This past Thursday brought the opening day of, not just one, but two, of my favorite yearly golf adventures. Both provided more entertainment than I could possibly have anticipated.
The day dawned damp and foggy and in the low thirties but with the promise of a gorgeous day ahead. The rumblings I heard came, thankfully, not from the skies but from my husband’s side of the room. Each spring, for five consecutive Thursdays, I head out to play Spring Teams and leave my husband home to tend to daily business. One would think, after cycling through this format for nine years that he would become acclimated to my temporary absence each week. Not so. Apparently something about my golfing while he is working upsets the finely tuned balance of his life. Or it may be that leaving him as the sole caretaker for the day of our over active and demanding Border Collie is just more than he manage. To say he isn’t big on multi-tasking is a vast understatement. But I digress…
The century old match play tournament of State Spring Teams is a wonderful opportunity and too much fun to pass up. Can you name any other single amateur golf tournament where the competitors play exclusively in twosomes on a course devoted entirely to their own play? Perhaps in this day of overcrowded and overplayed courses the time has come to rethink the format. You can make argument for both sides; to lessen the impact on the host course there are those who wish to see the ladies play in foursomes, not twosomes; but there are others who cannot bare to consider messing with a long established tradition. Thursday’s match adds a new dimension to the discussion.
The majority of Spring Team matches are played civility and without controversy. Carts are generally required and riding side by side with your opponent, just the two of you, together for eighteen holes, makes for a good deal of idle chit chat about spouses and children, jobs, homes and golf clubs. The match is important and of course everyone plays to win but the spirit in general is fun, and the conversation and competition are almost always both light hearted relaxed. But as a twosome in match play things can get a little stressful when an unexpected situation arises and you’ve no one to turn to directly for an answer. If Thursday’s match had been played out in foursomes, I can nearly guarantee the outcome would have been different.
Many private golf courses do not mark their cart paths and tee boxes as plainly as they would if they expected the general public to have to navigate through the green. With at least one member in every group the course does not need clear and precise directions posted for everyone to proceed as planned. But send out a cart of two players unfamiliar with the course layout and this lack of direction can cause issue. In the match in question two competitors, a few holes into play after a shotgun start, momentarily panicked and decided they were on the wrong hole. Off they went in the other direction, unknowingly now in the wrong direction, when they had actually been playing the course in proper sequence. Surely in this situation four heads would have been better than two and the decision to change holes would never have been made.
Of course one can still argue that it is the player’s responsibility to know and follow the rules. But consider that even, or especially, pro golfers have rules officials conveniently at hand and still things can get dicey. Add in the following facts: these particular Spring Team golfers, upon the completion of eighteen holes of play, immediately announced to the club pro that they may have committed an infraction; they did not provide any false information; the club pro did not have a clear and defined answer for them; the WGAM was consulted and appointed a committee of the six participating captains to vote on a decision; and a decision was made by the committee to let the match stand. End of story.
Some how, this is not the end of the story. The following day the two players were disqualified and their match points subtracted from the competition’s totals. How is this fair when neither the committee, nor the head golf professional, or even the WGAM when first consulted, could offer a correct declaration of the rules? Had the second decision been announced on the day of competition, before scores were posted and players left the course, the WGAM later said they could have replayed the holes in the proper sequence and had a valid match. That is obviously not a solution the day after play, which essentially robs the competitors of the chance to rectify their mistake. And remember, they came forward, asked for and surely expected a proper ruling.
Review the above scenario; then review Rule 34-1 and 34-3 of the Decisions of the Rules of Golf. So what do you think? Vote, based on the circumstances:
[survey_fly]
Thankfully, my day went from head spinning controversy to just about the most fun anyone can have on a golf course with their clothes on. The season premier of Thursday Twilight League was a blast.
