[Carl Nichols]

http://golfweek.com/news/2012/nov/05/blayne-barber-disqualifies-himself-six-days-after-/

This is an odd story.  He calls a penalty on himself at the time of the incident, disagreeing with his caddie about whether he brushed the leaf.  But he mistakenly adds only one stroke, rather than two, an error he learns about that same evening.  So he knows that night that he signed an incorrect scorecard -- his score on the card was either too low (because he brushed the leaf and gave himself only one additional stroke), or, I suppose, too high (because he didn't really brush the leaf, though not sure how he could believe that, having already assessed himself a penalty).  Nevertheless, he decides not to say anything at the time, plays two more rounds, qualifies for the next level, and later decides (8 days after the incident and 6 days after the tournament) that he needs to say something. 

This strikes me as less honorable than the author of the article makes it out to be.  After all, this isn't a situation where no one else knew what happened.  Instead, everyone in his group knew he called a penalty on himself--i.e., that he had concluded he brushed the leaf--and at least three people [Barber, his caddie, and his former teammate] knew that his card was wrong. 

[Carl Nichols]

It certainly doesn't look great - but at least he fessed up in the end. Ultimately, one is responsible for one's own scorecard, but you wonder, at this level, why there aren't better checks in place to stop this kind of thing from happening in the first place.

Brian:
Agree that it was much better to have come forward than not.  I just don't see any question at all once he learned that the penalty was 2 strokes, not 1. 

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

So easy to judge from afar, but sometimes with things like this,"the best course of action becomes clearly obvious'  to the person involved.
We all make mistakes and sometimes it  takes a while to realise how important they are in our everyday life, and that not dealing with them creates a miserable life.
So coming "clean" becomes that best course of action, even if to some morally perfect individuals it appears it is a belated desicion.

Speaking from experience here.....so this is part of my rehab so to speak.

[Keith OHalloran]

I agree that it is easy for us to see what the right thing to do is in hindsight, however this kid has played a ton of competitive golf. He knows the ramifications of signing an incorreect scorecard and finished the last two rounds. He qualified by 5 strokes. Did his presence on the leaderboard affect how some people behind him played? Could some people have taken chances that they did not need to, in an effort to catch a guy that was not going to qualify anyway? I know he ended up doing the right thing, but doing the right thing at the right time is important too.

[Jerry Kluger]

Allow me to throw something into the discussion.  It says he qualified with 5 strokes to spare so no matter what he had on the hole he would have made it and it would have had no affect on the rest of the field.  To me, I see no reason for him to be disqualified.  He signed his scorecard and the change in his score had nothing to do with the outcome of the event.  He did the right thing by signing a scorecard he believed to be correct.  The only thing he might have done was to ask an  official prior to signing the card to determine what score he should record on the hole.

[Keith OHalloran]

Jerry,
If you are advocating for a change in the rules, I would be fine with that. However, the rules are what they are. He knew he signed an incorrect card that night, and did not mention it. We have no idea how that affected any other player. When you break the rule, you do not get the benefit of saying that it would not have made a difference anyway.

[Jerry Kluger]

Keith: I am advocating for a change in the rule since the event was over and the violation had no affect on the outcome of the event.  It is just another case of the golf world thinking it is somehow honorable to disqualify someone for the sake of being able to say that it did so simply because it is the rule.  Exactly when would the player have been in the clear?  When Q school was over? When he made it to the Tour, played for 30 years on the Tour or maybe never and it would be written on his tombstone that he signed the wrong scorecard and should have been DQ'd.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I understand the so called "right" thing to do Kevin..but as I said earlier so easy to be judgemental, due to my own indiscretions I tend to be more sympathetic and look at the bigger picture..dont throw stones in glass houses approach.
The number of people and so called "friends" I know who judged me for instance, that I know drink too much on the golf course then drive home, cheat on their wives etc...come on..it is  game and the kid ended up doing the right thing.
I agree he did what he thought was the right thing to start with...and I have never understood the whole dq after the fact thing anyway, adjust the scorecard after the fact and move on...it appears this was an honest mistake.
Unfortuantely Kevin is right...those are the rules, which in essence left the player with two choices, keep quiet and deal with it, or becoma a dq victim.
A third option of telling the officials and getting the extra stroke..SHOULD have been an option...imho

[Mark Pearce]

He's a professional golfer, trying to make a living out of the game and he doesn't know the rules or carry a rule book?

