An interesting local rule!

[chrisd]

I played a course at the weekend and the local rule reads

"Loose impediments only may be removed without penalty. Embedded stones - play the ball as it lies. Taking relief in this situation incurs a one shot penalty"

Any views?

 

[upsidedown]

As our course in New Zealand, like many others in Canterbury, was on old river bed you got relief from any stones , why you should have a penalty its beyond me !!

 

[rulefan]

Embedded stones are not loose impediments.

 

[Colin L]

That's not so much a local rule as a reminder to players of what is already the case. I suppose too many players on that course had got it wrong and made the reminder necessary.

 

[North Mimms]

I'm assuming this is through the green, not a bunker LR

 

[CMAC]

Embedded stones are not loose impediments.

as we all hopefully knew so nothing strange here Chris, what's your views on posting?

 

[chrisd]

I'd be pretty brassed of ruining a club on a stone !

Never seen an embedded stone on my course fairway!

 

[duncan mackie]

I'd be pretty brassed of ruining a club on a stone !

Never seen an embedded stone on my course fairway!

and I thought you were questioning how they came up with the one shot penalty as the 'interesting/flawed' part of their LR.......

 

[pbrown7582]

Embedded stones are not loose impediments.

Exactly, my first course was routed over and around several old quarries some penalty drops to save dinks in shineys were order of the day!

 

[chrisd]

and I thought you were questioning how they came up with the one shot penalty as the 'interesting/flawed' part of their LR.......

I'd not come across an embedded stone that I can think of Duncan, so never looked up the rule and hadn't seen the wording on a card written like that. Certainly never lifted an embedded stone!

 

[rulefan]

and I thought you were questioning how they came up with the one shot penalty as the 'interesting/flawed' part of their LR.......

In case anyone hadn't spotted it, the penalty simply means play under rule 28.

 

[duncan mackie]

I'd not come across an embedded stone that I can think of Duncan, so never looked up the rule and hadn't seen the wording on a card written like that. Certainly never lifted an embedded stone!

it's not that unusual, especially on new courses.

by analogy to 33-8/8 the situation should be abnormal, preferably temporary and relief would be more appropriate on closely mown areas...

I suspect your club (the one you played here!) had previously had such a situation and has now withdrawn the relief. they may feel that this LR reminder of that is helpful.....as I raised above I can understand that but fail to comprehend what they are doing with the reference to a one shot penalty for 'taking relief in this situation'. does this mean that a player who moves his ball but failes to replace it can now benefit from a one shot penalty instead of two? - cheaper than the two shots for the player that removes an embedded stone interfering with their shot too! basically a well meaning screw-up.

it's the same as playing under 28 but that should require a player to play under 28 rather than just move their ball...and gets confused when there are lots of stones covering an area in excess of 2 club lengths and when the ball rolls back to where it started - all inconsistent with relief situations.

 

[chrisd]

it's not that unusual, especially on new courses.

by analogy to 33-8/8 the situation should be abnormal, preferably temporary and relief would be more appropriate on closely mown areas...

I suspect your club (the one you played here!) had previously had such a situation and has now withdrawn the relief. they may feel that this LR reminder of that is helpful.....as I raised above I can understand that but fail to comprehend what they are doing with the reference to a one shot penalty for 'taking relief in this situation'. does this mean that a player who moves his ball but failes to replace it can now benefit from a one shot penalty instead of two? - cheaper than the two shots for the player that removes an embedded stone interfering with their shot too! basically a well meaning screw-up.

it's the same as playing under 28 but that should require a player to play under 28 rather than just move their ball...and gets confused when there are lots of stones covering an area in excess of 2 club lengths and when the ball rolls back to where it started - all inconsistent with relief situations.

So they are just saying "treat a ball lying near an embedded stone as an unplayable lie" and yes Duncan I am sure the meaning as you say, is a one shot penalty instead of two. I havnt seen stones embedded there on the few times I've played it in recent years, it is in fact, the little course attached to Littlestone. Little stone no doubt being the operative wprds!

 

[CMAC]

So they are just saying "treat a ball lying near an embedded stone as an unplayable lie" and yes Duncan I am sure the meaning as you say, is a one shot penalty instead of two. I havnt seen stones embedded there on the few times I've played it in recent years, it is in fact, the little course attached to Littlestone. Little stone no doubt being the operative wprds!

if you want!

you can play it, I did once in a big competition, decent shot but I still get annoyed at the damage it did to my PW but I wasn't going to lose a shot when I only had 3 to play with

 

[El Bandito]

Now these are interesting local rules...
http://s1314.photobucket.com/user/stulennon/media/image001_zpse08c4e39.jpg.html