referee was consulted after the hole yes, and any rule problem must be rectified before the next hole is started, the referee told the officials that Walsh wasn't looking to claim the hole, his understanding of the rule was unclear.... I'm biased towards Walsh only because of cannons very petulant reaction.

Sir Shankalot

shabalala wrote: »

The referee was consulted after the hole yes, and any rule problem must be rectified before the next hole is started, the referee told the officials that Walsh wasn't looking to claim the hole, his understanding of the rule was unclear.... I'm biased towards Walsh only because of cannons very petulant reaction.

Did you not think it relevant to mention that all that I listed went on, ie Cannon putting, having his next one conceded, ref calling the hole a half. For an eyewitness observer you seem to want to dripfeed the info. The guys I know said there were no other GUI officials beside the green, just a bloke with his wife and child who seemed to agree with Cannon in regard to the ref having called the half and last year's winner, Greene, who was cheering Walsh on....I suspect you were either not there at all or are in fact this fella Greene....and failing badly to impersonate a GUI official who would not even dream of commenting on something like this

I guess we'll never know

Jacket111001

I don't get your point Shanks.
There was nothing unusual about him taking a putt and the next one being conceded.
If Walsh asked about the rule (which he is entitled to do) before the next tee shot was played whats the problem?

If Cannon was in the right do you think he would have let it go?

Sir Shankalot

Jacket111001 wrote: »

I don't get your point Shanks.
There was nothing unusual about him taking a putt and the next one being conceded.
If Walsh asked about the rule (which he is entitled to do) before the next tee shot was played whats the problem?

If Cannon was in the right do you think he would have let it go?

The problem is the key point that Shabalala failed to include in his summary of events. The issue was not raised with the referee at the time of the offence. After the lifting of the ball took place, the referee who saw this happen stood idly by, allowed Cannon to walk back to his ball, line up his own putt.

Cannon then takes his own putt, Walsh concedes the next one and the referee declares that the hole has been halved and that Walsh remains two up. Do you not see a problem with what then subsequently happened?? No new information came to light, the ref saw what he saw and did not deem it an offence.

I do not know if there were 10 seconds gone or whether the ball even had a chance of dropping, what I am saying is that you could see how it would be a major flashpoint given the conduct of the referee.

Sir Shankalot

Jacket111001 wrote: »

I don't get your point Shanks.
There was nothing unusual about him taking a putt and the next one being conceded.
If Walsh asked about the rule (which he is entitled to do) before the next tee shot was played whats the problem?

If Cannon was in the right do you think he would have let it go?

Another aspect to it, maybe someone else can help, if for example Cannon lifted the ball does this imply that Walsh has made 4 on the hole? In that case then Cannon would have still had a putt for a half, as opposed to standing over his putt thinking he had one putt for the win and TWO putts for the half. What I am trying to say is tht Cannon was not aware of the state of play when standing over his putt, which I do not think is right in any matchplay situation.

Having said that, if the offence results in loss of hole you could argue that the above is meaningless. The referee's actions which have been described to me in detail would give me cause for concern tho

Jacket111001

The referee does not offer any advise or make any decisions unless he is consulted.

Look at it from another viewpoint. Would you pick up a ball if it was on the edge of the hole?

royalcarlowgc

I must say I fully agree with you Jacket 111001.

Sir Shankalot,

I don't see the bid deal in the 'GUI poster' not mentioning that Cannon putted out etc. What difference does that make?

Also your accusation that the 'GUI poster' was not there at all and infact could be 'this fella Greene' is totally out of order.

I feel it is a great shame that Steven Walsh's win has been some what overshadowed by Cannons childish behaviour on Twitter.

It seems both you and Cannon maybe have a bit of growing up to do.

Sir Shankalot

Jacket111001 wrote: »

The referee does not offer any advise or make any decisions unless he is consulted.

So if a match referee sees a player committing an offence he does not intervene? Golf has some strange rules but I would very much doubt this is the case - I could well be wrong on this.

Look at it from another viewpoint. Would you pick up a ball if it was on the edge of the hole?

I would not go near my opponent's ball during a match, certainly one that is near the hole. Having said that, if a ball has come to rest as one poster has prev said you would want to have some balls to rush over and throw it back to him in an effort to prevent it dropping in. The ball was returned as Cannon thought it had stopped, Walsh obviously disagreed. The referee saw all this and let play continue and declared the hole to be halved - I think we are stretching it a little to suggest that the ref knew an offence had been committed and was just waiting for issue to be raised

Sir Shankalot

royalcarlowgc wrote: »

I must say I fully agree with you Jacket 111001.

Sir Shankalot,

I don't see the bid deal in the 'GUI poster' not mentioning that Cannon putted out etc. What difference does that make?

Also your accusation that the 'GUI poster' was not there at all and infact could be 'this fella Greene' is totally out of order.

I feel it is a great shame that Steven Walsh's win has been some what overshadowed by Cannons childish behaviour on Twitter.

