[Sean_A]

I was playing the Burnham Saturday Stableford  and was cruising along comfortably with 23 points after 10 holes.  On the 11th I drove into the fairway bunker tight to the face.  I took a mighty blow, but left the ball embedded in the stacked sod face of the bunker.  Here is where it gets interesting.

I claimed that the stacked face was not actually part of the bunker and that I was entitled to a free drop as my ball was embedded/plugged because we were playing winter rules.  The two chaps I was playing with said the wall of the bunker is indeed the bunker and if I wanted to call the ball unplayable (which it certainly was) then I would have to take a penalty and drop in the bunker.  The plot thickens.

I get out the R&A Rules of golf and look up the definition of bunker.  

"A bunker is a hazard consisting of prepared area of ground, often a hollow, from which turf or soil has been removed and replaced with sand or the like.  

Grass-covered ground bordering or within a bunker including a stacked turf face (whether grass-covered or earthen), is not part of the bunker.  A wall or lip of the bunker not covered with grass is aprt of the bunker.  

etc etc."

I called the face of the bunker stacked turf and the other two called the face a wall.  I could see a case for both and then thought since I am not disproved then I should be allowed a free drop.  Still no go - outvoted 2-1.  I am now laying 3 in the bunker and score nil point on a shot hole - that is the end of my run and I finish with a lowly 33 points.  Not bad considering the conditions of the day, but not even close to a winning total.  

Setting aside that a ball should never plug in the face of a stacked sod bunker and I do think it was because they were just re-built.  Perhaps the club should have declared this type situation a free drop until the bunkers are settled in so angry golfers don't take a few swipes at a a new face of the bunker! In any case, I wasn't about to tear up the face of the bunker which was just repaired. Believe me, I was in the state of mind that wanted to have a few hacks at it!  

Who is right?  

Finally, why can't one take a penalty drop from a bunker?  A bunker is classed as a hazard so whats the story?  Why no dropping?

Finally, finally, the most disappointing thing of all is that I let this incident get to me and wreck what still should have been a competitve score regardless of a blob.  

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Sean

Stacked tuf is NOT part of a bunker, but it is also not a "closely mown area" (part of your "etc, etc.").  So, you had to take an unplayable, but you could have dropped outside of the bunker (say on the left hand side, if within two club lengths).

I first encountered this situation in the mid-80's in a torunament at Dornoch, and the Committee called the R&A for resolution, only to be told that the Rules and Decisions (at that time) did not contemplate that specific situation, probably becuase neatly revetted bunkers (which allow balls to nestle in the cracks) were just then coming (back?) into vogue.

So....I'm probably partly responsible for your hissy fit in the Stableford.....Sorry!

[Paul_Turner]

Sean

That's weird because about 5 years ago, me and another GCAer (Darren Kilfara) had an almost identical situation at Burnham's 17th.  He was plugged in the revetted face.  I said no free drop.  But I think we later resolved (on this DG through rules guru John Morrisett) that he was entitled to a free drop.

Is there a difference in being plugged in a revetted face than say plugged in the grass island in that bunker on Muirfield's 18th?

[TEPaul]

Sean:

That sounds like your ball was not in the bunker to me. In that case you could avail yourself of the unplayable ball options a,b and c because your ball was lying "through the green" which means you could have dropped within two club length no nearer the hole or behind the spot keeping it between the drop and the hole as far back as you want.

Actually you can drop out of a bunker with an unplayable lie in a bunker under option A which is stroke and distance. You can always use stroke and distance.

As for your two friends or playing partners you should consider using P.J Boatright's Rule  35.

[Art Roselle]

I am not sure of the definition of stacked turf, but I have often wondered about your question regarding unplayable lies in bunkers.  It has always seemed odd to me that you can take certain types of relief from other hazards or other unplayable lies, but that in a bunker you have to stay in the bunker (or take stroke and distance as TEP points out).

I also think the drop rule is a bit odd in a bunker.  Buried lies are the exception rather than the rule in most bunkers, but to take a "drop" in a bunker virtually guarantees a buried lie.  I am not sure what the right answer is, but if a player finds his ball up against the face of a bunker and decides to take a penalty, it would seem that he should have choices other than a) full stroke and distance or b) a plugged lie two club lengths back from the face.

