Preamble
I
stated in the introduction to ‘Simpler Rules’ that I would not run a commentary
on the difference between existing rules and those proposed.
However,
Rule 4 introduces issues which are both daunting and confusing to club players.
First:
Players
are daunted by the sheer verbiage which the Rules contain and are thereby
deterred from attempting to understand what is going on, even though in the
vast majority of cases they would like to know.
For
example the penalty statements for Rules 4-1 & 4-2 comprises 215 words and
for Rule 4-4, 152 words.
It
is my proposal that in the interests of focussing rules on the interests of the
club player, all reference to the role, powers and responsibilities of the committee
be removed from the Definitions and Rules 1-32 and be placed in a revised Rule
33 entitled ‘Committee Powers and
Responsibilities’.
Hence
the proposed penalty statements in this and subsequent rules are designed to
provide the player with the essential information s/he needs in order to play
the game.
Second:
Penalties
are variously prescribed by the Rules to be applied, for example, ‘at the
conclusion of the hole at which the breach is discovered’; to ‘the next hole’;
‘not to the next hole’; ‘at each of the first two holes at which the breach
occurred’; or from the aggregate of holes or total points.
This
is plainly confusing and can lead to devastating outcomes.
For
example if a player breaches a competition condition prohibiting practice
between holes in a stroke competition and on the (not unreasonable) assumption
that the penalty applies to the hole just completed adds a two stroke penalty
to the score for that hole will be disqualified from the competition. A bit harsh,
don’t you think, for a clerical error or an understandable oversight in navigating
one’s way through a maze.
The game we play is called golf, not ‘linguistic
gymnastics’!!
An attempt is made within these proposed
rules revisions to make this situation as simple as it can be.
Rule 4: Clubs
4-1.
Conforming clubs; Wear and Alteration
If a player is in doubt as to the conformity
of a club he should consult the Committee.
A club that conforms with the Rules when new is deemed to conform after wear through normal use.
Any part of a club that has been purposely altered is regarded as new and must, in its altered state, conform with the Rules.
Any club carried in breach of this Rule must be declared out of play by the player to his opponent, or his marker or a fellow-competitor immediately upon discovery that a breach has occurred and the facts must be reported to the Committee at the conclusion of the round.
4-2.
Playing Characteristics Changed and Foreign Material
a. Playing Characteristics Changed
During a stipulated round, the playing
characteristics of a club must not be purposely changed by adjustment or by any
other means.
b. Foreign Material
Foreign material must not be applied to the
club face for the purpose of influencing the movement of the ball.
Any club carried in breach of this Rule must
be declared out of play by the player to his opponent, or his marker or a
fellow-competitor immediately upon discovery that a breach has occurred and the
facts must be reported to the Committee at the conclusion of the round.
PENALTY FOR MAKING STROKE WITH CLUB IN BREACH
OF RULE 4-1 or 4-2 or FAILING TO DECLARE OUT OF PLAY A CLUB OR CLUBS CARRIED IN
BREACH OF RULE 4-1 or 4-2
Disqualification from the competition.
Disqualification from the competition.
PENALTY FOR CARRYING, BUT NOT MAKING STROKE
WITH, CLUB OR CLUBS IN BREACH OF RULE 4-1 or 4-2:
Match play – At the conclusion of the hole at which the breach is discovered, the state of the match is adjusted by applying a penalty of one hole for each hole at which a breach occurred to a maximum of two holes per round.
Match play – At the conclusion of the hole at which the breach is discovered, the state of the match is adjusted by applying a penalty of one hole for each hole at which a breach occurred to a maximum of two holes per round.
For stroke, par and Stableford competitions
see Rule 33-17.
4-3.
Damaged Clubs: Repair and Replacement
a. Damage in Normal Course of Play
If, during a stipulated round, a player’s
club is damaged in the normal course of play, he may:
(i) use the club
in its damaged state for the remainder of the stipulated round; or
(ii) without
unduly delaying play, repair it or have it repaired; or
(iii) as an
additional option available only if the club is substantially damaged and unfit
for play replace the damaged club with any club. The replacement of a club must
not unduly delay play (Rule 6-7) and must not be made by borrowing any club
selected for play by any other person playing on the course.
A club is unfit for play if the shaft is dented, bent or broken; the clubhead is loose, detached or deformed; or grip is loose - a club is not unfit for play solely because the club’s lie or loft has been altered, or the clubhead is scratched.
A club is unfit for play if the shaft is dented, bent or broken; the clubhead is loose, detached or deformed; or grip is loose - a club is not unfit for play solely because the club’s lie or loft has been altered, or the clubhead is scratched.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 4-3a:
See Penalty Statements for Rule 4-4a or b,
and Rule 4-4c.
b. Damage Other Than in Normal Course of Play
If, during a stipulated round, a player’s
club is damaged other than in the normal course of play rendering it
non-conforming or changing its playing characteristics, the club must not
subsequently be used or replaced during the round.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 4-3b:
Disqualification from the competition.
c. Damage Prior to Round
A player may use a club damaged prior to a
round, provided the club, in its damaged state, conforms with the Rules.
