Back to the tee or otherwise!

[salfordlad]

Well, that is harsh on Player B. Coming to the realisation that A may well have hit his ball inside 3 minutes. Player A may well agree, especially if they happen to find Player A's ball in the rough, yet Player B is doomed to have his ball defined as lost.

However, just as a final thought. If you know were Player A hit your (likely) ball, whether you can still physically see it a long way down the fairway or not, can you not insist you have technically found a ball (you know where it is), and then you have any time you need to go and identify it? Not sure if you need to be physically able to see it from where you are stood, because they might have hit it onto the green, but ball hidden from view due to a small hill.

I'm seeing nothing in your amended scenario that would enable the search time clock to be extended so have nothing to add to the previous answer. You could send in your question to our R&A friends.

 

[Swango1980]

I'm seeing nothing in your amended scenario that would enable the search time clock to be extended so have nothing to add to the previous answer. You could send in your question to our R&A friends.

Seems ridiculous then.

I can imagine a player (Player B) walking up the fairway after his tee shot, comfortable his ball is in the light rough. No problem. Guy he is playing with (Player A) rushes ahead, and Player B sees him about to take his shot in the rough area he thinks his ball went. No time to yell across the course, but thinks "I hope he hasn't hit my ball". As he approaches him, and generally scans around his feet for another ball, he says to Player A "are you sure that was your ball, I think my ball was around here". Player A then says "Mine was a Callaway", and then B told him he was also hitting a Callaway. Player A then doubts he played the correct ball, and then agrees he might have hit the wrong ball. All well within the 3 minutes. They then spot another ball, and then see that is Player A's ball, so Player A and B are both even more convinced Player A hit Player B's ball. At this stage maybe 90 seconds has passed.

A rules official happens to be on the scene. He says to Player B "well, don't worry, you've got 90 seconds to run further down the hole and identify the ball Player A just hit". Sadly Player A smashed it 250 yards down the fairway, and Player B has a bad hip and can't move quickly.

 

[Swango1980]

I'm seeing nothing in your amended scenario that would enable the search time clock to be extended so have nothing to add to the previous answer. You could send in your question to our R&A friends.

Just to add to that: If the player can still actually see the ball, albeit 150 yards further down the fairway, surely they are no longer "searching". If I found a ball under a bush after 2minutes 59 seconds, to I have 1 second to identify it or as long as it reasonably takes? If I have as long as it takes, then I assume the same must apply if I can see the ball 150 yards away. I can then go and identify it?

 

[salfordlad]

Seems ridiculous then.

I can imagine a player (Player B) walking up the fairway after his tee shot, comfortable his ball is in the light rough. No problem. Guy he is playing with (Player A) rushes ahead, and Player B sees him about to take his shot in the rough area he thinks his ball went. No time to yell across the course, but thinks "I hope he hasn't hit my ball". As he approaches him, and generally scans around his feet for another ball, he says to Player A "are you sure that was your ball, I think my ball was around here". Player A then says "Mine was a Callaway", and then B told him he was also hitting a Callaway. Player A then doubts he played the correct ball, and then agrees he might have hit the wrong ball. All well within the 3 minutes. They then spot another ball, and then see that is Player A's ball, so Player A and B are both even more convinced Player A hit Player B's ball. At this stage maybe 90 seconds has passed.

A rules official happens to be on the scene. He says to Player B "well, don't worry, you've got 90 seconds to run further down the hole and identify the ball Player A just hit". Sadly Player A smashed it 250 yards down the fairway, and Player B has a bad hip and can't move quickly.

Player B with the bad hip is likely in a cart so no problem to check inside the 3 minute limit.

You have, incrementally, kept changing the facts of the scenario with each subsequent post. My first two answers were specific to the facts of those posts. If we keep on changing the facts, we could come up with a scenario in which B would likely be justified to extend the search time beyond 3 minutes, if necessary, to test whether the ball A hit was, in fact, B's ball. For example: A and B hit into the same area of open ground with no rough or trees in the vicinity and while they do not actually see their balls finish, they have high confidence they know they are quite close together and that it is safe ground. And there are no other people in the area. They head towards the balls, A much quicker to get there (B's bad hip'n'all) and A promptly makes a stroke with a ball. On arrival, B finds one ball in this open, clear area and it does not have his mark so he asks A whether he carefully identified the ball he played. A says he just affirmed it was a Callaway so played it. B says I am also using a Callaway but my initials are on it and this other Callaway in the area does not have my mark. A then affirms the other ball is his....... I think this scenario would justify extending the search time if the ball A struck is in a known position.