This goes back to the many discussions about match vs. medal play.  Tough medicine does not really seem unfair in match play, but in medal you have to give the player a way to finish the hole.  I sort of like the old fashioned idea of no "unplayable" relief anywhere, but I suppose that is impractical in today's medal mindset.  However, as long as we are going to have alternatives from unplayable lies, it seems like some of the bunker rules are inconsistent.

[Jim Thompson]

Sean,

The "margin of a bunker" is defined to extend upward not downward, therefore the stacked turf is just golf course.

JT

[Rich Goodale]

Sean

That's weird because about 5 years ago, me and another GCAer (Darren Kilfara) had an almost identical situation at Burnham's 17th.  He was plugged in the revetted face.  I said no free drop.  But I think we later resolved (on this DG through rules guru John Morrisett) that he was entitled to a free drop.

Is there a difference in being plugged in a revetted face than say plugged in the grass island in that bunker on Muirfield's 18th?

Paul

Unless the bunker face was mowed to fairway height (i.e. a closely mown area) John Morrissett was wrong on his advice.  See Decision 25-2/5 below:

Q. Are grass banks or faces of bunkers considered to be “closely mown areas” under Rule 25-2 (Embedded Ball) and may relief be taken from them under that Rule?

A. No, not unless they are cut to fairway height or less.

Cheers

Rich

[TEPaul]

Rich:

I guess John Morrissett could've been right if the club was using the local emedded ball Rule App 1 3a which allows embedded ball relief "through the green".

Sean:

In a sense you are asking some theoretical questions and making some suggestions about what you think the Rules should do. But to play by the Rules you pretty much need to determine some facts first and then proceed under what the Rules do allow.

First of all, there really is no such thing in the Rules of Golf as "winter rules". The closest thing to that is that App. 1 3a Local Rule that allows various relief to do with "temporary conditions" such as mud, wet conditions, protection of the course etc. But to use that Local Rule it must first be adopted by the club or in what is called "the Conditions of Competition". Players should be aware of what the conditions of competition are and what they are allowed to do or not in that vein.

The Rules of Golf also provides for a player to protect his own rights in various ways. There is no such thing in the Rules of Golf that provide for a player to be outvoted by his opponents or fellow competitors. If you're playing stroke play and you have doubt as to procedure you're allowed to invoke Rule 3-3 after stating your intentions to your marker or fellow competitors as well as mentioning which ball you want to count if the Rules permit.

In match play a player can proceed as he believes the Rules permit. If his opponent doesn't agree a claim must be made, the facts established etc before teeing off on the next hole. A decision can be reached by the committee or its representative later.

It sounds to me like your ball was lying "through the green" and whether that was true or not would have to be established at some point within the resolution limitations of the Rules of Golf. It also sounds to me if you all thought you were playing "winter rules" that the Local embedded ball Rule (app 1 3a) was in effect and that would allow you to use the embedded ball relief proceedure. But of course you'd need to find out if that was the case.

Also, Sean, it seems like you are somewhat confusing what's allowable under the Unplaybable Ball Rule (25) and what is allowable under the Local Embedded Ball Rule (App 1, 3a) provided the latter has been adopted for your competition or play.

I know it all probably sounds pretty confusing to you but it really isn't as long as a series of facts are established first.

It seems to me that the thing that confuses most golfers who have rules questions of this type is they are rarely aware of whether various Local Rules and Conditions of Compeition are in effect or not and even after that they really don't even understand what those Local Rules do and allow them to do or not.

The "Local Rules" and various "Conditions of Competition" are found in the back of the Rules Book under the Appendices. They are really not all that numerous and players who care to play under the Rules of Golf should familiarize themselves with what they are, what they mean and what they allow you to do or not.

[Sean_A]

Rich:

I guess John Morrissett could've been right if the club was using the local emedded ball Rule App 1 3a which allows embedded ball relief "through the green".

Sean:

In a sense you are asking some theoretical questions and making some suggestions about what you think the Rules should do. But to play by the Rules you pretty much need to determine some facts first and then proceed under what the Rules do allow.

First of all, there really is no such thing in the Rules of Golf as "winter rules". The closest thing to that is that App. 1 3a Local Rule that allows various relief to do with "temporary conditions" such as mud, wet conditions, protection of the course etc. But to use that Local Rule it must first be adopted by the club or in what is called "the Conditions of Competition". Players should be aware of what the conditions of competition are and what they are allowed to do or not in that vein.

