Would you have intervened?

[HitEmTrue]

> @Newby said:

> I'm afraid your reading is wrong. No referee would ever penalise a player, whether opponent or not, for preventing any breach of a rule. That is what.we are taught.

> Incidentally, there is no such animal as a Fellow Competitor now. Everyone is just a player.

 

Pre-2019, wasn't there a decision the clearly stated that preventing another player from breaching the rules was not considered to be advice?

 

[antip]

> @nsxguy said:

> However, while I personally really have no problem with offering a FC or opponent info so he doesn't break a rule and would even consider it an act of good sportsmanship, by the Rules themselves, even giving "information on the Rules" such as telling a FC that he is not allowed to tee up outside the teeing area when he is about to break that rule is clearly, by definition, a "verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in:

>

> Choosing a club,

>

> Making a stroke, or

>

> Deciding how to play during a hole or round."

>

> So how does one reconcile those 2 elements/definitions/whatever ?

Alerting a player to the fact that their ball is in the wrong place (in this case outside the teeing area), and if they go ahead and play it from there they will incur a penalty, has no connection whatsoever to suggesting what club to choose, how to play a stroke or how to play a hole. The rules are clear, you must start a hole from within the teeing area. Every decision relating to club, stroke and how to play the hole remain the choice of the player and when you tell him he is in the wrong place you are making no suggestion relating to any of those things that would constitute 'advice'.

 

[nsxguy]

> @antip said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > However, while I personally really have no problem with offering a FC or opponent info so he doesn't break a rule and would even consider it an act of good sportsmanship, by the Rules themselves, even giving "information on the Rules" such as telling a FC that he is not allowed to tee up outside the teeing area when he is about to break that rule is clearly, by definition, a "verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in:

> >

> > Choosing a club,

> >

> > **Making a stroke**, or

> >

> > **Deciding how to play during a hole or round**."

> >

> > So how does one reconcile those 2 elements/definitions/whatever ?

> Alerting a player to the fact that their ball is in the wrong place (in this case outside the teeing area), and if they go ahead and play it from there they will incur a penalty, has no connection whatsoever to suggesting what club to choose, how to play a stroke or how to play a hole. The rules are clear, you must start a hole from within the teeing area. Every decision relating to club, stroke and how to play the hole remain the choice of the player and when you tell him he is in the wrong place you are making no suggestion relating to any of those things that would constitute 'advice'.

>

So while the advice definition clearly says advice is ANY verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke such a comment on the Rules is NOT "influencing the player in making his next stroke" ?

 

I doubt my English teacher in 6th grade would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[antip]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > However, while I personally really have no problem with offering a FC or opponent info so he doesn't break a rule and would even consider it an act of good sportsmanship, by the Rules themselves, even giving "information on the Rules" such as telling a FC that he is not allowed to tee up outside the teeing area when he is about to break that rule is clearly, by definition, a "verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in:

> > >

> > > Choosing a club,

> > >

> > > **Making a stroke**, or

> > >

> > > **Deciding how to play during a hole or round**."

> > >

> > > So how does one reconcile those 2 elements/definitions/whatever ?

> > Alerting a player to the fact that their ball is in the wrong place (in this case outside the teeing area), and if they go ahead and play it from there they will incur a penalty, has no connection whatsoever to suggesting what club to choose, how to play a stroke or how to play a hole. The rules are clear, you must start a hole from within the teeing area. Every decision relating to club, stroke and how to play the hole remain the choice of the player and when you tell him he is in the wrong place you are making no suggestion relating to any of those things that would constitute 'advice'.

> >

> So while the advice definition clearly says advice is ANY verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke such a comment on the Rules is NOT "influencing the player in making his next stroke" ?

>

> I doubt my English teacher in 6th grade would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

So let's apply your thinking to the course.

You are a referee assigned to a match play game. Player A's ball is in a divot hole and he lifts the ball and drops in a nice lie a foot away. Player B says there is no rule that allows you to do that (RK's and Mikey's signature collecting petition to RBs hasn't triumphed yet), it's a shot penalty and you must replace the ball. Player A responds that B has just made a verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke so B gets the general penalty and loses the hole. Both A and B call you over seeking a ruling......

 

[Newby]

> @nsxguy said:

 

> So while the advice definition clearly says advice is ANY verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke such a comment on the Rules is NOT "influencing the player in making his next stroke" ?

