Boundary object or not?

[KenL]

We have a line of oob stakes defining a boundary next to a path near the clubhouse. Hanging between these stakes are plastic white chains. These chains can be unhooked.

The chains are not specifically defined in our local rules, see attached pic.

If a player has a ball in bounds can they unhook the chain and then play their shot without penalty?

My opinion is that these chains, although not specifically mentioned, are boundary objects and you are not allowed to remove them.

Thoughts appreciated.

 

[Steven Rules]

It's borderline (pun intended) and could benefit from clarity from the Committee but, in my opinion, the chain is a boundary object.

I believe the chain falls under the part of the definition of boundary object that says '...such as walls, fences, stakes and railings from which free relief is not allowed.'

The definition is also clear that boundary objects are treated as immovable even if they are movable or any part of them is movable.

I don't think the chain would fall into the category of items specifically excluded from being part of the boundary object such as angled supports or guy wires that are attached to a wall or fence, any gate, steps, bridge or similar construction used for getting over or through the wall or fence.

Others may have a different view.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I would think the same.

 

[KenL]

On querying this, the club came back and said that the chain is not a boundary object as it is just cosmetic. The boundary is defined only by the line of stakes.

No rule is broken if you remove it.
Annoying as I hear people have been penalised in the past.

 

[rulefan]

We have a line of oob stakes defining a boundary next to a path near the clubhouse. Hanging between these stakes are plastic white chains. These chains can be unhooked.

The chains are not specifically defined in our local rules, see attached pic.

If a player has a ball in bounds can they unhook the chain and then play their shot without penalty?

My opinion is that these chains, although not specifically mentioned, are boundary objects and you are not allowed to remove them.

Thoughts appreciated. View attachment 57806

ii) Is the one that puzzles me. Does that mean that a stretch of fairway beyond a wall running across a fairway is OOB?
I'm struggling to picture a wall that matches ii).

 

[KenL]

ii) Is the one that puzzles me. Does that mean that a stretch of fairway beyond a wall running across a fairway is OOB?
I'm struggling to picture a wall that matches ii).

There is a 250 year old wall that runs through/beside much of the course. It forms the boundary on several holes.
But, the wall also runs between the 4th and 18th holes. If you go over the wall whilst playing either of those holes you would be OOB.

 

[Steven Rules]

On querying this, the club came back and said that the chain is not a boundary object as it is just cosmetic. The boundary is defined only by the line of stakes.

No rule is broken if you remove it.
Annoying as I hear people have been penalised in the past.

It appears the Committee has interpreted that the chain is an attachment to the boundary object (see Clarification Boundary Object/1) and is a movable obstruction.

I am sure many would find it useful if the Committee included this in the Local Rule.

 

[KenL]

It appears the Committee has interpreted that the chain is an attachment to the boundary object (see Clarification Boundary Object/1) and is a movable obstruction.

I am sure many would find it useful if the Committee included this in the Local Rule.

Yes, I’ll be asking for this to be communicated and consideration given to adding it to the LR next time they print cards.

 

[clubchamp98]

Yes, I’ll be asking for this to be communicated and consideration given to adding it to the LR next time they print cards.

I’d be asking if it’s not part of the boundary why have people been penalised in the past?

Unless they have changed the rule.