The Rules of Golf also provides for a player to protect his own rights in various ways. There is no such thing in the Rules of Golf that provide for a player to be outvoted by his opponents or fellow competitors. If you're playing stroke play and you have doubt as to procedure you're allowed to invoke Rule 3-3 after stating your intentions to your marker or fellow competitors as well as mentioning which ball you want to count if the Rules permit.

In match play a player can proceed as he believes the Rules permit. If his opponent doesn't agree a claim must be made, the facts established etc before teeing off on the next hole. A decision can be reached by the committee or its representative later.

It sounds to me like your ball was lying "through the green" and whether that was true or not would have to be established at some point within the resolution limitations of the Rules of Golf. It also sounds to me if you all thought you were playing "winter rules" that the Local embedded ball Rule (app 1 3a) was in effect and that would allow you to use the embedded ball relief proceedure. But of course you'd need to find out if that was the case.

Also, Sean, it seems like you are somewhat confusing what's allowable under the Unplaybable Ball Rule (25) and what is allowable under the Local Embedded Ball Rule (App 1, 3a) provided the latter has been adopted for your competition or play.

I know it all probably sounds pretty confusing to you but it really isn't as long as a series of facts are established first.

It seems to me that the thing that confuses most golfers who have rules questions of this type is they are rarely aware of whether various Local Rules and Conditions of Compeition are in effect or not and even after that they really don't even understand what those Local Rules do and allow them to do or not.

The "Local Rules" and various "Conditions of Competition" are found in the back of the Rules Book under the Appendices. They are really not all that numerous and players who care to play under the Rules of Golf should familiarize themselves with what they are, what they mean and what they allow you to do or not.

TP

The competition (and all play until further notice) was under winter rules which stipulate that a player can pick and clean the ball if he is in the fairway.  My contention would be that if I am not in the bunker and the bunker is surrounded by fairway (no rough surrounding the bunker) then I must be in the fairway.  Therefore, I believe I should have been granted a free drop.  However, it is difficult to carry on if you are surrounded by folks who disagree.  I caved in because it was the easiest course of action.  

In hindsight, perhaps I should have played two balls and sought a later ruling.  However, it is only a game.  As I stated earlier, the most vexing aspect of the day was that I allowed this mishap to unnecessarily erode my score.  I will be the first to admit that I am too old for that sort of nonsense.

Ciao

[TEPaul]

"TP
The competition (and all play until further notice) was under winter rules which stipulate that a player can pick and clean the ball if he is in the fairway.  My contention would be that if I am not in the bunker and the bunker is surrounded by fairway (no rough surrounding the bunker) then I must be in the fairway."


Sean:

That is why most Rules purists (and the Rules of Golf) look at "winter rules" as somewhat bogus because there is no definition in the Rules for such a thing. The reason is The Rules of Golf make no distinction between fairway and rough and such. In the Rules it is all "through the green" and it's treated in a similar context (see the definition of "through the green" in the Rules of Golf).

[TEPaul]

"In hindsight, perhaps I should have played two balls and sought a later ruling."

Sean:

In my opinion, of course you should have. I feel there's a certain satisfaction if and when you can proof to fellow competitors or opponents that they are wrong and you are right when it comes to the Rules of Golf!  

[Art Roselle]

Sean:

That is why most Rules purists (and the Rules of Golf) look at "winter rules" as somewhat bogus because there is no definition in the Rules for such a thing. The reason is The Rules of Golf make no distinction between fairway and rough and such. In the Rules it is all "through the green" and it's treated in a similar context (see the definition of "through the green" in the Rules of Golf).

TP,
Don't the rules make this distinction between fairway and rough in certain cases, specifically when they refer to "closely mown areas"?  This comes up in the sort of case that Sean is asking about and the definition of fairway vs. rough would seem to be critical, whether or not there were any local "winter rules" in effect.

"25-2. Embedded Ball

A ball embedded in its own pitch-mark in the ground in any closely mown area through the green may be lifted, cleaned and dropped, without penalty, as near as possible to the spot where it lay but not nearer the hole. The ball when dropped must first strike a part of the course through the green. "Closely mown area" means any area of the course, including paths through the rough, cut to fairway height or less."

[Steven_Biehl]

Who is right?  All three of you were wrong!

I am going to rant a little.  There is always so much talk on this board about how golf course architecture is becoming dumbed down, formula based and void of interesting features.  Well, this is why!  You card and pencil players are more concerned about what the score is, rather than enjoying any interesting features, and shots that a course may present.  So, your ball came to rest in sod wall face.  Sorry about your luck, it's happend to me to.  Put the rule book away, put the score card away!  Enjoy the course, enjoy the company,  and enjoy the round!