>

> I doubt my English teacher in 6th grade would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

The Rule goes on to say:

_(advice)_ does not include public information, such as:

 

The **location of things on the course such as** the hole, the putting green, the fairway, penalty areas, bunkers, or **another player’s ball,**

 

The distance from one point to another, or

 

**The Rules.**

 

[Newby]

> @HitEmTrue said:

> > @Newby said:

> > I'm afraid your reading is wrong. No referee would ever penalise a player, whether opponent or not, for preventing any breach of a rule. That is what.we are taught.

> > Incidentally, there is no such animal as a Fellow Competitor now. Everyone is just a player.

>

> Pre-2019, wasn't there a decision the clearly stated that preventing another player from breaching the rules was not considered to be advice?

>

 

That rings a bell but I can't find it

[nsxguy]

> @Newby said:

> > @nsxguy said:

>

> > So while the advice definition clearly says advice is ANY verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke such a comment on the Rules is NOT "influencing the player in making his next stroke" ?

> >

> > I doubt my English teacher in 6th grade would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

> The Rule goes on to say:

> _(advice)_ does not include public information, such as:

>

> The **location of things on the course such as** the hole, the putting green, the fairway, penalty areas, bunkers, or **another player’s ball,**

>

> The distance from one point to another, or

>

> **The Rules.**

>

 

Now THAT part IS interesting. Thanks.

 

I think, but can't be sure of course, that the "location of another player's ball" is intended to mean while locating a ball, such as a lost ball or perhaps seeing where a player's ball went after it was struck when the player didn't.

 

So as to telling the FC that his ball is outside the teeing area, something that certainly need to be said to "locate" the player's ball, I still believe that is included in "ANY COMMENT" helping a player making a stroke and is therefore a penalty. But I also see those 2 instances as somewhat confusing.

 

So let's go BACK to the original point where the ball fell off a short tee and the player didn't notice.

 

Would you then say the player noting "Your ball fell off the tee" is "information on the location of the ball" ? Or "You're allowed to re-tee" as "information on the Rules" ? Or would you consider those 2 statements to be (more likely ?) be "ANY COMMENT" influencing the player's subsequent play of the stroke, hole, etc ?

[nsxguy]

> @antip said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @antip said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > However, while I personally really have no problem with offering a FC or opponent info so he doesn't break a rule and would even consider it an act of good sportsmanship, by the Rules themselves, even giving "information on the Rules" such as telling a FC that he is not allowed to tee up outside the teeing area when he is about to break that rule is clearly, by definition, a "verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in:

> > > >

> > > > Choosing a club,

> > > >

> > > > **Making a stroke**, or

> > > >

> > > > **Deciding how to play during a hole or round**."

> > > >

> > > > So how does one reconcile those 2 elements/definitions/whatever ?

> > > Alerting a player to the fact that their ball is in the wrong place (in this case outside the teeing area), and if they go ahead and play it from there they will incur a penalty, has no connection whatsoever to suggesting what club to choose, how to play a stroke or how to play a hole. The rules are clear, you must start a hole from within the teeing area. Every decision relating to club, stroke and how to play the hole remain the choice of the player and when you tell him he is in the wrong place you are making no suggestion relating to any of those things that would constitute 'advice'.

> > >

> > So while the advice definition clearly says advice is ANY verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke such a comment on the Rules is NOT "influencing the player in making his next stroke" ?

> >

> > I doubt my English teacher in 6th grade would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

>

> So let's apply your thinking to the course.

> You are a referee assigned to a match play game. Player A's ball is in a divot hole and he lifts the ball and drops in a nice lie a foot away. Player B says there is no rule that allows you to do that (RK's and Mikey's signature collecting petition to RBs hasn't triumphed yet), it's a shot penalty and you must replace the ball. Player A responds that B has just made a verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke so B gets the general penalty and loses the hole. Both A and B call you over seeking a ruling......

>

 

I don't know, I'm not a referee. Are you ? I'm a semi-serious casual player no longer a member in any "formal" club but still interested in the Rules.

 

Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

 

Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

[HitEmTrue]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @antip said:

> > So let's apply your thinking to the course.

