Match Play "team" Ruling??

[Sphere Hunter]

I recently played in an event where two teams were pitted against each other in an Intesectional-like format.
Each team has 10 players. Each foursome goes out on the course with 2 players from each team. Player A and B are teams memebrs. Player C and D are team members. Each player plays his own game and has an individual match against the two opposing team members in his foursome. So, although C and D are team members in an overall sense, they are playing matches independant of what the other does.

Now the question:

Can C and D collaborate, read each others putts and share club selection info? While they are part of an overall team, this is only in that they combine their points after the matches are over. They are in-fact playing individual matches so I wonder if they can act as a team on the course or if this might break a rule of golf.

To me, it seems to be the same as Mike Wier asking his team mate in the twosome ahead to hang back and read a putt for him during his singles match against Tiger on Sunday.

[AAA]

They are not partners in the matches so they may not give or seek advice, other than indicating the line of play when not on the putting green

[jvincent]

In the Rules there is nothing that I can see which precludes this. They define "partner" and "side' and also have definitions for specific types of matches but don't include the format you mention.

What you describe can probably be argued to be two separate three-ball matches being played in the same group.

[AAA]

By the way your use of the word 'foursome' is confusing as it is a defined format of play where two players alternate strokes with one ball. They would be better referred to as a 'group'. The format you have two three ball match play games being played at the same time. Mentioned in Rule 30-2.
Apart from the advice issue, which cannot be given or taken, I can see other problems. eg if A concedes a putt to C how does B stand who may want C to putt out ?

[Kilroy]

C would putt. If he missed it would count only for B's match, since A had conceeded the putt.

[Sphere Hunter]

Putts were given by both C and D before A could pick it up. The matches weren't intense so this was not a problem. I heard of some other matches where this did become awkward but that's the nature of this type of match play.

As we played, A (me) and B both wondered about whether their collaborating on club choices and putting lines was in violation of the rules. We decided it was probably within the rules becuase they were on a team. After thinking about it after the round, I wondered if that was correct or not. Seems like it's still not 100% clear.

By the way your use of the word 'foursome' is confusing as it is a defined format of play where two players alternate strokes with one ball. They would be better referred to as a 'group'. The format you have two three ball match play games being played at the same time. Mentioned in Rule 30-2.
Apart from the advice issue, which cannot be given or taken, I can see other problems. eg if A concedes a putt to C how does B stand who may want C to putt out ?

[AAA]

Seems like it's still not 100% clear.

It is quite clear. The players were not partners by definition. They may have been in the same team but they are not playing together in the same match against another side. Each match was independent of every other match. None of the rules about penalties (Rule 30-3) received by one player apply to the other or the 'pair'

[AAA]

C would putt. If he missed it would count only for B's match, since A had conceeded the putt.

Yes, I was concerned about the situation where A conceded and C tapped his ball away without thinking, forgetting he had to wait for B to say something (or nothing).

[Mattchew]

we played this format durring jr. intersectionals a few years ago and were told that we were not to help our playing partners/team-mates in anyway. But this might have just been a local rule!?

[BC MIST]

Putts were given by both C and D before A could pick it up. The matches weren't intense so this was not a problem. I heard of some other matches where this did become awkward but that's the nature of this type of match play.

As we played, A (me) and B both wondered about whether their collaborating on club choices and putting lines was in violation of the rules. We decided it was probably within the rules because they were on a team. After thinking about it after the round, I wondered if that was correct or not. Seems like it's still not 100% clear.

The collaboration aspect is part of THEIR rules, but contrary to The Rules of Golf. This should have been clarified before we started the matches. It happened in my matches as well, both this year AND last year, too. I did not ask my fellow team member for help as I can get confused with my own reading of greens and don't need another contrary, confusing opinion.

My moving up from the last grouping to the second last was also questioned, but I believe that this may be done in regular Intersectional play. Based on the medal scores this move had no affect on the final outcome. Regardless, GB and I talked afterward with RULZ and we clarified a couple of things, but not the advice part. That will be done before we play next year.

The concession of putts should not be an issue as the matches are played independent of each other. My playing partner felt that he should have been given some putts early in the match, but wasn't, and so he decided NOT to give any either. I conceded putts that he did not. This is fair play.

We obviously did not have our best team playing and we lost, however, the matches are fun, and the beautiful weather made them even better.

[AAA]

The collaboration aspect is part of THEIR rules, but contrary to The Rules of Golf

That settles that then