Ball unplayable

[Colin L]

True... ok so what if it was 20ft deep into trees and you called it unplayable... walk 50 yards back out of the trees and have a perfect PW into the green...

Since trees tend to be along the sides of a hole, your 50 yards back is almost certainly taking you deeper into the trees or out the other side, leaving you with the height of the trees between your ball and the green for a not so perfect PW in.

So if your in heavy rough an you find your ball can you pick it up an drop in within 2 clubs to the side say on to the fairway for penalty of 1 stroke? Instead of thrashing at it to try an pop it out.

Yes

 

[chrisd]

Funny that I had a similar conversation at my club at the weekend with someone who said that he rarely even does preferred lies in the winter as it doesn't seem right. He said he would consider anyone who putted off the green into a cavernous bunker, then playing again from the green under penalty, a cheat!

He wouldn't get that the rules are not there to harm you but just allow you to play the game equally and fairly

 

[Foxholer]

The Rules are written very carefully, so anything that is 'allowed', either specifically or by not being disallowed, is deemed legal.

So the guy who replays the putt, under penalty, rather than playing from a nasty bunker has not broken any Rule, so cannot be called a cheat - for this! It has cost him a shot to get that 'benefit'.

 

[MashieNiblick]

I think of this on the basis that your options under the unplayable ball rule are pretty much the same as for a lateral water hazard. So effectively you aren't penalised more for hitting your ball into a gorse bush than you would be for hitting it into a ditch. Seems fair to me.

 

[rulefan]

So if your in heavy rough an you find your ball can you pick it up an drop in within 2 clubs to the side say on to the fairway for penalty of 1 stroke? Instead of thrashing at it to try an pop it out.

But only 2 cl from the ball not, as some believe, 2 cl from the problem area.

 

[North Mimms]

So if your in heavy rough an you find your ball can you pick it up an drop in within 2 clubs to the side say on to the fairway for penalty of 1 stroke? Instead of thrashing at it to try an pop it out.

Except what usually happens is that we try and get it out first time, hit it further into the rough so that 2 clubs lengths won't get us out, and we no longer have the "replay from previous NICE position" option.
Thrash and repeat...

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Same with putting off the green and ball rolling into a horrid position in a green-side bunker. May be your best option to take a penalty shot and replace your ball on the green where you putted from - especially as you will now have a much better idea of line and weight.

 

[dazlight]

Never knew this rule was like this.
So you hit your 2nd shot from 50 yds off the green into a bunker.
It's up in the face and a nightmare lie.
Can you go back to the fairway where you hit the last shot and you will be hitting your 4th?
Hope that's not too confusing?

 

[Region3]

Never knew this rule was like this.
So you hit your 2nd shot from 50 yds off the green into a bunker.
It's up in the face and a nightmare lie.
Can you go back to the fairway where you hit the last shot and you will be hitting your 4th?
Hope that's not too confusing?

Spot on.

If you're confident out of bunkers you can also drop in a (probably) nicer place in the bunker for the same penalty stroke.

It just depends if you think you can get closer from a 5-10yd easy bunker shot or a 50yd fairway shot.

 

[BoadieBroadus]

the 2 club lengths rule is a strict 2 clubs - not 2 clubs from nearest point of relief is it not?

last comp we played one player hacked into the base of a tree and i said 2 clubs but the other player said nearest point of relief and 2 clubs. i acquiesced i suppose because:

a. the guy had one point after 4 holes so wasn't going to be toubling the leaderboard and had duffed it to the point behind the tree so was blobbing the hole ultimately in all likelihood (he did)
b. the chap giving the ruling manages the scratch team so i assumed he knew something i didn't, and even though i was pretty sure he was wrong i wasn't going to get into a rules argument over a blob

but isnt' it strange that people having played a long time are wrong about even the most straightforward of rules? (unless he was right and I'm the clueless one)

 

[Colin L]

Don't make the mistake of thinking that the quality of player's golf necessarily has any correlation with his knowledge of the rules.