> > You are a referee assigned to a match play game. Player A's ball is in a divot hole and he lifts the ball and drops in a nice lie a foot away. Player B says there is no rule that allows you to do that (RK's and Mikey's signature collecting petition to RBs hasn't triumphed yet), it's a shot penalty and you must replace the ball. Player A responds that B has just made a verbal comment that is intended to influence a player in making a stroke so B gets the general penalty and loses the hole. Both A and B call you over seeking a ruling......

> >

>

> I don't know, I'm not a referee. Are you ? I'm a semi-serious casual player no longer a member in any "formal" club but still interested in the Rules.

>

> Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

>

> Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

 

No need for a ref to chime in. Player A is wrong, and has no claim.

 

 

[chippa13]

Toss out the old "One" chestnut and the problem is solved.

[antip]

> @nsxguy said:

 

>

> Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

>

> Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

That is precisely what has happened. The rule has been pointed out and referees have chimed in. There is just your figuring it out left.

 

[nsxguy]

> @antip said:

> > @nsxguy said:

>

> >

> > Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

> >

> > Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

> That is precisely what has happened. The rule has been pointed out and referees have chimed in. There is just your figuring it out left.

>

 

So you're not going to point me to the Rule about a player illegally picking up the ball. No problem. Guess I don't need to participate in your quiz.

 

In other business, the only one really challenging my account/reading of the DEFINITION of "advice" is you. A referee telling us that AS A REFEREE they are encouraged to help players to avoid breaking a Rule is honorable and good sportsmanship but it does not apply here as we're not discussing what a referee can/will/might do.

 

I laid it out quite clearly. One statement INCLUDES information on the Rules, presumably(?) if said information is used to influence. You offer no clarification or explanation, you only stick to your "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra.

 

I explained how *I* interpret "your" "rules information" statement and you offer no explanation, just keep repeating the same refrain. The part of the definition of advice I am pointing out is "ALL-INCLUSIVE" if you will.

 

Information on the Rules is INCLUDED in "Any comment,,,,,, influencing". "Any comment intended to influence a player" MEANS "ANY COMMENT". Quoting a Rule without being asked to discuss it as in the context of this part of the discussion is clearly offered to influence another player's play of a shot and thus fits the definition of "advice".

 

You are the only one sticking to your one statement as if it is totally self-explanatory,,,,,,,,,,,,, and it's not. You're fairly new here so you might not notice it but the "usual suspects" have been rather quiet over this one. I would say that is,,,,,,,, unusual.

 

The Rules are not infallible. You might remember the kerfluffle about the Yellow Penalty Area drop that was "clarified". And many people spent a great deal of time trying to get that right. I daresay the gentlemen that first brought it up here on WRX WAS the first to spot it and all the Rulies here agreed it was an oversight and the quick clarification confirmed it.

[Mr. Bean]

Nsxguy, pls. read the Definition of Advice thoroughly.

[LeoLeo99]

This is a time when common sense rears its wonderful head. Blind tee shot:

 

Advice: aim your drive down the left side of the fairway. Not advice: this fairway slopes from left to right.

[lchang]

OP here. Don’t know why something like this has happened to me twice within a week: this one not so controversial I think? But nonetheless, what would you have done:

 

Paired with strangers having a match. (A $5 Nassau and some wonderfully hilarious trash talk). 4th hole, the lower cap guy about to putt for his 6, and asks his opponent what he’s in for. Higher cap responds 6. He gets a stroke on this hole, so the lower cap is about to take his ball away because he’s already lost to net 5. I say, “ummm. I think it’s a 7.” The higher cap pauses for a second and goes, “You’re right it’s a seven!” I say, “I’m sorry I didn’t mean to get involved in your match but...”. He cuts me off and says,”no no! You’re totally right. It’s a 7.” (Lower cap made his putt to halve the hole.)

 

Would you have done the same in my position?

 

[Newby]

> @nsxguy said:

> Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

There are at least four here who have.

[antip]

> @lchang said:

> OP here. Don’t know why something like this has happened to me twice within a week: this one not so controversial I think? But nonetheless, what would you have done:

>

> Paired with strangers having a match. (A $5 Nassau and some wonderfully hilarious trash talk). 4th hole, the lower cap guy about to putt for his 6, and asks his opponent what he’s in for. Higher cap responds 6. He gets a stroke on this hole, so the lower cap is about to take his ball away because he’s already lost to net 5. I say, “ummm. I think it’s a 7.” The higher cap pauses for a second and goes, “You’re right it’s a seven!” I say, “I’m sorry I didn’t mean to get involved in your match but...”. He cuts me off and says,”no no! You’re totally right. It’s a 7.” (Lower cap made his putt to halve the hole.)

