A Four Ball competition between Foremost and partner JSt against wily veterans JB and RGC ended All-Square after a rather miraculous 18th hole win by RGC. His hopes seemed faint on the long Par 4, as he had putted his 3rd shot from off the green into the greenside bunker. Nevertheless, he gamely rallied with a splendid kick-in bunker shot for a 5, net 4, which won the hole and tied the match. The parties shook hands after the hard-fought competition with F and JSt effusive in their praise of RCG’s grit, determination, and skill.

A decision was made to retire to the porch for a post-round beverage. JSt had to decline the invitation, leaving F on his own with the opposition. This circumstance proved to be a mistake, as the mood quickly turned hostile, as F’s opponents endeavored to win a match on the porch that they were unable to win on the course.

The conversation began with F’s opponents jointly criticizing F’s wardrobe selection on this Easter weekend in which he matched pink shorts with a pink F hat. RCG suggested that F’s father would turn over in his grave at the sight of such an ensemble of pink. F replied that he had never heard his father remark on fashion, other than to note that his friend and ardent Commodore fan HPk (aka, the Blade”) had an entire wardrobe of gold pants and slacks with none of the items remotely containing the same shade of gold.

JB said he was so distracted by F’s outfit that he could only think of the Pink Ladies in Grease as he tried to play golf. He then named several of the actresses in Grease (Frenchy, Rizzo, Sandra Dee, Marty Marashino and others … he knew their real and stage names) and all of the songs, a musing which F thought spoke more about JB than F’s own clothing selection.

Fortunately, the subject turned to golf as RCG asked F, if in his writings, he ever called attention to his own rules infractions as he called attention to the infractions of others. Specifically, he said three infractions by F on this day warranted a reversal of the outcome of the match, and payment of the substantial purse to himself and JB, which they had every right and intention of collecting.

Facts

1. First, RGC asked F if he recalled teeing up in front of the tee markers on the 14th and 15th holes. F did not. JB then pulled out his cell phone for a photo display which shows F’s stunning outfit and purports to show F teeing up outside of the teeing area.

Ruling

Assuming F’s ball was teed up outside the teeing area, there is no penalty in Match Play. His opponents had the right to cancel the stroke, in which case F would have been required to play another ball from the teeing area.

The cancellation must be invoked promptly and before another player makes a stroke, and not at some later time, such as later on a porch nursing a cranberry and vodka. (R6.1b(1)).

in fact, the only Rule violated on this occasion was JB’s use of a cell phone on the golf course, a clear violation of BMCC club rules, and one which should be reported to higher authorities.

2. Opponents JB and RGC also wanted to revisit the 6th Hole, a treacherous Par 3 ultimately won by F after a wonderful tee shot. Indeed, F had taken two clubs to the teeing area as he gauged distance and wind. Immediately after his shot, his opponents said it certainly looked to them as if F had used the discarded club as an alignment tool. The club was still on the ground where F had dropped it, perhaps a club-length from the spot of the teed ball, and F had to admit it was pointed in the general direction of the green.

JSt noted the positioning of the club was by chance, as F had simply tossed it, and not placed it in an alignment position evidencing any wayward intent.

Over their fruity cocktails, JB and RCG wished to raise this episode as anther reason to change the outcome of the match. RCG asked, “Would they penalize Tiger in the Masters if he hit a shot with a club lying at his feet like that?”

Ruling

Of course, we know that Tiger wouldn’t get penalized for this at the Masters, but yes, officials would probably take a close look at F.

A player may not “set down” an object (such as a club) to help with “Aiming, Taking Stance or Swinging”. (R10.2b(3)). F didn’t “set down” his club, which in plain English suggests placing it on the ground (a reasonable person would know that F would never engage in the strenuous effort required to bend over to place a club, and JB had no photographic evidence this time to suggest otherwise); nor was there any intent to position the club so as “to help” with aiming or taking a stance. F finds that no penalty was warranted.

3. Concessions

Two statements were made in two different four-ball matches at BMCC:

(1) As TDg faced a 6-foot putt for a par, net birdie, on the Par 4 9th Hole, his opponent said, “That’s good. Your partner, RJ, already made a 4.” TDg replied that he had a stroke and was putting for a net birdie and a win. He then putted and missed.

(2) F, forgetting JB had a stroke, said , “That’s good, isn’t it? JB then responded that he had a stroke. He putted and missed.

Issues: Were either, or both statements a concession? May a concession be declined?

Rulings

(1) “A concession is final and cannot be declined or withdrawn”. (R3.2b(2)). Accordingly, the concession stood, and TDg’s net birdie stood despite his honorable protest and subsequent miss. According to Grok, the missed putt would be considered a practice putt.

(2) F finds that his own attempted concession failed as it was phrased as a question …”That’s good, isn’t it?” A concession must “clearly show the player’s intent to concede the stroke” (Ibid). Yes, a poor choice of words, but F’s intent was to determine his opponent’s scoring status on the hole.

F regrettably rules against his opponents in all three instances.

As usual, all comments or corrections are welcome! Will the Masters this weekend provide this much excitement! We will see!

Respectfully submitted,

F