Damage to a club that occurred prior to a
round may be repaired during the round, provided the playing characteristics
are not changed and play is not unduly delayed.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 4-3c:
See Penalty Statement for Rule 4-1 or 4-2.
See Penalty Statement for Rule 4-1 or 4-2.
(Undue delay – see Rule 6-7)
4-4.
Maximum of Fourteen Clubs
a. Selection and Addition of Clubs
A player must not commence a stipulated round
with more than fourteen clubs. He is limited to the clubs thus selected for
that round, except that if he started with fewer than fourteen clubs, he may
add any number, provided his total number does not exceed fourteen.
If a player should claim that he commenced
the stipulated round with more than fourteen clubs through the actions
(inadvertent or otherwise) of another person, other than his partner or either
of their caddies, he must be able to demonstrate the circumstances to the
satisfaction of the Committee. Should he be able to do that, the penalty
attached to this Rule does not apply.
The addition of a club or clubs must not
unduly delay play (Rule 6-7) and the player must not add or borrow any club
selected for play by any other person playing on the course or by assembling
components carried by or for the player during the stipulated round.
b. Partners May Share Clubs
Partners may share clubs, provided that the
total number of clubs carried by the partners so sharing does not exceed
fourteen.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 4-4a or b,
REGARDLESS OF NUMBER OF EXCESS CLUBS CARRIED:
See Penalty Statement for Rule 4-1 or 4-2.
See Penalty Statement for Rule 4-1 or 4-2.
c. Excess Club Declared Out of Play
Any club or clubs carried or used in breach
of Rule 4-3a(iii) or Rule 4-4 must be declared out of play by the player to his
opponent in match play or his marker or a fellow-competitor in stroke play
immediately upon discovery that a breach has occurred. The player must not use
the club or clubs for the remainder of the stipulated round.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 4-4c:
Disqualification from the competition.
Disqualification from the competition.
While playing in a stroke-play competition I believe that I am in breach of Rule 4-3a so I check your rules for the penalty...
ReplyDelete* 4-3a's penalty statement refers me to the penalty statement for Rule 4-4a or b, and Rule 4-4c.
* The penalty statement under Rule 4-4 refers me to the penalty statement for Rule 4-1 and 4-2.
* The penalty statement (in stroke play) for Rules 4-1 and 4-2 refers me to Rule 33-17
"... as simple as it can be."
Thanks Anon
DeleteAs you will be aware, the penalty statements for Rule 4 have always been complicated and confusing (at least rules students have found them so) and I have tried to simplify them without making too much change to the structure, or including too much repetition.
However, I understand and accept your criticism completely and will have another go at rationalising these statements.
Essentially, I think that the only direct reference to a penalty in this Rule (other than the disqualification penalties) needs to relate to match play where continuity of the game is affected. All other penalty provisions can be addressed under ‘committee powers and responsibilities’ (33-17) and will look something like:
Stroke competition – Two strokes for each hole at which the breach occurred to a maximum of four strokes per round to be added by the Committee to the aggregate score for the round.
Par competition – One hole for each hole at which the breach occurred to a maximum of two holes per round to be deducted by the Committee from the aggregate score for the round.
Stableford competition – Two points hole for each hole at which the breach occurred to a maximum of four points per round to be deducted by the Committee to the aggregate score for the round.
Is this a view with which you would agree?
How will your rules address the situation where the return of the scorecard is handled by placing it in a box? Will the player be expected to write out a description of his breach so that the Committee can add the penalty to the proper holes?
ReplyDeleteAnon
DeleteNote the final paragraph in proposed rule 4-1:
‘Any club carried in breach of this Rule must be declared out of play by the player to his opponent, or his marker or a fellow-competitor immediately upon discovery that a breach has occurred and the facts must be reported to the Committee at the conclusion of the round.’
This requirement is consistent with other current Rules, such as Rules 3-3a, 6-8c and 32-1a & b. and will appear in other rules to which the principle of ‘committee responsibility’ is relevant.
In essence, the circumstances involved in this type of issue are quite rare and I think that disproportionate treatment of them within the ‘playing rules’ makes it just that much more difficult for players to focus on the rules that ‘really matter’ (that is, those which are in everyday use).
Far be it from me to provide gratuitous advice, but if card return is by way of a box, maybe there could be two boxes; one for submitted cards and one for cards which require committee decisions before being submitted.
Is the statement in Rule 4-1 sufficiently prominent?
Will failure to report the facts lead to disqualification? If so, is your change worth the additional 'opportunities' for disqualification?