>

> Would you have done the same in my position?

>

 

Yes.

[antip]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> >

> > >

> > > Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

> > >

> > > Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

> > That is precisely what has happened. The rule has been pointed out and referees have chimed in. There is just your figuring it out left.

> >

>

> So you're not going to point me to the Rule about a player illegally picking up the ball. No problem. Guess I don't need to participate in your quiz.

>

> In other business, the only one really challenging my account/reading of the DEFINITION of "advice" is you. A referee telling us that AS A REFEREE they are encouraged to help players to avoid breaking a Rule is honorable and good sportsmanship but it does not apply here as we're not discussing what a referee can/will/might do.

>

> I laid it out quite clearly. One statement INCLUDES information on the Rules, presumably(?) if said information is used to influence. You offer no clarification or explanation, you only stick to your "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra.

>

> I explained how *I* interpret "your" "rules information" statement and you offer no explanation, just keep repeating the same refrain. The part of the definition of advice I am pointing out is "ALL-INCLUSIVE" if you will.

>

> Information on the Rules is INCLUDED in "Any comment,,,,,, influencing". "Any comment intended to influence a player" MEANS "ANY COMMENT". Quoting a Rule without being asked to discuss it as in the context of this part of the discussion is clearly offered to influence another player's play of a shot and thus fits the definition of "advice".

>

> You are the only one sticking to your one statement as if it is totally self-explanatory,,,,,,,,,,,,, and it's not. You're fairly new here so you might not notice it but the "usual suspects" have been rather quiet over this one. I would say that is,,,,,,,, unusual.

>

> The Rules are not infallible. You might remember the kerfluffle about the Yellow Penalty Area drop that was "clarified". And many people spent a great deal of time trying to get that right. I daresay the gentlemen that first brought it up here on WRX WAS the first to spot it and all the Rulies here agreed it was an oversight and the quick clarification confirmed it.

 

If you remain unhappy that people responding to the large number of words you are contributing to this discussion do not seem to understand your questions, or you don't like the answers, then you could take advantage of the excellent facility provided by the USGA allowing you to phone in your questions. We've clearly gone round the loop a number of times and multiple referees (me included) have suggested your interpretation of certain statements as advice is, in their view, incorrect.

[Newby]

> @antip said:

> > @lchang said:

> > OP here. Don’t know why something like this has happened to me twice within a week: this one not so controversial I think? But nonetheless, what would you have done:

> >

> > Paired with strangers having a match. (A $5 Nassau and some wonderfully hilarious trash talk). 4th hole, the lower cap guy about to putt for his 6, and asks his opponent what he’s in for. Higher cap responds 6. He gets a stroke on this hole, so the lower cap is about to take his ball away because he’s already lost to net 5. I say, “ummm. I think it’s a 7.” The higher cap pauses for a second and goes, “You’re right it’s a seven!” I say, “I’m sorry I didn’t mean to get involved in your match but...”. He cuts me off and says,”no no! You’re totally right. It’s a 7.” (Lower cap made his putt to halve the hole.)

> >

> > Would you have done the same in my position?

> >

>

> Yes.

Yes also

[Sawgrass]

> @lchang said:

> OP here. Don’t know why something like this has happened to me twice within a week: this one not so controversial I think? But nonetheless, what would you have done:

>

> Paired with strangers having a match. (A $5 Nassau and some wonderfully hilarious trash talk). 4th hole, the lower cap guy about to putt for his 6, and asks his opponent what he’s in for. Higher cap responds 6. He gets a stroke on this hole, so the lower cap is about to take his ball away because he’s already lost to net 5. I say, “ummm. I think it’s a 7.” The higher cap pauses for a second and goes, “You’re right it’s a seven!” I say, “I’m sorry I didn’t mean to get involved in your match but...”. He cuts me off and says,”no no! You’re totally right. It’s a 7.” (Lower cap made his putt to halve the hole.)

>

> Would you have done the same in my position?

>

 

If I was assigned to the match I would speak up. If I was a roving ref, or one assigned to a hole, I would stay silent. If I was a spectator, it would depend on how well I knew the players and what I knew about them.