It seems both you and Cannon maybe have a bit of growing up to do.

Do you honestly think it makes no difference that play continued as normal and that the referee declared a half, before subsequently reversing this decision? And just to be clear, it was not a "GUI Poster" - this person has declared themselves to be a GUI member, I think implying they were a GUI official - every single member of an affiliated club is a member of the GUI so I don't think that is what they meant.

I am sorry if it appears out of order, there were little or no people following the second match on the course at this early stage. As I said I have been informed very clearly that the only other people there were a local man, his wife and child who were sitting on a wall at back of green, the guys I know from Balbriggan GC and Greene.....who happens to be from Carlow GC.....so perhaps I touched a nerve ROYALCARLOWGC

downthemiddle

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Do you honestly think it makes no difference that play continued as normal and that the referee declared a half, before subsequently reversing this decision? And just to be clear, it was not a "GUI Poster" - this person has declared themselves to be a GUI member, I think implying they were a GUI official - every single member of an affiliated club is a member of the GUI so I don't think that is what they meant.

I am sorry if it appears out of order, there were little or no people following the second match on the course at this early stage. As I said I have been informed very clearly that the only other people there were a local man, his wife and child who were sitting on a wall at back of green, the guys I know from Balbriggan GC and Greene.....who happens to be from Carlow GC.....so perhaps I touched a nerve ROYALCARLOWGC

And the members of Balbriggan don't have an agenda??

Sir Shankalot

downthemiddle wrote: »

And the members of Balbriggan don't have an agenda??

They did not embellish the story, lie about who was and who was not there or exclude any of the facts of what happened - I would be satisfied with that. In case you think they thought Walsh was way out of order, they most certainly did not....the situation was handled very poorly by the referee. Even if you don't believe their account the referee admitted to announcing the hole as being halved - do you not think it odd that it was then reversed.

When is the correct time to query a ruling - I would have thought that like most sports the tendency would be to do it there and then.

Perhaps a poster who is an actual rules official or has some refereeing experience can clarify what is normal procedure in a case like this? I am not professing to be an expert - this debate has snowballed due to what I perceived to be an extremely biased account of what happened by Shalalaba, does anyone know a GUI official who would get involved in a forum debate like this? Most of them are 60+ and would have more sense than the likes of you or me!

royalcarlowgc

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Do you honestly think it makes no difference that play continued as normal and that the referee declared a half, before subsequently reversing this decision? And just to be clear, it was not a "GUI Poster" - this person has declared themselves to be a GUI member, I think implying they were a GUI official - every single member of an affiliated club is a member of the GUI so I don't think that is what they meant.

I am sorry if it appears out of order, there were little or no people following the second match on the course at this early stage. As I said I have been informed very clearly that the only other people there were a local man, his wife and child who were sitting on a wall at back of green, the guys I know from Balbriggan GC and Greene.....who happens to be from Carlow GC.....so perhaps I touched a nerve ROYALCARLOWGC

Its unfortunate that a hole was decided under those circumstances, but the GUI made a decision based on the rules of golf, and that's good enough from me. Third Party information is not always reliable you know.

Touched a nerve? I don't see how you have Sir Shankalot

downthemiddle

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

They did not embellish the story, lie about who was and who was not there or exclude any of the facts of what happened - I would be satisfied with that. In case you think they thought Walsh was way out of order, they most certainly did not....the situation was handled very poorly by the referee. Even if you don't believe their account the referee admitted to announcing the hole as being halved - do you not think it odd that it was then reversed.

When is the correct time to query a ruling - I would have thought that like most sports the tendency would be to do it there and then.

Perhaps a poster who is an actual rules official or has some refereeing experience can clarify what is normal procedure in a case like this? I am not professing to be an expert - this debate has snowballed due to what I perceived to be an extremely biased account of what happened by Shalalaba, does anyone know a GUI official who would get involved in a forum debate like this? Most of them are 60+ and would have more sense than the likes of you or me!

They gave their account which is bound to be biased towards Robbie Cannon. They were there to support him after all. I can't imagine any GUI official engaging in a debate here but I know the country's leading rules official quite well and if I'm talking to him in the near future I will ask him what happened from a GUI point of view.

Sir Shankalot

royalcarlowgc wrote: »

Its unfortunate that a hole was decided under those circumstances, but the GUI made a decision based on the rules of golf, and that's good enough from me. Third Party information is not always reliable you know.

Touched a nerve? I don't see how you have Sir Shankalot

Just to be very clear - I have no issue with the rules of golf being implemented. In this case it seems that ultimately the right decision was made and that Cannon picking up the ball was ill-advised. I can only guess that the thought of the ball actually being in a position to drop never crossed his mind so he was tossing the ball back to his opponent and conceding the next putt. We can never know if the ball would have dropped or not.

The issue for me is that a referee, armed with all of the above info, did not make a decision there and then, on the spot. Do you not find that unusual?