Backstopping

[WaywardTom]

Player A who is aware of new guidance on backstopping chips up to flag 2ft from hole then turns to put wedge back & get putter & mark ball. meanwhile B 40yrds away on opposite side of green plays his shot & thins it a bit but hits A’s ball and stops 3ft from hole. A is perplexed as he was never given the opportunity to Mark & B has obviously benefited. B replaces A’s ball and both make 3’s. A objects to B’s score citing it was unfair on others in the field as B benefited from not allowing A time to mark and remove the risk of a Potential backstop. Under the new rule that nobody knows anything about should B have incurred a penalty?

 

[jim8flog]

Thee answer lies in the Rules clarifications
The next to last sentence is the important one

Rule 15.3:

1. Backstopping:
“Backstopping“ is the common term used to describe the following situation in stroke play:

A player, without agreement with any other player, leaves his or her ball in place on the putting green close to the hole in a position where another player, who is about to play from off the putting green, could benefit if his or her ball struck the ball at rest.​

As there has been no agreement to leave the ball in place to help any player, there is no breach of the Rules – see Rule 15.3a.

However, The R&A and USGA take the view that ”backstopping” fails to take into account all of the other players in the competition and has the potential to give the player with the “backstop” an advantage over those other players.​

Consequently, The R&A and USGA offer players the following guidance and explanation of best practice:

- In stroke play, the competition involves all players and, because each player in the competition cannot be present to protect his or her own interests, protecting the field is an important responsibility that all players in the competition share.​

- Therefore, in stroke play, if there is a reasonable possibility that a player’s ball close to the hole could help another player who is about to play from off the green, both players should ensure that the player whose ball is close to the hole marks and lifts that ball before the other player plays.​

- If all players follow this best practice, it ensures the protection of the interests of everyone in the competition. (Added 1/2020)​

 

[rulefan]

Shouldn't this gave been in 'Rules of Golf' ?

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Shouldn't this gave been in 'Rules of Golf' ?

It is now ?

 

[Crow]

Thee answer lies in the Rules clarifications
The next to last sentence is the important one

Rule 15.3:

1. Backstopping:
“Backstopping“ is the common term used to describe the following situation in stroke play:

A player, without agreement with any other player, leaves his or her ball in place on the putting green close to the hole in a position where another player, who is about to play from off the putting green, could benefit if his or her ball struck the ball at rest.​

As there has been no agreement to leave the ball in place to help any player, there is no breach of the Rules – see Rule 15.3a.

However, The R&A and USGA take the view that ”backstopping” fails to take into account all of the other players in the competition and has the potential to give the player with the “backstop” an advantage over those other players.​

Consequently, The R&A and USGA offer players the following guidance and explanation of best practice:

- In stroke play, the competition involves all players and, because each player in the competition cannot be present to protect his or her own interests, protecting the field is an important responsibility that all players in the competition share.​

- Therefore, in stroke play, if there is a reasonable possibility that a player’s ball close to the hole could help another player who is about to play from off the green, both players should ensure that the player whose ball is close to the hole marks and lifts that ball before the other player plays.​

- If all players follow this best practice, it ensures the protection of the interests of everyone in the competition. (Added 1/2020)​

"Consequently, The R&A and USGA offer players the following guidance and explanation of best practice:"

But coming back to the OP's question, is there a penalty?

 

[clubchamp98]

It says “should “ not “ must “.
There are lots of things you should do but are not penalised.
But if you must do and don’t usually it’s a penalty

But there is no “breach of the rules”
I assume it has to be deliberate on Bs part to gain an advantage.

He could claim he was just playing ready golf.!

 

[WaywardTom]

therefore there is no penalty or is the fact that player b ignored the ‘guidance’ and therefore should be DQ

 

[clubchamp98]

therefore there is no penalty or is the fact that player b ignored the ‘guidance’ and therefore should be DQ

I think you would have a hard time proving that if he denied it , he could just claim he was playing quickly under ready golf.!
If both players ignore the rule it’s DQ.
It does seem up to the honesty of the players!

 

[WaywardTom]

It’s only guidance because it totally undermines leaving the flag in whilst putting which is in its self another backstop

 

[rulefan]

If there was obvious connivance, would 1.2 be justified?

 

[WaywardTom]

B got into hole in 3 had A been given opportunity to mark it would have been 4 or more. Thankfully B didn’t win by 1 shot

 

[clubchamp98]

It’s only guidance because it totally undermines leaving the flag in whilst putting which is in its self another backstop

It certainly makes the target bigger.
I am not a flag in person myself but that’s another debate that’s been done to death.

 

[clubchamp98]

If there was obvious connivance, would 1.2 be justified?

The burden of proving it would be hard as one player would have marked given the chance.
Accusing him of conniving would be harsh imo.

 

[WaywardTom]

Yes but if the argument was leave flag in to speed up play fair enough but this slows it down again but has the benefit of removing a possible advantage not available to all competitors. If you walked up to mark ball u may as well tend the flag

 

[WaywardTom]

If there was obvious connivance, would 1.2 be justified?

Yes because ignoring it is unfair on the rest of competition. He has made the choice wait until it’s marked or take unfair advantage

 

[WaywardTom]

It’s my understanding that if a player off the green does not allow or ask other players in the group to mark their ball to avoid benefiting potential unfair advantage over the rest of the field by leaving the potential risk of a backstop in place then the player is DQ for ignoring the whole backstop rule and the subsequent guidance.

 

[Duckster]

I wouldn’t say there’s any penalty there. Did player A say anything that they were going to mark their ball? Plus, it’s from 40 yards away! I could understand if it was closer, but at 40 yards I’d only be trying to get within 10 foot.

 

[williamalex1]

An intentional back stop from 40 yards away , so much for speeding up play and ready golf.

 

[clubchamp98]

Yes but if the argument was leave flag in to speed up play fair enough but this slows it down again but has the benefit of removing a possible advantage not available to all competitors. If you walked up to mark ball u may as well tend the flag

Why would you attend the flag if player b is off the green.
Plus all players can have the flag in.

 

[WaywardTom]

Who ever goes to mark their ball when the next player is 40 yards away?
If they were both on the fringe, different story, but 40 yards away???
This scenario as given cannot be a penalty.

That’s the rule! if the green is 20yds wide and u are Pin high but 10 left off the green and your partner pin high but 10 right he will probably be 40yards away from you. Whoever plays first must then go up and mark the ball if it is at risk of providing a backstop and for the other player. In amateur gold this could literally be anywhere on the green. The onus is on the player making the shot to have the ball marked. Local agreements are irrelevant as they do not protect the interests of other players in the competition. If you ignore this it looks like you are ignoring the whole of the backstop rule therefore under rule 1.2 you are FQ