Q-School Disqualification

[ward peyronnin]

Clearly the answer is he need to fire his blind caddie

[Jerry Kluger]

Let's say that the camera never saw Dustin Johnson grounding his club at the PGA and he wound up winning the event.  What should he do first - give back the trophy or the money? It was posted all over the locker room and the caddies were told many times about the bunker rule and there was a rules official walking with the group.  The kid here acted in good faith and there was no intent to violate the rules.  This is ridiculous and it really makes me wonder if somehow golfers are supposed to be perfect and all-knowing.

[Keith OHalloran]

Jerry,
In my mind, his good faith ended when he learned that night that he signed the wrong card. What do you suppose he played the last two rounds for? Or waited the next 6 days?
Golfers do not have to be all knowing, but once he knows, he has an obligation.

[JESII]

I've signed wrong cards and dealt with penalty situations I thought I knew but didn't so I can't blame him for that stuff but playing round three with the information he received overnight is a head scratcher...

Keep an eye on those 6 guys that got through to second stage because of this.

[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.

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

I know. I was just stating what we know from the article.

[Andy Stamm]

I'd like to point out from the first post, that if he signed a card for a stroke that was one shot "too high" (which I don't think is plausible in this situation) that that would not be an incorrect scorecard and would not subject him to any ramifications or disqualification. Rather the sore recorded, if is higher than the number of strokes played, is the score for the hole and therefore his score would be accurate not "too high" and certainly not subject to penalty.

So if he had penalized himself one stroke for say tending the flagstick when playing from off the green, he'd be ok because that's not illegal, and the score he recorded would stand. Given that here he signed a card one shot too low, he's disqualified.

[Mark Pearce]

The kid here acted in good faith and there was no intent to violate the rules.  This is ridiculous and it really makes me wonder if somehow golfers are supposed to be perfect and all-knowing.

Jerry,

As Keith and Jim have pointed out he cannot, simply cannot, claim to have acted in good faith after the evening of the round when he realised he had assessed the incorrect penalty.  I'm completely with you up to that point and simply cannot understand your position after it.

[Tim Martin]

It is clear that no one in the group that day knew the rule as the article indicates that Barber notified his paying partners of the infraction. Certainly the player that was keeping Barber's card didn't know as it was also incumbent upon him to protect the field. It is very hard for me to give him a pass after learning that the correct penalty was two shots. It should have been reported before the commencement of the next round. Waiting six days to come clean does not make Barber a hero in my eyes. We all know that the Rules of Golf could use some practical revision but it is incumbent on all competitors especially at PGA Tour qualifying to comply unequivocally.

[Carl Nichols]

I'd like to point out from the first post, that if he signed a card for a stroke that was one shot "too high" (which I don't think is plausible in this situation) that that would not be an incorrect scorecard and would not subject him to any ramifications or disqualification. Rather the sore recorded, if is higher than the number of strokes played, is the score for the hole and therefore his score would be accurate not "too high" and certainly not subject to penalty.

So if he had penalized himself one stroke for say tending the flagstick when playing from off the green, he'd be ok because that's not illegal, and the score he recorded would stand. Given that here he signed a card one shot too low, he's disqualified.

If he put down a score that was too high, that wouldn't have been incorrect in the sense that he would have been disqualified, but I didn't say in my original post that it was incorrect in that sense.  Instead, all I meant was that his card simply had the wrong score for that hole [and therefore his round]--either one stroke too high or too low--a fact that he learned that night.   

[Pete_Pittock]

Rule 34 - Disputes and Decisiions     (excerpted)
Rule 34-1 Claims and Penalties
       a. Match Play - (doesn't apply here)
       b. Stroke Play - In stroke play, a penalty must not be rescinded, modified or imposed after the tournament has closed. A competitiojn is closed when the result has been officially announced (rest not applicable in this case)
      Exceptions A penalty of disqualification must be imposed after the competition is closed if a competitor:
      (i) not applicable in this case
      (ii) not applicable in this case
      (iii) returned a score for any hole lower than actually taken (Rule 6-6d) for any reason other than failure to include a penalty that, before the tournament closed, he did not know he had incuued; o
     (iv) knew, before the tournament clsed, that he had been in breach of any other rule for which the penalty is disqualtification.

