Artificial surface & Out of Bounds

[backwoodsman]

Hopefully, this one is straight-forward.

A short way behind a green is an artificially surfaced path. The back edge of the path is bounded by a tall wood-panel fence - which is the course boundary. So a ball could roll up against the fence and therefore be in bounds, but touching both the artificial surface and the course boundary. Or could be so close to the fence that a shot towards the hole, or even towards the green, is not possible. But in both cases, it would be possible to get club to ball.

Presumably then, rule 16.1a(3) - the "shot clearly unreasonable" exception - does not apply, and free relief from the path is allowable? Is my thinking correct?

 

[Steven Rules]

Without seing the actual geography it sounds correct from your description. It might be clearly unreasonable to play a shot directly towards the hole but as long as it is not clearly unreasonable to play out sideways and such stroke has interference from the path then, yes, free relief from the path (not the boundary object) would be allowed.

If this is a common occurrence on this hole then the Committee should probably consider creating a local rule and/or a dropping zone.

 

[backwoodsman]

Without seing the actual geography it sounds correct fom your description. It might be clearly unreasonable to play a shot directly towards the hole but as long as it is not clearly unreasonable to play out sideways and such stroke has interference from the path then, yes, free relief would be allowed.

If this is a common occurrence on this hole then the Committee should probably consider creating a local rule and/or a dropping zone.

In general, it's pretty much always possible to get club to ball and be able to hit it - but it certainly wouldn't be towards the hole. For the most part, the geography means that NPoR is nearly always green-side of the path (due to "not nearer hole" being a circular shape and path is generally straight) - so not sure a local rule needed?

But there is a complication which I'll get to in "part II" of the query ...

 

[rulefan]

We created two dropping zones for a similar situation such that they were slightly further from the green than a ball directly behind the green.

Edit: Didn't see your post#3 when I clicked.

 

[jim8flog]

We use a dropping zone for a similar situation.

Dropping Zones are normally 'may' and not 'must'.

 

[rulefan]

We use a dropping zone for a similar situation.

Dropping Zones are normally 'may' and not 'must'.

Indeed. But hardly an option if the alternative is S&D.

 

[Steven Rules]

We use a dropping zone for a similar situation.

Dropping Zones are normally 'may' and not 'must'.

Agreed.

Typically dropping zones provide an additional relief option (Model Local Rules E-1.1 and E-1.2) but it is certainly open to the Committee to make the dropping zone the only relief option. (Model Local Rule E-1.3)

 

[Colin L]

Without seeing the whole situation, it's not possible to know if simply moving the boundary to the green side to put the path off the course would be an alternative.