My key point here is we can only make a call on all the facts - and if all we have is A may have hit B's ball or A probably hit B's ball, I don't think we have authority in the published rules to extend B's search time. If you were so motivated, it might be an interesting exercise to try and sound out the R&A on some scenarios that are significantly closer to the example I present above (if they are prepared to respond to such hypotheticals), to see if they would accept a case to enable B to extend the search clock.

One more angle to note - if that ball A struck is not in a known position, I can see no reason to extend the clock. The call then is B's ball is lost if not found within 3 minutes and an assessment must be made whether there is KVC that the ball was moved by an outside influence (in this case A).

 

[Swango1980]

Player B with the bad hip is likely in a cart so no problem to check inside the 3 minute limit.

You have, incrementally, kept changing the facts of the scenario with each subsequent post. My first two answers were specific to the facts of those posts. If we keep on changing the facts, we could come up with a scenario in which B would likely be justified to extend the search time beyond 3 minutes, if necessary, to test whether the ball A hit was, in fact, B's ball. For example: A and B hit into the same area of open ground with no rough or trees in the vicinity and while they do not actually see their balls finish, they have high confidence they know they are quite close together and that it is safe ground. And there are no other people in the area. They head towards the balls, A much quicker to get there (B's bad hip'n'all) and A promptly makes a stroke with a ball. On arrival, B finds one ball in this open, clear area and it does not have his mark so he asks A whether he carefully identified the ball he played. A says he just affirmed it was a Callaway so played it. B says I am also using a Callaway but my initials are on it and this other Callaway in the area does not have my mark. A then affirms the other ball is his....... I think this scenario would justify extending the search time if the ball A struck is in a known position.

My key point here is we can only make a call on all the facts - and if all we have is A may have hit B's ball or A probably hit B's ball, I don't think we have authority in the published rules to extend B's search time. If you were so motivated, it might be an interesting exercise to try and sound out the R&A on some scenarios that are significantly closer to the example I present above (if they are prepared to respond to such hypotheticals), to see if they would accept a case to enable B to extend the search clock.

One more angle to note - if that ball A struck is not in a known position, I can see no reason to extend the clock. The call then is B's ball is lost if not found within 3 minutes and an assessment must be made whether there is KVC that the ball was moved by an outside influence (in this case A).

The reason why a lot of these are discussed on these forums is that no one is going to write to the R&A. Why would they, of course they are not going to answer. They'd only really answer to an official approach by a club who need to resolve a current situation. Which is absolutely fair enough.

My point I was trying to get to, is Player B always going to have his ball declared as lost if Player A hits it, making it impossible for Player B to ever find it in 3 minutes. If the 3 minutes actually passes before they come to the realisation A hit his ball, then maybe I can see this as just bad luck. Player B could always have asked A if they can confirm they hit the ball, although I'm sure there are many scenarios this would not be the case. Therefore, I tried to present a scenario in which Player's B and A both has reasonable doubt A hit the wrong ball before the 3 minutes was up, but no guarantee. A scenario in which they might even still be able to see the ball Player A probably incorrectly hit. In that situation, does Player B effectively avoid the unfortunate situation of having to say his ball is lost?

I felt it was an important question. Because, up to that point the impression was that if Player A hits the wrong ball, and B does not identify it within 3 minutes, it is a lost ball. Which is true for the OP. However, I was trying to think of a completely reasonable situation in which that is no longer necessarily true. If, in my scenario, you were Player C. 2 minutes into the search both A and B have already discussed the high possibility A hit B's ball, and that ball is now 200 yards down the fairway. You can see it from where you stand. They ask you for advice on the rule. Do you allow B to go and identify that ball and it does not matter if identification occurs outside the 3 minutes, or do you tell him if he doesn't identify it within 60 seconds, he needs to go back to the tee to take stroke and distance?

 

[Swango1980]

Not challenging any ruling, but just to avoid accusation of slightly tweaking scenarios to see if the outcome would be any different, the following happened to me quite some time ago (back when there was a 5 minute search time, but we can ignore that part).

