R&A Pace of Play Questionnaire

by Roller_Coaster Wed 22 Oct 2014, 11:17 am

First topic message reminder :

R&A Pace of Play Questionnaire

I guess many of you may get this through your clubs from the R&A anyway but thought it might be worthy of sticking in a topic. Only takes a couple of minutes to do anyway (and probably won't make the blindest bit of difference). Sorry if the inserted link is cocked up the address is:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PaceofPlayTest

by Davie Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:22 pm

As far as I'm aware, you've never owned up to what handicap you play off Mac (official or estimated) .. come on, spill the beans

by McLaren Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:29 pm

Davie

As I said in my last post, do people ever bother to read most of what is posted. Go to the recent best golfer on here thread and you will find what you are looking for.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:36 pm

McLaren wrote:Playing scratch matchplay is the only way to really enjoy golf.

Not really, no. I enjoy that but I also enjoy handicap matchplay as I get a kick from rolling over an opponent to whom I'm giving plenty. I also enjoy strokeplay as it's a challenge versus the course and elements to put in a decent score to my handicap or better.

by MustPuttBetter Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:46 pm

McLaren wrote: Side note: does anyone ever bother to read all of a post. It seems you always have to point out a part someone has missed?

I've always thought if you're forever explaining your posts or pointing out bits that everyone else has 'missed' the problem is probably with the posts......

by Davie Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:48 pm

McLaren wrote:Davie

As I said in my last post, do people ever bother to read most of what is posted. Go to the recent best golfer on here thread and you will find what you are looking for.

Yes I read most things on here. Yes I read your post on that thread. It doesn't answer my question. All you said was you'd be lucky to get to single figures. I'd be lucky to get to single figures too.

BTW that's twice now you've accused people of not reading posts properly - yet on the thread you've just mentioned you were clearly guilty of not reading properly several times Rolling Eyes

by raycastleunited Tue 28 Oct 2014, 12:53 pm

McLaren wrote:Ok, 80 was a generalization. As I went on to say "never breaking 80 would be a sign that you are lacking some fundamental skills". (Side note: does anyone ever bother to read all of a post. It seems you always have to point out a part someone has missed?)

So you could shoot high 80's with a 22 handicap and think it is a good day but surely you would recognise there is more to be had from the game in terms of shot making and how to overcome a course? Hence my comment about nett scores meaning nothing to me. I can come away from a round perfectly happy if I have pulled off one shot that really meant something. The better you are the more often that sort of satisfaction occurs. 80 was nothing more than a proxy for determining a general skill level.

Go on Mac, back track a bit more. Just admit it was a stupid comment and you were acting like a jerk, it's much easier in the long run.

by McLaren Tue 28 Oct 2014, 1:02 pm

raycastle

I do not retract anything I have posted on this thread.

by Bob_the_Job Tue 28 Oct 2014, 1:37 pm

Do you or have you played other sports Mac? Maybe you're missing the competitive gene? I can't see that hitting a great shot when it's for a treble bogey is "overcoming the course", where as if it's for par or birdie it is. So score is bound to matter. And if score matters then nett score matters unless you can regularly go around in level. In which case nett score still matters, it just happens to be the same as your gross.

by McLaren Tue 28 Oct 2014, 1:55 pm

bob

I play football as well as golf.

by super_realist Tue 28 Oct 2014, 2:04 pm

McLaren wrote:bob

I play football as well as golf.

Let me guess, you don't care about the score as long as you make a good pass or have a good shot at goal?

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:11 pm

super_realist wrote:
McLaren wrote:bob

I play football as well as golf.

Let me guess, you don't care about the score as long as you make a good pass or have a good shot at goal?

by McLaren Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:22 pm

Pretty much spot on. If I feel I played pretty well then the I am happy enough. The team outcome is secondary to my performance. That does not mean I don't try for the team and value having tried to win, but if I play well and we loose due to others poor performance then I still take some pleasure away from the match.

by Roller_Coaster Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:25 pm

McLaren wrote:Pretty much spot on. If I feel I played pretty well then the I am happy enough. The team outcome is secondary to my performance. That does not mean I don't try for the team and value having tried to win, but if I play well and we loose due to others poor performance then I still take some pleasure away from the match.

Mac - Are you Cristiano Ronaldo?

by Eyetoldyouso Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:33 pm

Roller_Coaster wrote:
McLaren wrote:Pretty much spot on. If I feel I played pretty well then the I am happy enough. The team outcome is secondary to my performance. That does not mean I don't try for the team and value having tried to win, but if I play well and we loose due to others poor performance then I still take some pleasure away from the match.

