‘A card can be signed at any time’

So what does Rule 6-6a mean wherein it states that: ‘On completion of the round the marker must sign the score card…’?

The key thing is the marker’s signature is required on the card.
There are Decisions dealing with problems getting the marker’s signature on the card.
The MUST is that the signature is required.
There is no sanction anywhere in the Rules for an early signature applying to either the marker or player.
The player cannot prevent a “premature” signature.
The Rule could be rewritten to state that the player must verify the marker’s signature is on the card before it is handed in.

The player cannot prevent a “premature” signature

How would they know anyway, the marker has possession of the card when the round commences.

‘A card can be signed at any time’

So what does Rule 6-6a mean wherein it states that: ‘On completion of the round the marker must sign the score card…’?

It just means that the card must be signed at the completion of the round as opposed to not being signed at all…and what the marker does or doesn’t do is not as important as the players actions.
A card can in exceptional circumstances be accepted without the markers signature: D.6-6b/6
but not without the player’s and he can, as already said, sign the card at any time, confirmed by the R&A.

Very poorly worded, confusion reigns.

I agree with RulesDoc under the common sense rationale but if the words are taken literally in the sequence they appear the round must be completed before said signature is applied by marker.

The act of signing after the round has been completed is the act of the marker attesting to all scores being correct, ditto player.

You play the round, you finish the round, you sign the card to say the score is correct. I wouldn’t have thought it was that hard?

D4S, it’s not hard at all. But the question was whether there is any penalty for prematurely signing the card. The answer, it seems, is ‘NO’.

Shanks, I agree – poorly worded. See previous discussions.

Very poorly worded, confusion reigns.

I agree with RulesDoc under the common sense rationale but if the words are taken literally in the sequence they appear the round must be completed before said signature is applied by marker.

The act of signing after the round has been completed is the act of the marker attesting to all scores being correct, ditto player.

Imagine a case where the player is waiting to make a 2 inch putt on the 18’th green, for some reason there’s a delay and he writes and sign his scorecard in the meantime.

Imagine the uproar if this player was disqualified!!

There’s uproar most times players gets disqualified for anything.

The signature says “My scores are correct”, not “My scores will be correct”. Most errors are honest and they need to be caught. One can not catch what is yet to be thrown.

The signature is a crucial part of the game—it wants to be taken seriously.

There is good reason scorecards have their signature areas at the bottom.

The 2” putt guy, DQ. It would be extremely rare for him to have a known dedicated block of time where he can, with his marker, concentrate fully on checking scores before the round is completed. That rare time is not worth compromising the whole point of the signature for.

The DQ would also discourage paperwork on the green that is already tainting the game.

It just means that the card must be signed at the completion of the round as opposed to not being signed at all…and what the marker does or doesn’t do is not as important as the players actions.
A card can in exceptional circumstances be accepted without the markers signature: D.6-6b/6
but not without the player’s and he can, as already said, sign the card at any time, confirmed by the R&A.

Vacuous argument Doc.

1. ‘The card can be signed (by the marker) at any time’ (RulesDoc)

2. ‘The card must be signed (by the marker) at the completion of the round’ (Rule 6-6a)

3. ‘The player cannot prevent a “premature” signature. How would they know anyway, the marker has possession of the card when the round commences’. (Skans4ever) Correct.

4. ‘There is no sanction anywhere in the Rules for an early signature applying to either the marker or player’. (languid) Correct.

5. ‘It just means that the card must be signed at the completion of the round as opposed to not being signed at all…’ (RulesDoc) I doubt it. This is dealt with in R6-6b.

6. ‘A card can in exceptional circumstances be accepted without the markers signature: D.6-6b/6’. (RulesDoc) Irrelevant. This question is about R6-6a.

Conclusions:
1. Rule 6-6a is a useless Rule: it contains an unenforceable mandatory requirement.

2. Rules 6-6a and 6-6b need to be re-written.

OldBogey & Shanks4ever

You people seem to have an interest in rules reform.

Over the coming weeks, have look at the ‘rogamania’ website (address below) – I will be posting proposals for a revised set of rules for club competition.

You may like to criticise, comment on, or suggest improvements to these proposals.

....sometimes I’ve signed a players card when he’s given it to me saying ” I have to go home now , can you hand my card in?”....when I notice he hasn’t signed it I just make something vaguely close to his name so that he isn’t DQ’d….
I doubt any captain would scrutinise every signature to ensure it’s legit….most cards are a mess anyway….as long as there’s some sort of mark there it gets accepted

OldBogey & Shanks4ever

You people seem to have an interest in rules reform.

Over the coming weeks, have look at the ‘rogamania’ website (address below) – I will be posting proposals for a revised set of rules for club competition.

You may like to criticise, comment on, or suggest improvements to these proposals.

http://www.rogamania.blogsp…

Rogaman, I’ve taken a note of your blog (added to favourites) and will try and remember to look at it occasionally.

Actaully, it’s American software so that should be “favorites”, even though it’s spelt incorrectly.

I’ve passed comments in other threads in favour of rationalising and simplifying the rules.

I rarely agree with Rogamania but in this case I do.

The rule says
‘After completion of the round ….. He must ….. sign the score card himself….’

It does not say ‘After completion of the round and before returning the score card, it must have been signed by the player himself’

There is a subtle difference in the tense of the verb.

Well, the R&A does not have a problem with a card signed at any point during the round.

RD

Nor do I ;-)

I’m really just making a point about the grammar (as I’m prone to do).
Albeit that Humpty Dumpty is my hero.
(Who can work that one out?)

Oh, you always confuse me when you go into that lingothing ;-)

I rather think that the point on this rule to take note of is that although the rule states that the card Must be signed after completion of the round. there is no way that those checking the cards can have any idea as to when the card was signed.
I guess that they could go around checking with everybody’s marker as to when the card was signed But I cannot see that happening.:-)
As I stated previously . What possible gain could you get by signing the card early other than making sure that you do not forget to sign it?
AAA; Humpty Dumpty? You have lost me.

Well, the R&A does not have a problem with a card signed at any point during the round.

Hit it where they mow

That is hardly the point!

We do not all have access to the magic looking glass through which the R&A reads its rules.

Nor do we live by Humpty-Dumpty’s tenet: ‘When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’

The point is, if the R&A ‘does not have a problem with a card signed at any point during the round’, why don’t they bloody-well say so. Why maintain the fiction that is must be signed ‘at the completion of the round’.

You may know that this provision has been in place since at least 1956 when the rule (38.1) stated that ‘On completion of the round the marker shall sign the card …’.

Incidentally Doc, have you ever thought of auditioning for the part of Sir Joseph Porter – I think you would be a natural!

Thanks OB

I hope I can keep you interested.

A lady auditioning for the part of a man… I wondered how long it would be before you started becoming personal.

I have no idea who are men and who are women on this site – and I have no interest in knowing, as it has no relevance to how I approach a poster’s comments or my own.

I don’t know the person you are refering to, don’t have a clue why you mention him to me and fail to see the relevance to this thread.

I would have hoped someone seriously attempting to simplify the rules would have been around the various rules forums long enough gaining public opinion, where they would have encountered RulesDoc thousands of times.