I teed off the 9th hole, par 4, and hit it down the right of the fairway. This area is light rough with trees, and separates the 9th and 6th fairways (the 6th coming up in the opposite direction to the 9th). Therefore, the area it went is in the landing zone for me, but also slicers of the 6th. A common spot, and I always got worried if I saw people coming up the 6th to that area. On this occasion, this is what happened. After watching my drive land, I could see a group in the competition coming up the 6th. As usual, I quietly thought "they better not bloody hit my ball". Especially as I could see them play a shot from those trees. Anyway, the other guys in my group teed off, and then I walked the 250-280 yards to where my ball may be. After a minute or 2 I found a ball. It wasn't mine, but it was one of the guys coming up the 6th. It had his initials on it. By that stage they had already progressed a long way up the par 5 6th. So, I marked his ball, picked it up, and went about 150 yards to where he was (just after he hit another bloomin shot up the 6th). When I got to him, I showed him the ball I found and asked him if it was his. He said it was, and then he realised he was playing with the wrong ball. I said I was sure he had played on with my ball. So, to find out, I had to run another 180 yards from there to the ball he just hit to find out. And, as I expected, when I got there I found my ball with my initials. I'm pretty sure the point I saw my initials was well after 5 minutes from when I arrived where my original drive went, let alone 3 minutes.

Once I did this, I asked him where he played it from, replaced it and played on without penalty.

The question is, was this incorrect? Should the ball have been considered lost, even though I already realised this guy had probably hit my ball within the search time (the rough is not deep, and the trees spread out, so it is very unlikely you could lose a ball in there). Or, was I OK? If it was considered lost, could I not argue that the search was temporarily interrupted for a good reason (i.e. my 3 minutes starts when I get to the area I expect to find the ball, but before 3 minutes is up it becomes very likely that the area I expect to find the ball is no longer where I am, but over 200 yards up the 6th fairway)

 

[Colin L]

It is indeed hard on Player B, just as losing your ball under autumn leaves, having it nicked by a kid from the neighbouring estate, not knowing that it ricocheted off a tree (as happened to me with a ball sliced into the trees which ended up in the middle of the fairway where, of course, I hadn't even looked) and so on. I have also lost a ball that must have been in plain view, the only problem being that I couldn't find it amongst the dozens of balls littering the practice ground which of necessity is on the course. Each of us probably has a hard luck story about a lost ball.

While B may feel aggrieved, it could be/should be that A feels very bad about it but he can do nothing about redeeming himself until the two of them reach the bar.

 

[Swango1980]

It is indeed hard on Player B, just as losing your ball under autumn leaves, having it nicked by a kid from the neighbouring estate, not knowing that it ricocheted off a tree (as happened to me with a ball sliced into the trees which ended up in the middle of the fairway where, of course, I hadn't even looked) and so on. Each of us probably has a hard luck story about a lost ball.

While B may feel aggrieved, it could be/should be that A feels very bad about it but he can do nothing about redeeming himself until the two of them reach the bar.

Of course, all your examples indicate the player is unaware of any of these things. He doesn't know it is under a leaf, or which one. He has no evidence a kid nicked his ball (unless he sees the kid run on, pick his ball up and run away) and he doesn't know it bounced off a tree. All of those things have happened to me, and I accept it is just bad luck.

However, in my situation my 3 minutes began when I arrived in the area where I expected to find my ball. Within that 3 minutes, new evidence became available to allow me to now realise that the area I was looking for my ball was very likely incorrect. The area is now on the 6th fairway. To be honest, had I looked up that fairway, I would have seen my ball (now being played by this other guy) before he smacked it up the fairway again just before I got to him. Therefore, still inside 3 minutes, I could see a ball that I believed to be mine. Was I allowed to identify it, and did this have to happen inside 3 minutes? The rules suggest I can, as they say if a ball is found then I have a reasonable time to identify the ball. There does not seem to be any limit on how far away the ball is when it is "found". However, I could see taking the rule as read may not help me out had the player who hit the wrong ball proceeded further up the fairway, to a point I could not physically see the ball, even though it was clear he was still playing with it (i.e. he wasn't off hunting in some trees as he had gone wayward again)

 

[Ethan]

If I was Player B and penalised for that, I wouldn't be walking back to the tee, but to the car park to change my shoes and sod off home.

That is a stupid and manifestly unfair rule. There is no reason the situation could not be rectified under equity when it is discovered that Player A played the wrong ball. There is no reasonable way of being virtually certain Player A played the wrong ball and Player B may not even have reached Player A's ball or the expected search area before Player A hit it.