Mac - Are you Cristiano Ronaldo?

by kwinigolfer Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:47 pm

More like Eldrick Tont at the Ryder Cup. (No surprise there.)

by Bob_the_Job Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:52 pm

Adel Taarabt drumroll

by beninho Tue 28 Oct 2014, 3:56 pm

That is clearly lifted from I, Zlatan, or maybe I, Alan.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 28 Oct 2014, 4:17 pm

McLaren wrote:Pretty much spot on. If I feel I played pretty well then the I am happy enough. The team outcome is secondary to my performance. That does not mean I don't try for the team and value having tried to win, but if I play well and we loose due to others poor performance then I still take some pleasure away from the match.

I have to say Mac, you must be wonderful to have on the team. I would certainly recommend that you don't let your teammates into how you're thinking.

by McLaren Tue 28 Oct 2014, 6:24 pm

It is not like I don't care how my teammates play, if they are constantly making the wrong pass or failing to move the ball on at the right moment I will have a dig at them. Anyone shooting from outside the box also really gets to me.

by super_realist Tue 28 Oct 2014, 7:17 pm

Surely if they've got the skills then shooting from outside the box doesn't matter? Did you see the Hearts equaliser at the weekend? That was from about 35 yards and from a defender. Would you have had a go at him?

by raycastleunited Tue 28 Oct 2014, 9:45 pm

I was thinking Balotellii but Taraabt is spot on too.

It's pretty clear anyway that when you say you play football you are referring to a computer game.

by Roller_Coaster Wed 29 Oct 2014, 8:52 am

Sorry Mac, but even by your own apparent levels of posting merely to fish for responses, your efforts in the last couple of days are noteworthy and causing more than mild amusement.

Sir, I applaud you.

Or is that sexist? Not sure so I will amend and apologise for any offence.

I applaud you. clap

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 9:00 am

roller

It is rather worrying that you see bringing up sexism in the game as "fishing for responses". It is increasingly the case in this board that comments that do not fall in line with golfer group think are unwelcome. It might shock some of you how standard it is in some circles to call out sexism or other discriminatory behavior. Yet on here it is seen as something underhand!

by super_realist Wed 29 Oct 2014, 9:02 am

Mac, come come now. You always portray this holier than thou, right on, politically correct at all times front and insinuate that anyone who doesn't behave precisely the same way as you is some sort of bigot or closet racist, homophobe, sexist, you name it, as if you alone are some sort of moral barometer and standard bearer.

by Bob_the_Job Wed 29 Oct 2014, 9:09 am

Did I miss the vote when Mac was elected to determine and set the moral level of the board???

To be fair, I would have voted for him anyway - nobody does puffed up indignation and moral outrage quite like Mac.

by Roller_Coaster Wed 29 Oct 2014, 10:41 am

Ha ha. Mac - another classic. You're on a roll this week. thumbsup

To paraphrase the particular comments I was actually referring to (whilst they are not verbatim, they are representative of how they come across):

If you don't shoot 80, you're Poopie - whilst almost simultaneously professing that scores don't count.

Scratch matchplay is the only way to enjoy golf.

I don't care how the team does as long as I was OK.

If my team members don't do what I think is right I'll give them a bollocking.

And yes, the MANNER in which you bring up many items is (in my opinion) solely "fishing for response". Were it anything other, then you would be able to cite and demonstrate actions you have taken to stamp out whatever evil you have seen, beyond merely posting on here phrases akin to "Sergio's a racist" or "Bishop's a sexist" when all they are is mistaken in phraseology from what I can see. (Incidentally, my view on Bishop is he was trying to draw a parallel between the crying young girls do, frequently, and the fact that Poulter was merely whining (or crying) about something Mr Faldo said. Unfortunately it does not come across well in the written word as so many people extrapolate different meaning. Sexist - Love sacks he was. Mistaken - absolutely. Unfortunately, that's a human trait - I dare say we will all err today in some way and for those of you who don't, ask someone for a second opinion.

If you are that bothered about absolutely everything, go and actually do something about it instead of castigating us for not actually doing anything wrong beyond holding an opinion that doesn't match that portrayed by your manufactured internet self.

As for "golfer group think" there seem to be so many different opinions on here in the main that such a thing would prove impossible I feel. What might happen is that some views put forward are occasionally so far off the mark that many might, naturally, hold the contrary view.

There you go. Again, I must applaud you for this time you have caught a response.

Although if you didn't construct these flim-flampaigns (a campaign of flim flam) every so often, it would be a long, long time between majors on here, so my applause is also genuine for you for occasionally entertaining.

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:08 am

McLaren wrote:roller

It is rather worrying that you see bringing up sexism in the game as "fishing for responses". It is increasingly the case in this board that comments that do not fall in line with golfer group think are unwelcome. It might shock some of you how standard it is in some circles to call out sexism or other discriminatory behavior. Yet on here it is seen as something underhand!