 

From Committee Procedures 6C:

 

When Assigned to Multiple Matches or to Certain Holes or Sections of the Course. As the referee is not assigned to accompany the match throughout the round, he or she should avoid becoming involved in a match unless:

 

A player in a match asks for help with the Rules or requests a ruling (see Rule 20.1b(2)). When making a ruling at the request of a player, the referee should always confirm that the request for the ruling was made in time (see Rules 20.1b(2) and 20.1b(3)).

 

A player or players in a match may be in breach of Rule 1.2b (Code of Conduct), Rule 1.3b(1) (Two or More Players Deliberately Agreeing to Ignore any Rule or Penalty they Know Applies), Rule 5.6a (Unreasonable Delay of Play) or Rule 5.6b (Prompt Pace of Play).

 

A player arrives late to his or her first tee (see Rule 5.3).

 

A player’s search for a ball reaches three minutes (see Rule 5.6a and definition of “lost”).

 

 

[Hateto3Putt]

I love these molehill to mountain threads!

 

Ball falls off a tee unnoticed, friend or foe, I speak up.

 

3 or 4 more pages please..... B)

[Newby]

> @Sawgrass said:

> If I was assigned to the match I would speak up. If I was a roving ref, or one assigned to a hole, I would stay silent. If I was a spectator, it would depend on how well I knew the players and what I knew about them.

>

Given the statement _"Paired with strangers having a match"_ implies he was not a referee, my answer was based on being a spectator.

 

[lchang]

> @Newby said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > If I was assigned to the match I would speak up. If I was a roving ref, or one assigned to a hole, I would stay silent. If I was a spectator, it would depend on how well I knew the players and what I knew about them.

> >

> Given the statement _"Paired with strangers having a match"_ implies he was not a referee, my answer was based on being a spectator.

>

Yes I was completely a spectator to a $5 Nassau. I could totally have stayed silent. Players could have made mistakes in reporting their scores, “gotten away with it”, etc. I could have just nodded to myself knowingly and moved on. But I think I feel somehow better that the result was more “deserved” after my little correction.

 

[nsxguy]

> @lchang said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > If I was assigned to the match I would speak up. If I was a roving ref, or one assigned to a hole, I would stay silent. If I was a spectator, it would depend on how well I knew the players and what I knew about them.

> > >

> > Given the statement _"Paired with strangers having a match"_ implies he was not a referee, my answer was based on being a spectator.

> >

> Yes I was completely a spectator to a $5 Nassau. I could totally have stayed silent. Players could have made mistakes in reporting their scores, “gotten away with it”, etc. I could have just nodded to myself knowingly and moved on. But I think I feel somehow better that the result was more “deserved” after my little correction.

>

 

Didn't you already post this exact situation in a thread of its own ? That, BTW, didn't come to a completely satisfactory conclusion.

 

[https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1776584/match-play-ruling-stroke-allocation-confusion#latest](https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1776584/match-play-ruling-stroke-allocation-confusion#latest "https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1776584/match-play-ruling-stroke-allocation-confusion#latest")

[nsxguy]

> @antip said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @antip said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

> > > >

> > > > Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

> > > That is precisely what has happened. The rule has been pointed out and referees have chimed in. There is just your figuring it out left.

> > >

> >

> > So you're not going to point me to the Rule about a player illegally picking up the ball. No problem. Guess I don't need to participate in your quiz.

> >

> > In other business, the only one really challenging my account/reading of the DEFINITION of "advice" is you. A referee telling us that AS A REFEREE they are encouraged to help players to avoid breaking a Rule is honorable and good sportsmanship but it does not apply here as we're not discussing what a referee can/will/might do.

> >

> > I laid it out quite clearly. One statement INCLUDES information on the Rules, presumably(?) if said information is used to influence. You offer no clarification or explanation, you only stick to your "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra.

> >

> > I explained how *I* interpret "your" "rules information" statement and you offer no explanation, just keep repeating the same refrain. The part of the definition of advice I am pointing out is "ALL-INCLUSIVE" if you will.

> >

> > Information on the Rules is INCLUDED in "Any comment,,,,,, influencing". "Any comment intended to influence a player" MEANS "ANY COMMENT". Quoting a Rule without being asked to discuss it as in the context of this part of the discussion is clearly offered to influence another player's play of a shot and thus fits the definition of "advice".