 

[Steven Rules]

There is no reason the situation could not be rectified under equity....

Yes - there is a perfectly good reason why the situation cannot be rectified under equity. The concept of resolving rules issues in accordance with equity no longer exists in the post-2019 rules.

 

[Colin L]

If I was Player B and penalised for that, I wouldn't be walking back to the tee, but to the car park to change my shoes and sod off home.

That is a stupid and manifestly unfair rule. There is no reason the situation could not be rectified under equity when it is discovered that Player A played the wrong ball. There is no reasonable way of being virtually certain Player A played the wrong ball and Player B may not even have reached Player A's ball or the expected search area before Player A hit it.

As Steven says, plus if you did apply the principle, you could justifiably consider that in equity the situation you describe had to be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other in which a ball is not found after 3 minutes of searching.

 

[Ethan]

It is indeed hard on Player B, just as losing your ball under autumn leaves, having

Yes - there is a perfectly good reason why the situation cannot be rectified under equity. The concept of resolving rules issues in accordance with equity no longer exists in the post-2019 rules.

Did common sense disappear with it?

 

[Swango1980]

As Steven says, plus if you did apply the principle, you could justifiably consider that in equity the situation you describe had to be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other in which a ball is not found after 3 minutes of searching.

What is the definition of found? I presume a ball can be considered found pre-identification?

 

[Ethan]

As Steven says, plus if you did apply the principle, you could justifiably consider that in equity the situation you describe had to be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other in which a ball is not found after 3 minutes of searching.

Effectively the player has been misdirected as to the relevant search area by a breach of the rules by his playing partner.

 

[Swango1980]

Effectively the player has been misdirected as to the relevant search by a breach of the rules by his playing partner.

I'm sure they might change the rule one day when it impacts a pro. Maybe some sneaky fan will steal his ball. Pro can't find it in 3 minutes, although as he goes back to tee broadcasters relay msg to him that a fan stole his ball. Outrage with fans because the rules state his ball is still lost.

Too bad mate, bad luck. Those sorts of comments by the rules officials probably won't cut it with the viewing public, or the player.

Until then, us hacker golfers just beat keep our eyes peeled for clumsy players in our group hitting our ball

 

[salfordlad]

Not challenging any ruling, but just to avoid accusation of slightly tweaking scenarios to see if the outcome would be any different, the following happened to me quite some time ago (back when there was a 5 minute search time, but we can ignore that part).

I teed off the 9th hole, par 4, and hit it down the right of the fairway. This area is light rough with trees, and separates the 9th and 6th fairways (the 6th coming up in the opposite direction to the 9th). Therefore, the area it went is in the landing zone for me, but also slicers of the 6th. A common spot, and I always got worried if I saw people coming up the 6th to that area. On this occasion, this is what happened. After watching my drive land, I could see a group in the competition coming up the 6th. As usual, I quietly thought "they better not bloody hit my ball". Especially as I could see them play a shot from those trees. Anyway, the other guys in my group teed off, and then I walked the 250-280 yards to where my ball may be. After a minute or 2 I found a ball. It wasn't mine, but it was one of the guys coming up the 6th. It had his initials on it. By that stage they had already progressed a long way up the par 5 6th. So, I marked his ball, picked it up, and went about 150 yards to where he was (just after he hit another bloomin shot up the 6th). When I got to him, I showed him the ball I found and asked him if it was his. He said it was, and then he realised he was playing with the wrong ball. I said I was sure he had played on with my ball. So, to find out, I had to run another 180 yards from there to the ball he just hit to find out. And, as I expected, when I got there I found my ball with my initials. I'm pretty sure the point I saw my initials was well after 5 minutes from when I arrived where my original drive went, let alone 3 minutes.

Once I did this, I asked him where he played it from, replaced it and played on without penalty.

The question is, was this incorrect? Should the ball have been considered lost, even though I already realised this guy had probably hit my ball within the search time (the rough is not deep, and the trees spread out, so it is very unlikely you could lose a ball in there). Or, was I OK? If it was considered lost, could I not argue that the search was temporarily interrupted for a good reason (i.e. my 3 minutes starts when I get to the area I expect to find the ball, but before 3 minutes is up it becomes very likely that the area I expect to find the ball is no longer where I am, but over 200 yards up the 6th fairway)

Replying to the bolded words:
Not correct. RBs have been very clear that the realisation that you are searching in the wrong place is not a reason to temporarily stop the search clock.