See post #25. "Nearest point of relief" doesn't come into this. It has to do with relief from abnormal ground conditions and obstructions - in fact, the word "relief" doesn't appear in Rule 28. For an unplayable ball you measure from where the ball is.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

the 2 club lengths rule is a strict 2 clubs - not 2 clubs from nearest point of relief is it not?

last comp we played one player hacked into the base of a tree and i said 2 clubs but the other player said nearest point of relief and 2 clubs. i acquiesced i suppose because:

a. the guy had one point after 4 holes so wasn't going to be toubling the leaderboard and had duffed it to the point behind the tree so was blobbing the hole ultimately in all likelihood (he did)
b. the chap giving the ruling manages the scratch team so i assumed he knew something i didn't, and even though i was pretty sure he was wrong i wasn't going to get into a rules argument over a blob

but isnt' it strange that people having played a long time are wrong about even the most straightforward of rules? (unless he was right and I'm the clueless one)

I may well be wrong but the clue is in the words 'nearest point of relief'. This impies that you are being given relief from something 'abnormal' and that you shouldn't have to contend with. So 'nearest point of relief' only applies when getting relief and one way we get given relief is by a free drop. Ball at base of tree? Tough! Not unplayable unless you choose to declare it so. And if you do then you take a 'penalty' drop within two club lengths of where ball lies at rest.

 

[duncan mackie]

the 2 club lengths rule is a strict 2 clubs - not 2 clubs from nearest point of relief is it not?

last comp we played one player hacked into the base of a tree and i said 2 clubs but the other player said nearest point of relief and 2 clubs. i acquiesced i suppose because:

a. the guy had one point after 4 holes so wasn't going to be toubling the leaderboard and had duffed it to the point behind the tree so was blobbing the hole ultimately in all likelihood (he did)
b. the chap giving the ruling manages the scratch team so i assumed he knew something i didn't, and even though i was pretty sure he was wrong i wasn't going to get into a rules argument over a blob

but isnt' it strange that people having played a long time are wrong about even the most straightforward of rules? (unless he was right and I'm the clueless one)

the easiest way to remember is that you are not 'taking relief from anything' so it can't be anything to do with nearest point of relief, where as if you were taking relief from a specific situation such an an immovable obstruction, you establish the nearest point of relief, and then drop within 1 club length of that point.

you might think you are taking relief from the base of a tree (for example) but in reality you are simply taking one of the options available to you for a penalty. It's important to recognise that if your dropped ball rolls back behind the tree it will cost you another shot to drop it again as well!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Don't make the mistake of thinking that the quality of player's golf necessarily has any correlation with his knowledge of the rules.

See post #25. "Nearest point of relief" doesn't come into this. It has to do with relief from abnormal ground conditions and obstructions - in fact, the word "relief" doesn't appear in Rule 28. For an unplayable ball you measure from where the ball is.

Ah - you got in there before me - and as usual much more definitive than my random thoughts - as you identify the rule

 

[rosecott]

the 2 club lengths rule is a strict 2 clubs - not 2 clubs from nearest point of relief is it not?

last comp we played one player hacked into the base of a tree and i said 2 clubs but the other player said nearest point of relief and 2 clubs. i acquiesced i suppose because:

a. the guy had one point after 4 holes so wasn't going to be toubling the leaderboard and had duffed it to the point behind the tree so was blobbing the hole ultimately in all likelihood (he did)
b. the chap giving the ruling manages the scratch team so i assumed he knew something i didn't, and even though i was pretty sure he was wrong i wasn't going to get into a rules argument over a blob

but isnt' it strange that people having played a long time are wrong about even the most straightforward of rules? (unless he was right and I'm the clueless one)

As you suggest, there is no such thing as Nearest Point of Relief when it comes to taking a drop for an unplayable lie. NPR is only applicable to free relief from GUR, immoveable obstructions etc..

 

[Colin L]

Synchronicity is grand - as long as we are all saying the same thing. I await the day Duncan and I post simultaneously and contradict each other.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

It's important to recognise that if your dropped ball rolls back behind the tree it will cost you another shot to drop it again as well!

I think that this is covered by Rule 666 under paragraph headed Sods Law

 

[duncan mackie]

I think that this is covered by Rule 666 under paragraph headed Sods Law

yep - and sometimes it's entirely predictable as well, but that doesn't stop people trying it; after which they can end up in a real mess!

 

[BoadieBroadus]

Don't make the mistake of thinking that the quality of player's golf necessarily has any correlation with his knowledge of the rules.

Thanks for confirming my initial thoughts - actually he wasn't a low handicapper, he organises the scratch team rather than is anywhere near playing in it. It was his position as a golf administrator of relative stature within the club that made me think he would know the rule. And why I was quietly surprised when it seemed to me like he didn't.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Thanks for confirming my initial thoughts - actually he wasn't a low handicapper, he organises the scratch team rather than is anywhere near playing in it. It was his position as a golf administrator of relative stature within the club that made me think he would know the rule. And why I was quietly surprised when it seemed to me like he didn't.

Ah - an organiser - that rather explains it; likes being in control; knows all the answers , and of course being involved with the scratch team he's got all good connections. With golf - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Unless you are very confident of the source of your 'seems too good to be true' advice, it is best to play as lies or take a penalty.