Also (and while I understand Michael's point), this was a genuine mistake right up to the point that night he realised it was a two stroke penalty.  I agree with Jerry that the rules don't make good sense but they are what they are and the right thing to do (no matter how hard) at that point was to come clean immediately.  Then to spend some time getting familiar with the rules of the game he intends to make a living out of.

[Jon Wiggett]

A third option of telling the officials and getting the extra stroke..SHOULD have been an option...imho

The problem is that the event was finished. In this case it would have been fairly clear cut but what would you suggest if through the extra shot he would have been in a play off?

The rules are fairly clear on this though I seem to think that there have been cases where because the competition was finished and the final rankings published the result stood. Could be mistaken though.

Jon

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Jon, What I mean is that next morning he should have been able to go to the officials told them of his mistake and picked up the extra shot and move on.
This was a first round offense wasnt it, not the last round?

I think it is an error in the rules, they do not allow for legitimate mistakes that are relised after the fact.

[Keith OHalloran]

Brian,
Speaking fo rmyself, I would have no problem if the rule was changed.  In this circumstance, it has not been changed yet. If we give him credit for telling the tour about it 8 days and 2 rounds after he discovered it, we can also question what was going through his mind during that time.

[John Kavanaugh]

No one cares by how many seconds Lance Armstrong won his 7 Tour de France's.  When you cheat in golf you are given many chances to come clean before disqualification.  After the shot, after the hole and then all during the round.  Even then you are given one final chance before you sign your card.  This kid makes Cam Newton look like a Rhodes Scholar.  War Eagle!!!

[Adam Clayman]

The rules makers need to be cautious when changing rules. Their constant tweaking leads to the confusion of one stroke or two.

[John Kavanaugh]

Where does the rule about protecting the field start and stop?  It would seem this kids playing partners were as guilty as him when they did not properly enforce the rule.  The article states that they were told of the infraction.  It would seem they should also be disqualified for allowing him to take only one stroke.

This is why I rarely play in tournaments any longer.  I just don't have the balls to enforce the rules, as stupid and complicated as they are.   Golf should be fun and snitching lost its luster when I hit puberty.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Keith, I agree with the 8 days after sceanrio, and do not condone what he did..BUT..if an option would have been tell them the next morning, after realising his mistake, this whole thing would have been avoided.
I agree with you JK, the playing partners shouls also have known better and perhaps helped the kid out at the time.
But as we are on the topic of "honour"in the game unfortunatley in the dog eat dog world of pro golf perhpas this sceanrio suits them better?
Lets not pretend that scenario is not feasible, keeping quiet until you dont keep quiet.
Happened to me in a State Am..signed my scorecard two out of the lead, THEN one of my playing partners reminded the official that "perhaps" that one shot penatly should have been a two...
that kind of shit is what a rule change could avoid.
Not to affect the intentional but to protect the player against the unintentional "ignorance" of the too many rules within the game.

[Jason Topp]

Normally before I turn in a card at a better run tournament, the official will ask if the group encountered any rules issues during the round.  It seems that such a practice would have avoided the problem and I am surprised that the issue did not get resolved there. 

Nonetheless, I agree that the player should have disqualified himself the next morning or at least raised the issue and explained why he did not believe a penalty was appropriate because he did not believe he touched the leaf.  In that case I believe his score would stand because he would have signed for a higher score than he should have posted. 

On the other hand, if the player really did not believe he touched the leaf and decided to dq himself anyway because he was not certain, I think he deserves to be commended for his actions.

[Jon Wiggett]

JK,

did the article say that his playing partners were aware at the point of his signing the card that he had broken the rules? If they were unaware then they carry no blame as it is the player's responsibility to ensure he/she signs a correct card. If however, they did know then you are correct and they to must be disqualified.