 

[Swango1980]

Replying to the bolded words:
Not correct. RBs have been very clear that the realisation that you are searching in the wrong place is not a reason to temporarily stop the search clock.

Ok. But if I would have been OK if I could at least still physically see the ball I believed to be mine, albeit it was 150 yards or so away.

 

[Steven Rules]

What is the definition of found? I presume a ball can be considered found pre-identification?

Ok. But if I would have been OK if I could at least still physically see the ball I believed to be mine, albeit it was 150 yards or so away.

There is no definition of 'found'. Only a definition of 'lost'. A key element of the ball not being 'lost' is the player must be able to identify the ball as his or hers. (Rules 7.2 and 18.2a(1))

In the circumstances of this scenario I don't think that seeing a ball on the fairway 150 yards ahead amounts to identifying it. Interpretation 7.2/1 guides us:

7.2/1 Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:
Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player's ball, or
Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player's stroke.

**************

If a ball is found at, say, tthe 2 min 50 sec mark, there may be some additional reasonable time permitted beyond the three minutes for the player to identify it as his/hers:

Rule 18.2a(1) When Ball Is Lost or Out of Bounds
(1) When Ball Is Lost. A ball is lost if not found in three minutes after the player or his or her caddie begins to search for it.
If a ball is found in that time but it is uncertain whether it is the player’s ball:
The player must promptly attempt to identify the ball (see Rule 7.2) and is allowed a reasonable time to do so, even if that happens after the three-minute search time has ended.
This includes a reasonable time to get to the ball if the player is not where the ball is found.
If the player does not identify his or her ball in that reasonable time, the ball is lost.

******************

Please......let's not get into a discussion here about what is 'reasonable'. You and the Committee can sort that out on the day.

 

[Swango1980]

There is no definition of 'found'. Only a definition of 'lost'. A key element of the ball not being 'lost' is the player must be able to identify the ball as his or hers. (Rules 7.2 and 18.2a(1))

In the circumstances of this scenario I don't think that seeing a ball on the fairway 150 yards ahead amounts to identifying it. Interpretation 7.2/1 guides us:

7.2/1 Identifying Ball That Cannot Be Retrieved
If a player sees a ball in a tree or some other location where he or she is unable to retrieve the ball, the player may not assume that it is his or hers but rather must identify it in one of the ways provided in Rule 7.2.

This may be done even though the player is unable to retrieve the ball, such as by:
Using binoculars or a distance-measuring device to see a mark that definitely identifies it as the player's ball, or
Determining that another player or spectator saw the ball come to rest in that specific location after the player's stroke.

**************

If a ball is found at, say, tthe 2 min 50 sec mark, there may be some additional reasonable time permitted beyond the three minutes for the player to identify it as his/hers:

Rule 18.2a(1) When Ball Is Lost or Out of Bounds
(1) When Ball Is Lost. A ball is lost if not found in three minutes after the player or his or her caddie begins to search for it.
If a ball is found in that time but it is uncertain whether it is the player’s ball:
The player must promptly attempt to identify the ball (see Rule 7.2) and is allowed a reasonable time to do so, even if that happens after the three-minute search time has ended.
This includes a reasonable time to get to the ball if the player is not where the ball is found.
If the player does not identify his or her ball in that reasonable time, the ball is lost.

******************

Please......let's not get into a discussion here about what is 'reasonable'. You and the Committee can sort that out on the day.

We can sort it out on day. But, it is also what people use these forums for.

As rulefan says, if it isn't in the rules, you can do it (or words to that effect).

In other words, there is nothing in the rules to say you can only have a reasonable time to identify a ball you found if done so inside x metres. If I see what I believe to he my ball 150 yards away, I would like to know why I am.not allowed to identify it? If people cannot quote me the rule in this forum, fine. I'd ask the Committee to quote the rule.

It is not designed to catch anyone out or try and prove earlier responses wrong. I just found it an interesting extension of what had been discussed. And I genuinely cannot see anything in the rules to definitively stop me identifying that ball. It only seems to come down to.interpretation, and people interpreting they do not want me to identify the ball I am almost sure is mine.

Had I been on Committee, I would have allowed the player to identify his ball.if he had a reasonable argument it was his. And, if it wasn't, then fair enough, lost ball. But, if it was, justice is done as he found his ball some goon had hit.

 

[rulefan]

if he had a reasonable argument it was his.

It all depends on the particular circumstances. That's what the rule amounts to.