> >

> > You are the only one sticking to your one statement as if it is totally self-explanatory,,,,,,,,,,,,, and it's not. You're fairly new here so you might not notice it but the "usual suspects" have been rather quiet over this one. I would say that is,,,,,,,, unusual.

> >

> > The Rules are not infallible. You might remember the kerfluffle about the Yellow Penalty Area drop that was "clarified". And many people spent a great deal of time trying to get that right. I daresay the gentlemen that first brought it up here on WRX WAS the first to spot it and all the Rulies here agreed it was an oversight and the quick clarification confirmed it.

>

> If you remain unhappy that people responding to the large number of words you are contributing to this discussion do not seem to understand your questions, or you don't like the answers, then you could take advantage of the excellent facility provided by the USGA allowing you to phone in your questions. We've clearly gone round the loop a number of times and multiple referees (me included) have suggested your interpretation of certain statements as advice is, in their view, incorrect.

 

LOL You wouldn't even point me to the Rule for a player incorrectly moving his ball out of a divot. Too many words I guess.

 

Anyway, since the USGA is apparently not answering emails very quickly (in fact very slowly if at all) I expect I will call them this coming week. I actually have 2 other questions to ask. And actually one of them is exactly what Ichang just posted about (wrong NET stroke information) which was brought up elsewhere(?) and IIRC did not completely come to closure.

 

As for this discussion, said referees, including yourself, instead of trying to explain why the 2 statements do NOT contradict one another, have simply stuck to the "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra even while ignoring the very clear statement about "Any comment influencing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, etc"

 

Rather than continue to bore everybody (after this post), I'll give this one last shot. You're welcome BTW

 

Let's look at the 2 statements separately.

 

a) ANY comment influencing a player's play,,,,,,,,,,

 

b) Information on the Rules is not advice.

 

If statement "a" is correct then statement "b" is not.

 

If statement "b" is correct then statement "a" is not.

 

And if statement "b" is correct, statement "a" should have been worded something like "any comment, except any information on the Rules (no matter when or how spoken about),,,,,,,,,,,,,,"

 

And then, of course, statement "b" wouldn't have even been necessary. Sometimes less is more.

 

Or statement "b" could be also have been stated as an "exception" to statement "a" (but also, not necessarily but should, have included "no matter when or why") verbiage as well IMO.

 

However the phone call comes out I'll let you know what they say (NOT word-for-word of courses LOL).

[Sawgrass]

> @nsxguy said:

 

> Let's look at the 2 statements separately.

>

> a) ANY comment influencing a player's play,,,,,,,,,,

>

> b) Information on the Rules is not advice.

>

> If statement "a" is correct then statement "b" is not.

>

> If statement "b" is correct then statement "a" is not.

>

> And if statement "b" is correct, statement "a" should have been worded something like "******any comment, except any information on the Rules (no matter when or how spoken about),,,,,,,,,,,,,," ******

 

The bolded statement, if it were actually a rule, would be a truly horrible one.

 

"How's your kid doing?"

Sorry, general penalty for making a comment except information about the rules.

 

Just sayin'.

 

[Mr. Bean]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @antip said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Point me to the correct Rule(s) and I'll try to figure it out.

> > > > >

> > > > > Better still, a referee might chime in and let ~~us~~ me know.

> > > > That is precisely what has happened. The rule has been pointed out and referees have chimed in. There is just your figuring it out left.

> > > >

> > >

> > > So you're not going to point me to the Rule about a player illegally picking up the ball. No problem. Guess I don't need to participate in your quiz.

> > >

> > > In other business, the only one really challenging my account/reading of the DEFINITION of "advice" is you. A referee telling us that AS A REFEREE they are encouraged to help players to avoid breaking a Rule is honorable and good sportsmanship but it does not apply here as we're not discussing what a referee can/will/might do.

> > >

> > > I laid it out quite clearly. One statement INCLUDES information on the Rules, presumably(?) if said information is used to influence. You offer no clarification or explanation, you only stick to your "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra.

> > >

> > > I explained how *I* interpret "your" "rules information" statement and you offer no explanation, just keep repeating the same refrain. The part of the definition of advice I am pointing out is "ALL-INCLUSIVE" if you will.