My last point before was that I believe if a mistake is discovered after the tournament is finished and the final results have been posted then no action is usually taken. I am almost certain this has happened on the PGA Tour at some point in the last few seasons.

Rule enforcement is not really so difficult. If in doubt make all parties aware of what has happened, present this to the appropriate person(s) at the end of the round and let them decide.

Jon

[Carl Nichols]

JK,

did the article say that his playing partners were aware at the point of his signing the card that he had broken the rules? If they were unaware then they carry no blame as it is the player's responsibility to ensure he/she signs a correct card. If however, they did know then you are correct and they to must be disqualified.

It says that he told his playing partners at the time that he was assessing himself a penalty -- it doesn't say that he told them how much of a penalty, and it doesn't say whether there was any discussion about 1 vs. 2 strokes.  Presumably, however, one of them attested his score.

[Jon Wiggett]

JK,

did the article say that his playing partners were aware at the point of his signing the card that he had broken the rules? If they were unaware then they carry no blame as it is the player's responsibility to ensure he/she signs a correct card. If however, they did know then you are correct and they to must be disqualified.

It says that he told his playing partners at the time that he was assessing himself a penalty -- it doesn't say that he told them how much of a penalty, and it doesn't say whether there was any discussion about 1 vs. 2 strokes.  Presumably, however, one of them attested his score.

JK was wondering if the playing partners should have been disqualified. You are not disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard as the marker unless you know that the scorecard is incorrect. You might argue that the marker should have involved himself much more in the rules question but that is the only shortcoming that could be said of him.

I am still not sure if he should have been disqualified at should a late stage although he knew at an earlier stage and so one might argue a more severe penalty should be imposed for deliberately concealing a rule breach.

Jon

[Jerry Kluger]

Just explain to me how his disqualification protects the field.  He should have taken two strokes instead of one but that extra stoke had no affect on the outcome.  BTW: How many players in any event know every rule - I would guess zero and the same goes for the officials.  You can try and pick and choose rules that you feel a player should know but you cannot make it the rule that every player has to know every rule.  Please show me the person who has the "Decisions on the Rules of Golf" memorized because I've never met him.  You don't deliberately violate a rule and when you learn of your mistake you do what you can to correct it but just keep your perspective - it is golf and not life and death. 

[Mark Pearce]

Jerry,

It took him 6 days to do what he could to correct it.  Are you OK. With that?  As to the rules, he doesn't need a copy of the decisions to know the correct penalty, I'm sure his caddy could cope with the additional weight of a rule book and, if he couldn't, there are rules officials at every tournament.  There is no excuse for a mistake like this.

[Jerry Kluger]

Mark: The issue to me is the disqualification penalty.  It's also that the competition was over. At what point in time is it done with?  We are dealing with human beings and they make mistakes.  Most criminal offenses require have an intent factor and most have a statute of limitations.  Enough is enough.  Stop with the holiness of the game of golf.  It is a game and even at the professional level people aren't perfect and you have to get on with it.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I think we are missing the point. The issue isn't about golf it is about a young man's struggle with his conscience.  In my profession we would call it confession.  It is good for the soul.  It isn't really about the rules of golf.  It is about learning to do the right thing. I suspect this young fellow will be the better for it.  All of us have failed to do the right thing at a particular moment.  After we have had time to evaluate our actions we may have tried to set things right. It isn't necesarily laudable or damnable. It is part of the human condition.

[Mark Johnson]

I think we are missing the point. The issue isn't about golf it is about a young man's struggle with his conscience.  In my profession we would call it confession.  It is good for the soul.  It isn't really about the rules of golf.  It is about learning to do the right thing. I suspect this young fellow will be the better for it.  All of us have failed to do the right thing at a particular moment.  After we have had time to evaluate our actions we may have tried to set things right. It isn't necesarily laudable or damnable. It is part of the human condition.

Don't disagree with that.  However, if he knew the rules, then this is a moot point.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()