3 minutes to find ball

[chrisd]

I’m sure Colin will answer the point but I'm wondering how can you ignore a rule if it’s not breached. Surely it must be tested in order for it to be ignored. Which means the example scenario you mention (playing a wrong ball) would have to occur in every comp by every group

Surely I cant say to myself on the 1st tee I’m going to ignore the rule about dropping a ball from knee height and then not have to make any drop that round, then get DQ’d!

My understanding is that if players in a competition agree before (or during I guess) a round of golf that they will ignore a rule/s then the very fact that they have struck the agreement is against the rules and for doing so alone is a DQ.

 

[Orikoru]

I think what Homer is trying to get at is if we know the majority of players don't and won't use a timer then somewhere in the field of play there is going be someone that perhaps goes over a touch, not all will most won't but some may. In that knowledge I think what he's getting at is then in most comps then in the eyes of the watch police it means the whole field has been cheated whether intentional or inadvertently, perhaps even when using a timing device that has no seconds on it. So therefore all this back and forth would lead back to same question how do you ensure the whole field does it accurately.

Queue the cant baby sit everyone, you've been told how to but refuse to accept it comments. Reading between the lines that how I view what he posted.

The idea of everybody having little stopwatches is laughable, so really we're back to policing it exactly like we do every other rule in the game - treating your fellow players like responsible adults and trusting them.

 

[Slab]

I fully accept that the first three scenarios are all fine and dandy and are a given that all is fair and above board, on the understanding of course it is timed. It still boils down to when the clock starts and that is is adhered to. In the last scenario, a player has taken longer than he should, played it and carried on (and again by default I assume the PP's let it go) and whether they believe it to be less than 3 minutes is irrelevant and the rules is broken

Unless I misunderstood an earlier post from one of the experts, a player who makes a good effort to time his search accurately would not get penalised if they believed it was under three minutes but in actuality it was 3;00;01

 

[Slab]

My understanding is that if players in a competition agree before (or during I guess) a round of golf that they will ignore a rule/s then the very fact that they have struck the agreement is against the rules and for doing so alone is a DQ.

Homer mentioned no such discussion to reach an agreement in his example i responded to

 

[Wolf]

The idea of everybody having little stopwatches is laughable, so really we're back to policing it exactly like we do every other rule in the game - treating your fellow players like responsible adults and trusting them.

Which brings us full circle to the questions we were asking and told we weren't willing to accept. Funny that.

Unless I misunderstood an earlier post from one of the experts, a player who makes a good effort to time his search accurately would not get penalised if they believed it was under three minutes but in actuality it was 3;00;01

See the post where I said I'd look at my mobile and got told "could do better"

That would have you believe making the attempt clearly isn't enough.

 

[Slab]

Which brings us full circle to the questions we were asking and told we weren't willing to accept. Funny that.



See the post where I said I'd look at my mobile and got told "could do better"

That would have you believe making the attempt clearly isn't enough.

Yeah that's back to the point of hh:mm on many phones V's hh:mm:ss (or mm:ss) He didn't actually say you'd get a penalty

Anyway, supposing it was a mm:ss timer & the player inadvertently & unknowingly started timing 3 or 4 seconds late and it read 2:58 when he stopped it and played the ball. Without speaking for them I don't think the refs on here would give a penalty because sufficient effort was made to accurately time the search

 

[Wolf]

Yeah that's back to the point of hh:mm on many phones V's hh:mm:ss (or mm:ss) He didn't actually say you'd get a penalty

Anyway, supposing it was mm:ss & the player inadvertently & unknowingly started timing 3 or 4 seconds late and it read 2:58 when he stopped it and played the ball. Without speaking for them I don't think the refs on here would give a penalty because sufficient effort was made to accurately time the search

Very true he didn't say that your right, he just compared it to using a fuel gage 😂⛽

 

[Marshy77]

Very true he didn't say that your right, he just compared it to using a fuel gage 😂⛽

Isn't the simple answer to all this just to listen to your playing partners who 99% of the time just say 'we'll have a quick look but hit a provisional you door handle, that's lost'

 

[Wolf]

Isn't the simple answer to all this just to listen to your playing partners who 99% of the time just say 'we'll have a quick look but hit a provisional you door handle, that's lost'

😂😂
You sir are 100% correct. Now on the provisional do I take that drop from tyre or radiator height

 

[Marshy77]

😂😂
You sir are 100% correct. Now on the provisional do I take that drop from tyre or radiator height

Again use the door handle

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

So rather than have my phone tucked away in a pocket of my bag - I will have it instantly available through being in the little compartment on my trolley handle, and have it displaying the timer screen. In this way when I have to search for a ball I can just touch start and get on with looking...mind you it'll be a pain if I then - nervous of exceeding the 3mins - keep going back to my trolley to check how time is ticking on So instead maybe I set it to display stopwatch screen with time set at 3min, And all I do is touch start and when my 3mins is up it bleeps...and subsequently during the hole or on next tee I reset it to 3mins for the next time.

And so it seems to me that not one single one of us really has any excuse to be ignorant of the time we are taking to search for our ball. And as that is the case then we need not really have to worry about timing the searches of our playing companions.

 

[chrisd]

I'm wondering how can you ignore a rule if it’s not breached. Surely it must be tested in order for it to be ignored.!

I was answering the question you asked. If you AGREE to ignore a rule that you are aware of, you are dq'd - it doesn't matter whether you actually do ignore it, simply agreeing to beforehand is enough to be DQ'd for

 

[Wolf]

I was answering the question you asked. If you AGREE to ignore a rule that you are aware of, you are dq'd - it doesn't matter whether you actually do ignore it, simply agreeing to beforehand is enough to be DQ'd for

Yet nobody has said they're agreeing to break a rule. This just goes round in circles with new things being made up by people in order to ignore what others are actually saying.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Yet nobody has said they're agreeing to break a rule. This just goes round in circles with new things being made up by people in order to ignore what others are actually saying.

I think they did at the early doors of this marathon, words like officious, dickhead and decency were used. That person may now have altered their approach to this issue, no problem with that, but it did sort of steer the thread in a certain direction and give it a certain fuel and "taint" shall we say

 

[Orikoru]

I think they did at the early doors of this marathon, words like officious, dickhead and decency were used. That person may now have altered their approach to this issue, no problem with that, but it did sort of steer the thread in a certain direction and give it a certain fuel and "taint" shall we say

In fairness we didn't call anyone a dickhead, that was Jacko, lol.

 

[robinthehood]

Yet nobody has said they're agreeing to break a rule. This just goes round in circles with new things being made up by people in order to ignore what others are actually saying.

Actually orikoru said it very early on.

 

[Wolf]

I think they did at the early doors of this marathon, words like officious, dickhead and decency were used. That person may now have altered their approach to this issue, no problem with that, but it did sort of steer the thread in a certain direction and give it a certain fuel and "taint" shall we say

Yet here we are that old head only agree and acknowledge with others who raise the same point that haave been on here years. One of us new comers asks it and we're given ridiculous comparisons and scenarios.

 

[Wolf]

Actually orikoru said it very early on.

What he said was he wouldn't be so anal but has since state will be more vigilant. What did that get him not acknowledged for doing so but instead accused of back tracking... And further posts to deride him

 

[Slab]

I was answering the question you asked. If you AGREE to ignore a rule that you are aware of, you are dq'd - it doesn't matter whether you actually do ignore it, simply agreeing to beforehand is enough to be DQ'd for

You've taken it out of context but thanks for the info

 

[Orikoru]

Actually orikoru said it very early on.

No he didn't