[John_Cullum]

To get somewhat TomPaulian on you guys, this scenario is a good example of how things are not always crystal clear in the world of golf rules, and sometimes they get decided by a majority vote of the rules committee.

Since Rich's scenario has been sufficiently flogged, let me throw out this scenario:

In the first round of a two round stroke play championship, RFG hits his tee shot on the 7th hole into the dunes. After a brief search he finds his ball under a small immovable fence. He lifts the ball and takes his drop under the obstruction rule and plays his next stroke out, a short punch out into the fairway. When he gets to the ball he realizes it is not his ball, so he abandons it and returns to search for his original ball, which he promptly finds (all in less than 5 minutes from when he first started searching) about 10 feet from where he found the other ball, and he plays it and finishes the hole in 5 strokes, plus whatever penalties he incurred, and completes his round.

What is RFG's score for the hole?

John V is not allowed to answer

[Jason Topp]

Another simpler question.  In the 17th hole of a qualifier, I hit a ball into a big pile of wood gathered from some tree trimming.  

I think the pile would be considered an obstruction.  We could not find the ball in the pile, and I took a free drop from the obstruction rule.

I am not 100 percent sure I did the right thing because the definition of obstruction is something artificial.  The pile was artificial but the wood was not.  

Did I screw up?  I did not come close to qualifying so noone was hurt from that perspective.  I also had a playing partner who was right on the anticipated cut line so I had did not want to make him wait for me to walk back and play 2 balls(he birdied the last hole to make it).

[John_Cullum]

It was not an obstruction but it may have been material piled for removal, thus GUR, so the outcome would be basically the same.

Usually if stuff is in a pile off in the rough, it is not going to be removed, it has reached its final resting place

[TEPaul]

"To get somewhat TomPaulian on you guys, this scenario is a good example of how things are not always crystal clear in the world of golf rules, and sometimes they get decided by a majority vote of the rules committee."

JohnC:

This is true and the Rules of Golf actually address any and all of these types of situations in some pretty interesting ways---but ways that very much do have a final purpose and/or principle.

For instance, it is certainly possible within the Rules of Golf for a local committee (tournament or club) to make a ruling on a situation like Rich outlines.

Following the closing of the competition, the participants have an opportunity to petition the local committee to place the situation and the local committee's interpretation AND RULING before the USGA or R&A Rules of Golf Committee for a final interpretation.

The R&A or USGA Rules of Golf Committee may very well hand down an interpretation that explains that the local committee's interpretation and ruling was wrong.

However, if the competition is closed the interpretation of the situation by the R&A or USGA's Rules Committee is of no consequence regarding the outcome of the competition. Only the local committee's interpretation and ruling is even if it turns out to be wrong!

Some people just can't get their minds around that kind of thing but that's just the way the Rules of Golf work and they always have.  

The reason it works that way is pretty interesting too and pretty basic.  

However, nothing in the Rules is ever that black and white as there are certain situations whose resolution can survive the close of competition.

This of course gets into various situations and interpretations of the prickly world of "Wrong Information".

[JohnV]

The most important thing from my point of view as an official in this example is you have to listen very carefully to what you are told by the players.  I hope I do a better job of that on the course than I do here.

The most important thing from the players point of view in stroke play is once you've done something wrong or confusing, to always hole out with every ball from every possible location to minimize the penalties.  Don't pick up one assuming you know it won't count and don't pick on up and move it somewhere else just because you are sure you should.

For example, if the guy who hit the wrong ball didn't go back and correct it, he would be DQ'ed.  For a guy who putted (or played) from a wrong place, he should hole out the ball from there and go and hole out again from the right place to make sure he is covered.  If there was no serious breach, he will just get two strokes by holing out the ball from the wrong place vs 4 if he picks it up and returns to the correct spot.  If there was a serious breach, he will avoid getting DQ'ed by going back and holing out from the right place.

You will never get penalized extra strokes for trying to fix the problem, assuming you holed out each scenario.

In match play, if you both are unaware or unsure of what to do, talk to your opponent and if you can come to an agreement on what to do you won't be penalized even if you are wrong.  This is not an agreement to waive a rule, just ignorance of the rules.  If he doesn't like what you are doing, he can make a claim and have the Committee rule on it.  

If you both do know the right thing to do, but agree to do something else, then you've agreed to waive the rules and will DQ'ed (example: you can't find your ball after your tee shot and you both know you should go back to the tee, but you agree to continue play from where you think it is lost you've agreed to waive the rule.)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()