Get a Ruling • Re: Match Play
Hi friends
I'm one of the collegues mentioned above. I think we all agree that in the scenario presented by JMC the hole in question is halved if nobody makes a claim and also that A would lose the hole if B - the real culprit who has a bad conscience - would make a claim based on Rule 17-3. But it is A who makes a claim claiming that B breached a Rule which carries a loss of hole penalty and notifies B accordingly. B of course has every reason to remain quiet and wants to disregard A's breach. The committee can not find any Rule B might have breached and doesn't upheld the claim. It of course is aware that B would win the hole if he had made a claim but it also knows that B is allowed to disregard A's breach. I can't find anything in the book which would allow the committee to step in in favour of player B.
quincy
I'm one of the collegues mentioned above. I think we all agree that in the scenario presented by JMC the hole in question is halved if nobody makes a claim and also that A would lose the hole if B - the real culprit who has a bad conscience - would make a claim based on Rule 17-3. But it is A who makes a claim claiming that B breached a Rule which carries a loss of hole penalty and notifies B accordingly. B of course has every reason to remain quiet and wants to disregard A's breach. The committee can not find any Rule B might have breached and doesn't upheld the claim. It of course is aware that B would win the hole if he had made a claim but it also knows that B is allowed to disregard A's breach. I can't find anything in the book which would allow the committee to step in in favour of player B.
quincy
Statistics: Posted by quincy — Today, 19:11