Sean et al,
I didn't mean to imply that my 'honourable obligation' bit was taken, word for word, from the rules. Reading that particular entry back, I could have perhaps split one paragraph into two.
However, what the rules clearly do state, again, is:
It is a group’s responsibility to keep up with the group in front. If it loses a clear hole and it is delaying the group behind, it should invite the group behind to play through, irrespective of the number of players in that group. Where a group has not lost a clear hole, but it is apparent that the group behind can play faster, it should invite the faster moving group to play through......
.......In the case of a serious breach of etiquette, the Committee may disqualify a player under Rule 33-7.
Now, it's absolutely true that there is some need to apply common sense when interpreting when and where you are actually obliged to call groups through. But let's be honest, the moment we begin to get liberal with interpretations, and this coming from an out and out liberal, we open up the possibility of people abusing a tried and trusted system. Most of us here would no doubt conclude that if we're in a fourball, are just about keeping up with the fourball in front and there is absolutely no one else on the course other than the twoball that suddenly catches us up, the decent thing to do would be to invite the twoball through. Now, I would suggest that the above quote from the rule book adequately and clearly deals with such a scenario. But that same clarity is exactly what causes many people to conveniently overlook or fudge the issue because it's not in their own short sighted, selfish interests to simply do as prescribed.