> > >

> > > Information on the Rules is INCLUDED in "Any comment,,,,,, influencing". "Any comment intended to influence a player" MEANS "ANY COMMENT". Quoting a Rule without being asked to discuss it as in the context of this part of the discussion is clearly offered to influence another player's play of a shot and thus fits the definition of "advice".

> > >

> > > You are the only one sticking to your one statement as if it is totally self-explanatory,,,,,,,,,,,,, and it's not. You're fairly new here so you might not notice it but the "usual suspects" have been rather quiet over this one. I would say that is,,,,,,,, unusual.

> > >

> > > The Rules are not infallible. You might remember the kerfluffle about the Yellow Penalty Area drop that was "clarified". And many people spent a great deal of time trying to get that right. I daresay the gentlemen that first brought it up here on WRX WAS the first to spot it and all the Rulies here agreed it was an oversight and the quick clarification confirmed it.

> >

> > If you remain unhappy that people responding to the large number of words you are contributing to this discussion do not seem to understand your questions, or you don't like the answers, then you could take advantage of the excellent facility provided by the USGA allowing you to phone in your questions. We've clearly gone round the loop a number of times and multiple referees (me included) have suggested your interpretation of certain statements as advice is, in their view, incorrect.

>

> LOL You wouldn't even point me to the Rule for a player incorrectly moving his ball out of a divot. Too many words I guess.

>

> Anyway, since the USGA is apparently not answering emails very quickly (in fact very slowly if at all) I expect I will call them this coming week. I actually have 2 other questions to ask. And actually one of them is exactly what Ichang just posted about (wrong NET stroke information) which was brought up elsewhere(?) and IIRC did not completely come to closure.

>

> As for this discussion, said referees, including yourself, instead of trying to explain why the 2 statements do NOT contradict one another, have simply stuck to the "information on the Rules is not advice" mantra even while ignoring the very clear statement about "Any comment influencing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, etc"

>

> Rather than continue to bore everybody (after this post), I'll give this one last shot. You're welcome BTW

>

> Let's look at the 2 statements separately.

>

> a) ANY comment influencing a player's play,,,,,,,,,,

>

> b) Information on the Rules is not advice.

>

> If statement "a" is correct then statement "b" is not.

>

> If statement "b" is correct then statement "a" is not.

>

> And if statement "b" is correct, statement "a" should have been worded something like "any comment, except any information on the Rules (no matter when or how spoken about),,,,,,,,,,,,,,"

>

> And then, of course, statement "b" wouldn't have even been necessary. Sometimes less is more.

>

> Or statement "b" could be also have been stated as an "exception" to statement "a" (but also, not necessarily but should, have included "no matter when or why") verbiage as well IMO.

>

> However the phone call comes out I'll let you know what they say (NOT word-for-word of courses LOL).

 

So you did not bother to read the Definition of Advice, huh?

 

It is extremely clearly said there that information of the Rules is NOT an Advice. Also if you would bother to read the Definition you would (maybe) understand that this is an exception to the overall statement, as are those two others described in the Definition.

[nsxguy]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @nsxguy said:

>

> > Let's look at the 2 statements separately.

> >

> > a) ANY comment influencing a player's play,,,,,,,,,,

> >

> > b) Information on the Rules is not advice.

> >

> > If statement "a" is correct then statement "b" is not.

> >

> > If statement "b" is correct then statement "a" is not.

> >

> > And if statement "b" is correct, statement "a" should have been worded something like "******any comment, except any information on the Rules (no matter when or how spoken about),,,,,,,,,,,,,," ******

>

> The bolded statement, if it were actually a rule, would be a truly horrible one.

>

> "How's your kid doing?"

> Sorry, general penalty for making a comment except information about the rules.

>

> Just sayin'.

>

 

Jeez saw, I was just tryin' to save some typing. Surely you realize that wasn't going to be the entire definition. LOL

 

As suggested, MY "proposal" would read

 

ADVICE

Any verbal comment or action, except any information on the Rules (no matter when or how spoken about), (such as showing what club was just used to make a stroke) that is intended to influence a player in:

Choosing a club,

Making a stroke, or

Deciding how to play during a hole or round.

 

Then the rest of the definition wouldn't need to be there AND there'd be no confusion,,,,,,,, even on MY part. LOL

 

[HitEmTrue]

@nxsguy, the way it is written is fine. Sometimes a player is faced a choice under the rules, for example, where to drop. Or, if he takes relief in this particular location, he may also be able to take relief from something else. Currently, it is against the rules for a player to advise another player on which choice to make, and your proposal would seem to open that door.

