CADDIES' ROLE:The amateur game is an area wide open to abuse where the question of morality is up to the individual, writes COLIN BYRNE

GOLF HAS long been held in high esteem as a game of honour, a game of principles and ethics that enables its participants to play in vast isolated areas of land in competition without fear of anyone taking advantage of the absence of referees.

The idea is that each competitor is a guardian of the rest of the field and if you see anyone doing anything untoward it is your duty, as an upholder of the principles of the game, to challenge the offender or alert the authorities.

The problem with the rules of golf is that they are just a little complicated and there is seemingly no sense of purpose for club members to inform themselves of fundamental rules. They are more likely to know the difference between a high and low kick-point shaft than a lateral and standard water-hazard. Anyone who watched Carl Pettersson being penalised two shots on the first hole of his final round of the US PGA may well be still wondering just how such an innocuous act could be so heavily punished by two strokes.

Such fastidiousness makes the game, in the modern era of questionable ethics in many sports, stand above so many popular and hugely influential sports. Particularly in how it sets a standard for young people in their formative stages. The most difficult dilemma in golf is to call a shot or more on yourself when you alone are the only witness to the misdemeanour.

In a game of narrow margins there is almost certainly a compelling urge to keep the little secret to yourself. Of course the golfing gods will come back to redress the general equilibrium of the game. So cheat at your peril.

The rules are one area in amateur golf that are widely open to abuse.The fact that there is no real compulsion to know the rules as a GUI golfer is a bit of a mystery to me. But the grey area of interpretation of the rules is a domain that can only be governed ultimately by the individual in the amateur game.

I have been talking to some golf colleagues recently about playing with golfers who should be wearing masks when they are playing in competitions, such is their ability in relation to their official handicaps. It is common for certain members of a golf club to be known as ‘bandits’.

This is a term for golfers playing off a much higher handicap than their ability. Obviously they end up winning more as a result, effectively because they build their handicap or cheat, depending on how you look at such an act.

I never thought much of it years ago when a player going down the last hole had calculated roughly what the winning score would be and decided that he would not be on the podium. He would therefore save his handicap by knocking the ball out of bounds, ensuring that he would not have a score better than standard scratch. The last hole on my course lent itself to some major catastrophes, so if you purposely made a mess of it in full view of the clubhouse it could be mistaken for standard handicap golf.

Of course nothing would have been said, it was simply a tacit decision not to lose a valuable shot from your handicap.

Beware of the ‘cute hoor’ who diffidently tells you he is playing off 14 but can’t remember the last time he had a good score as he limbers up on the first tee.

It is the complete opposite in America where golfers brag about how low their handicap is and the reality for many is that they should have 10 shots more.

Golf, played competitively, gives players a great sense of satisfaction knowing that they got the absolute maximum out of their performance on a particular day. The philosophy of a great competitor is to ‘squeeze a round dry’ and sign your card knowing that you couldn’t have got a sliver more out of your game. It is a mantra that will ultimately breed success. So for “chancers” in a club to bleat about being bad-mouthed for trying to cheat fellow members out of playing on as level a playing field as golf’s handicap system tries to create, undermines the very ethos of a game that is designed to reward honesty and a sense of fair play.

The scenario of someone taking advantage of the trustworthy nature of a game may well have a familiar ring to us. Protecting your handicap is in the ‘sleveen’ category. It’s availed of by a sad minority who think they are getting one over on the rest of the field – but of course they are morally cheating only themselves.

In professional golf you pay an instant penalty for rule infringements and your reputation is ultimately kept intact. In amateur golf the instant penalties seem less severe but the bush telegraph will ensure your good name will be forever under question.

Moral standards are up to the individual but hopefully there will be a renewed vigour from handicap committees carefully monitoring individual attitudes to the honourable game of golf.