ReplyDeleteYes, thanks: I think such mandatory specifications need to be consistent throughout the rules.
DeleteI am not clear on the meaning of your second sentence: could you elaborate a litte, please.
Anon
ReplyDeleteI meant to note that there is currently a mandatory provision included in Rule 6-6a and 6-6b which is universally ignored with impunity and with, I am reliably informed, the tacit approval of The Castle. Namely, as you no doubt know, players and markers regularly sign the card before commencement, as opposed on ‘completion of the round’ as required by these rules. I do not think that this is a good state of affairs: either something is required, or it is not.
Elaborating: The more often that the rules mandate (with disqualification as the penalty) that players report to the Committee, the more often players will fail to do so. Increasing the number of situations that require a 'report' should not be taken lightly.
ReplyDeleteAs for the signing of the card, the rules do not require that the signature be applied after the round is complete; they merely require that the signature be present when the score card is returned.
Elaborating: Yes, I agree with both of your contentions. We are faced, though, with a ‘risk/reward’ dilemma wherein the risk of non-compliance has to be set against the twin issues of, on the one hand, the rule being so complex and choked with words that players are deterred from reading what is essential and, on the other, players being left to interpret and apply provisions which are sometimes close to incomprehensible (even for the committed). I think that given the frequency with which much of Rule 4 is likely to be invoked, requiring the player to advise the committee so that the issue can be dealt with appropriately is probably the lesser of the two evils.
ReplyDeleteAs to Rule 6-6a, we will have to agree to disagree. ‘On completion of the round the marker must sign the score card … not ‘must ensure that the score card has been signed’. This seems pretty clear to me. Similarly the mandatory timing of the player signing the card seems clearly to be, ‘After completion of the round…’
However, the issue has been dealt with in the Rule 6 draft; stating that, ‘It is the responsibility of the marker to ensure that he has signed the card prior to handing it to the competitor…’
And, ‘After completion of the round, the competitor should check his score for each hole and settle any doubtful points with his marker and/or the Committee. He should ensure that the marker or markers have signed the score card, ensure that he has signed the score card and return it to the Committee as soon as possible’.
The penalty for returning a card not signed by player and marker remains at disqualification from the competition.
Anon
ReplyDeleteI have posted a revised version of Rule 4, addressing the valid issue you raised in relation to the complexity of penalty statements.
It may be necessary to sacrifice brevity for clarity in an attemp to make these provisions clearer.
Please let me have your thoughts on these changes and any other improvements which you think are required.
I may be missing something here, but rule 33 has at the moment 8 sub sections. It looks like your rule 33 will have at least 17 sub sections.
ReplyDeletearny
ReplyDeleteThe basis of this proposal is that there are matters which the player needs to be aware of and understand in order to play the game, and there are matters which the committee needs to understand completely in order to properly manage the course and competitions.
These two sets of provisions do not need to be intermingled. In fact, in my view it is counter-productive for them to be so.
For example while a player needs to understand the meaning and significance of an area of the course marked with a red line s/he does not need to know why this area is marked, or why the markings are red. The committee is responsible to properly identify and mark a lateral water hazard but the player really only needs to know how to proceed if her/his ball lies within the red line.
Hence, information relating to the specification of a lateral water hazard will appear in the revised Rule 33, and not in the Definitions.
Similarly, the committee is responsible for determining the result of a player’s round (based upon, for example, the score recorded at each hole, handicap recorded on the card and other information regarding any event(s) which occurred during play). Hence, it makes sense, in my view, to ensure that the while player should be provided with information within the playing rules sufficient to allow for the resolution of a penalty situation on the course where such resolution is vital to the continuation of play (mainly in match play), when it comes to more intricate penalty determinations (such as a wrong score at a hole in a par competition which does not affect the result of the hole, or application of a maximum penalty, or whether a player is disqualified from a hole or the competition in a par competition) the player be advised within the playing rules on how to proceed so that the matter is properly determined. This means referring the matter to the committee.
I plan to replace current Rules 33 and 34 with a new Rule 33 titled ‘Committee Powers and Responsibilities’. This rule is in process of development and at present notionally contains 17 sections; but it is very much in a draft form and cannot be finalised until all of the playing rules are dealt with. This will be a large(ish) ‘rule’ focussed on the needs of the committee.
This is not to say, of course, that there will not be players interested enough in such issues as, for example, the intricacies of course marking or penalty applications to become familiar with the role of the committee (which comprises, by definition, persons committed to, and responsible for, the proper management of the game) but these are matters upon which it is not necessary to have a complete understanding in order to play the game.
OK Rog, sorry if I jumped the gun.
ReplyDeleteAll good arny; your query was appropriate and timely.
ReplyDeletePlease do not hesitate to correct or prompt me at any time you feel it necessary.
Do you think that the pathway I have taken is reasonable?