 

And certainly you know that you may not move your ball out of a divot hole, that was not the point of @antip’s scenario.

[antip]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @lchang said:

> > OP here. Don’t know why something like this has happened to me twice within a week: this one not so controversial I think? But nonetheless, what would you have done:

> >

> > Paired with strangers having a match. (A $5 Nassau and some wonderfully hilarious trash talk). 4th hole, the lower cap guy about to putt for his 6, and asks his opponent what he’s in for. Higher cap responds 6. He gets a stroke on this hole, so the lower cap is about to take his ball away because he’s already lost to net 5. I say, “ummm. I think it’s a 7.” The higher cap pauses for a second and goes, “You’re right it’s a seven!” I say, “I’m sorry I didn’t mean to get involved in your match but...”. He cuts me off and says,”no no! You’re totally right. It’s a 7.” (Lower cap made his putt to halve the hole.)

> >

> > Would you have done the same in my position?

> >

>

> If I was assigned to the match I would speak up. If I was a roving ref, or one assigned to a hole, I would stay silent. If I was a spectator, it would depend on how well I knew the players and what I knew about them.

>

> From Committee Procedures 6C:

>

> When Assigned to Multiple Matches or to Certain Holes or Sections of the Course. As the referee is not assigned to accompany the match throughout the round, he or she should avoid becoming involved in a match unless:

>

> A player in a match asks for help with the Rules or requests a ruling (see Rule 20.1b(2)). When making a ruling at the request of a player, the referee should always confirm that the request for the ruling was made in time (see Rules 20.1b(2) and 20.1b(3)).

>

> **A player or players in a match may be in breach of Rule 1.2b (Code of Conduct**), Rule 1.3b(1) (Two or More Players Deliberately Agreeing to Ignore any Rule or Penalty they Know Applies), Rule 5.6a (Unreasonable Delay of Play) or Rule 5.6b (Prompt Pace of Play).

>

> A player arrives late to his or her first tee (see Rule 5.3).

>

> A player’s search for a ball reaches three minutes (see Rule 5.6a and definition of “lost”).

>

>

Saw

From the refereeing perspective - but this would also be of interest to many that come to discuss/learn/share stuff about the rules - there is a significant issue with the wording I have highlighted above. I saw that wording in the book and explicitly raised it with the Senior Director, Rules, who lead the Workshop I attended in March. My question was: has there been an explicit change in 2019 in the guidance to referees on when they can intervene in match play when not assigned to the match? He replied why do I ask? I noted that pre-2019 was clear that a referee could intervene on (old) R33-7, specifically the capacity to intervene in a serious breach situation, but that 2019 wording had apparently narrowed that significantly - by limiting the new 1.2 reference to 1.2b (which applies only to a breach of a Code of Conduct that had been empowered under a Local Rule - and very few courses have one of these). His response was there was absolutely no intention to change anything in this area so that reference is incorrect, probably should just read Rule 1.2 rather than 1.2b (Code of Conduct).

 

Now coming back to Ichang's OP Mark 2, player in a match states a lower number of strokes to an opponent and you are a referee witnessing this not assigned to a match: do you intervene? If I'm not a referee, my answer is an unequivocal yes. If I am a referee not assigned to the match, my answer is more complicated.

 

IMO (subject of course to any new RB guidance that emerges) the referee is empowered to intervene. Telling an opponent a lower number than you have had when it influences the hole is very significant. Clearly, it can be innocent error and probably is most of the time, but it may also be serious misconduct of the worst possible kind. Consequently, my thought is the referee has authority to intervene, to clarify the situation. That is not to say that a referee **must** intervene but **may**.

 

What might be the difference? My thinking is influenced by the guidance we get on whether it is a breach not to tell an opponent about a penalty. If it is obvious that a player has incurred a penalty, it is not a breach to fail to draw that explicitly to an opponent's attention. So in a wrong score situation, if we are talking simple situations and low scores (regulation or close to), with little or no complexity, probably not a sufficient case to intervene. But more complex or higher score situations that involved players getting into difficulties of some sort and there could be very good reason to intervene. And some judgement may be required. That's why those of us that referee get paid the big bucks (LOL).