   There are four reasons when a disqualification after the closure of the competition is allowed. He broke the third one in that he knew , by admission, 2 1/2 day before the end of competition that he had turned in an incorrect scorecard which included a one stroke penalty rather than a two stroke penalty.
    While he ostensibly qualified by five shots, the field was playing for 18 spots and ties. 19th or worse was pack and go. It didn't matter if he finished 1st or tied for 18th, the math of the situation was flawed by his failure to disqualify himself before the start of the third round. Math counts
    The general penalty for breaching a rule is usually two stokes, why did he start with the assumption it was one stroke.

[Andy Stamm]

I'd like to point out from the first post, that if he signed a card for a stroke that was one shot "too high" (which I don't think is plausible in this situation) that that would not be an incorrect scorecard and would not subject him to any ramifications or disqualification. Rather the sore recorded, if is higher than the number of strokes played, is the score for the hole and therefore his score would be accurate not "too high" and certainly not subject to penalty.

So if he had penalized himself one stroke for say tending the flagstick when playing from off the green, he'd be ok because that's not illegal, and the score he recorded would stand. Given that here he signed a card one shot too low, he's disqualified.

If he put down a score that was too high, that wouldn't have been incorrect in the sense that he would have been disqualified, but I didn't say in my original post that it was incorrect in that sense.  Instead, all I meant was that his card simply had the wrong score for that hole [and therefore his round]--either one stroke too high or too low--a fact that he learned that night.   

Fair enough. I took the following language to mean otherwise.

"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."

My point was just that signing for a card "too high" wouldn't be an incorrect scorecard and further that he woudn't need "to say anything at the time" that he discovered something that is not against the rules in any way.

But again there's no such thing as recording a score one stroke "too high" (for an individual hole). If you record a score that's lower than what you "took" that's a dq. If you record a score that's equal to or higher than what you "took," what you write (not what you "took") IS your score (when you sign and turn it in). It's the official (and correct) score, not "too high."

But I was just wishing to offer some clarification and not trying to pick fights.

[Carl Nichols]

I'd like to point out from the first post, that if he signed a card for a stroke that was one shot "too high" (which I don't think is plausible in this situation) that that would not be an incorrect scorecard and would not subject him to any ramifications or disqualification. Rather the sore recorded, if is higher than the number of strokes played, is the score for the hole and therefore his score would be accurate not "too high" and certainly not subject to penalty.

So if he had penalized himself one stroke for say tending the flagstick when playing from off the green, he'd be ok because that's not illegal, and the score he recorded would stand. Given that here he signed a card one shot too low, he's disqualified.

If he put down a score that was too high, that wouldn't have been incorrect in the sense that he would have been disqualified, but I didn't say in my original post that it was incorrect in that sense.  Instead, all I meant was that his card simply had the wrong score for that hole [and therefore his round]--either one stroke too high or too low--a fact that he learned that night.   

Fair enough. I took the following language to mean otherwise.

"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."

My point was just that signing for a card "too high" wouldn't be an incorrect scorecard and further that he woudn't need "to say anything at the time" that he discovered something that is not against the rules in any way.

But again there's no such thing as recording a score one stroke "too high" (for an individual hole). If you record a score that's lower than what you "took" that's a dq. If you record a score that's equal to or higher than what you "took," what you write (not what you "took") IS your score (when you sign and turn it in). It's the official (and correct) score, not "too high."

But I was just wishing to offer some clarification and not trying to pick fights.

Understood.  My point was only that there was no scenario under which he thought his score that day was actually correct [putting aside what followed as a result], which is one of the reasons to think that he should've said something at that point.