Oh, for Heaven's sake man. Could it possibly have occurred to you that your position is the one that's flawed? With your "every golfer is a sexist/racist/etc" nonsense? You see everything as discriminatory when, I'm afraid, it simply isn't; must be nice in your black/white world. Personally, I'd love to frequent your circles and have a great laugh at the OTT 'calling out' of perceived sexism/racism when it's nothing of the sort.

by super_realist Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:13 am

Mac would make the insufferably insipid and bland journalistic style of Lorraine Kelly look edgy and controversial.

by BlueCoverman Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:44 am

Anyone else remember when Mac posted links to a load of dodgy porn on here?...a little bit sexist perhaps?

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:54 am

BlueCoverman wrote:Anyone else remember when Mac posted links to a load of dodgy porn on here?...a little bit sexist perhaps?

Did I really do that?

How dodgy are we talking?

by Roller_Coaster Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:56 am

I thought it was just a picture of Adam Scott?

by BlueCoverman Wed 29 Oct 2014, 11:59 am

Inappropriate rather than dodgy would have been a more fair description!

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:01 pm

Ok, but I still don't remember what it was. I am not doubting you just wondering what it was. You must have liked it quite a bit for you to still remember it.

by Bob_the_Job Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:09 pm

Flawed assertion. People also tend to remember things that shock, upset or offend them, not just things they like.

by BlueCoverman Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:22 pm

Oh no I liked it! Laugh

Suprised you don't remember Mac, you were soon castigated for it by the mods. Might have been the old site come to think of it.

by super_realist Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:30 pm

Mac has said all sorts of things on this site. He even came out once.

by Bob_the_Job Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:44 pm

As a Sun reading Tory??

by incontinentia Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:45 pm

BlueCoverman wrote:Oh no I liked it!

Suprised you don't remember Mac, you were soon castigated for it by the mods. Might have been the old site come to think of it.

Think I remember that, was it a reference to Dog

ing?

by incontinentia Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:49 pm

mclaren, how come you get so worked up over sexism/racism but cruelty to animals is ok in your book? you've joked about it several times in the past.

by Bob_the_Job Wed 29 Oct 2014, 12:53 pm

For clarity - I think Inco and BC Man are talking about two different things here... Whistle

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:00 pm

inco

I obviously think cruelty to animals is usually unacceptable, but in the UK we seem to have a disproportionate reaction to it. It is this reaction that annoys me, not that I think it is ok to be cruel to animals. I assure you that I only by free range chickens and the like.

Where I might differ from you is what we define as cruelty to animals.

by raycastleunited Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:00 pm

Bob_the_Job wrote: For clarity - I think Inco and BC Man are talking about two different things here...

by Davie Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:22 pm

McLaren wrote:
Where I might differ from you is what we define as cruelty to animals.

Just as we differ from you on what we define as racist or sexist Rolling Eyes

by incontinentia Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:40 pm

Mac- good on you with the free range chickens, keep up the good fight.

I'm not sure you can have differing definitions of animal cruelty. Surely any action by humans that causes animals pain/suffering can be defined as such. One of the things I hate about this time of year is that certain people think its fun to mix animals with fireworks for some cheap laughs. I'm sure you'll agree this is at least as abhorrent as sexist remarks?

by super_realist Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:42 pm

Doesn't eating meat cause the animal stress at the very least Inco?

Doesn't bother me, but I think it probably does.

by incontinentia Wed 29 Oct 2014, 1:58 pm

Suppose it does, but at least it's humane for the most part.

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 2:13 pm

Davie wrote:
McLaren wrote:
Where I might differ from you is what we define as cruelty to animals.

Just as we differ from you on what we define as racist or sexist :roll:

What is your point?

It is clear that my definition of animal cruelty has no impact on whether an act will actually harm an animal (It just shows what I am willing to not stop happen to the animal). So are you admitting your definitions of sexism and racism hold a similar risk?

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 29 Oct 2014, 3:44 pm

McLaren wrote:
Davie wrote:
McLaren wrote:
Where I might differ from you is what we define as cruelty to animals.

Just as we differ from you on what we define as racist or sexist

What is your point?

It is clear that my definition of animal cruelty has no impact on whether an act will actually harm an animal (It just shows what I am willing to not stop happen to the animal). So are you admitting your definitions of sexism and racism hold a similar risk?

What are you on about Mac?? Your definition re. animal cruelty might have no influence on animal cruelty overall, just as Davie's definitions of sexism/racism might have no effect on them overall. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but I have the feeling your argument is balderdash...

by McLaren Wed 29 Oct 2014, 3:51 pm

Navy

I was trying to make it clear to davie that our personal definitions of concepts like racism and sexism do not change whether a behavior is or isn't sexist/racist. You have to look at the evidence of how your actions are effecting other people.

For example it would be hard to argue after reading this http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/28/how-life-for-women-britain-getting-tougher?CMP=share_btn_tw that sexism isn't an issue in 2014 Briton.

Or this video which shows men (who presumably aren't being sexist by their own definition) being extremely sexist; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvbWn0A

by super_realist Wed 29 Oct 2014, 3:57 pm

When we have idiots like Harriet Harman and Hazel Blears as MP's i'm glad there are fewer women than there should be.

by Sponsored content