[TEPaul]

"TP,
Don't the rules make this distinction between fairway and rough in certain cases, specifically when they refer to "closely mown areas"?  This comes up in the sort of case that Sean is asking about and the definition of fairway vs. rough would seem to be critical, whether or not there were any local "winter rules" in effect."

Art:

That's a very good point, I've never really thought of it that way, and of course the Embedded Ball Rule mentions what "closely mown" means for relief purposes (fairway height or less) and so fairway and rough is certainly mentioned but nevertheless the Rules of Golf does not make a separate distinction in their "Definitions" between areas that are "fairway" and areas that are "rough" which is all "through the green" (all the area of the course other than greens, tees and hazards) under the Rules. So, one could take relief for an embedded ball if it was way out in the rough somewhere if that area was mown at fairway height or less.

My point about "winter rules" is mostly that is used if the ball is in the fairway only and not in the rough and the Rules of Golf do not make that definitional distinction and so the Rules of Golf don't really contemplate "winter rules" per se. Under the Rules fairway and rough areas are all "through the green". There are no separate "Definitions" in the Rules of Golf for "fairway" and for "rough" making a distinction between them.

[TEPaul]

Art:

Frankly, some Rules over the years have gotten into the regular numbered Rules through the transitional process of "Local Rules" which are Rules that can be adopted at the option of clubs and committees.

The "Embedded Ball" Local Rule (App 1, 3a) is used so often these days it wouldn't surprise me if it did not become a regular Rule one of these years whereby a player could take relief from an embedded ball "through the green" at any time, and at that point this limitation to "closely mown area" in Rule 25-2 would become history.

[Art Roselle]

TP,
I bet you are right about the embedded ball rule.  In fact, I don't think I have ever seen a ball embedded "through the green" in competition that did not somehow get free relief.  I am sure someone will dive in an tell me the 50 cases they have seen where just that has happened, but I have not seen it. So, I am not sure there is much point in the distinction anymore.

As for Sean's question, I actually would have thought that the stacked turf wall of a bunker is part of the bunker and the only relief would be to drop it in the bunker with a penalty.  I guess I am wrong, but that is what I would have assumed if it had happened to me.

[TEPaul]

Art:

It really doesn't matter how much or how little golfers tell you they've seen the embedded ball rule used anywhere "through the green". The Rules of Golf do not work by some consensus opinion of golfers, they work the way they're written at the time. The point is the more liberal "through the green" relief procedure cannot be used if the local rule that provides for it is not in effect. If it's not in effect only relief via the "closely mown area" contained in Rule 25-2 can be used.

[Art Roselle]

Well I guess my point is that the local rule seems to always be in effect, at least if there is even a remote chance that a ball might plug.  In practice, local rules like this do work by consensus of opinion (at least of the rules committee, who are invariably influenced by the comments of the golfers).  If a player's ball plugs in the rough in a practice round, you can bet the local rule will be in effect the next day when the tournament begins.

Specifically, all I meant to say was that I have never seen a ball plug anywhere through the green, where it was not CORRECTLY entitled to relief, either because it was in the fairway or because the local rule was in effect.  I am sure others have, but I have not.

[TEPaul]

Art:

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. I've been officiating for years for the Golf Association of Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania Golf Association and it seems to me too that the "local" embedded ball Rule has always been in effect for quite a few years.

I guess this is what leads me to believe that it wouldn't be surprising to see it enter into the regular Rules of Golf and then that will be the only relief procedure and obviously a more liberal one for an embedded ball. In other words, the "local" Rule (App. 1, 3a) will take the place of Rule 25-2.

I've never exactly thought of this before, Art, but it would not surprise me if the "embedded" ball Rule did not begin to enter into golf as a result of the complete over-irrigation of American golf courses perhaps following WW2!

[Mark Chaplin]

Sean,

At RCP newly revetted bunkers tend to have the face and new turf areas as GUR whilst the actual sand itself is in play. As you rightly say it reduces the chances for damage whilst the face settles.

Back in the summer I did get plugged in the face on #9 but was fortune that 2 club lengths took my onto the fairway. Fortunately well made revetted bunkers settle pretty quickly.

As for the plugged rule, surely thats one for mushy parkland courses and not the links!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()