Bunker Question

[Deleted member 16999]

Sat having a brew after playing today and was listening to a discussion in the bar.

One of the guys convinced all around the table that you could take your trolley into a bunker with no penalty, but, if you had a glove in your back pocket and whilst stood in the bunker it fell out onto the sand, it was a one shot penalty, discussion got animated and a few accused him of talking rubbish, eventually he had convinced them all.
Was he spreading a myth or was he correct?

 

[duncan mackie]

Fine by me, except the 1 stroke penalty...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Fine by me, except the 1 stroke penalty...

Please expand the answer Duncan.

 

[duncan mackie]

Please expand the answer Duncan.

How can it be 1 stroke - what was his reasoning/ruling with which he convinced everyone?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

How can it be 1 stroke - what was his reasoning/ruling with which he convinced everyone?

From what I could gather he was saying something along the lines of, the trolley was not deemed as players equipment but the glove is!
I believe it would be a penalty if it caused the ball to move, but simply landing on the sand I didn't think so.

 

[user2010]

Wow! Do you know the idiots this clown was convincing with his rubbish? Only i`m a Nigerian Prince..........

 

[rulie]

Sat having a brew after playing today and was listening to a discussion in the bar.

One of the guys convinced all around the table that you could take your trolley into a bunker with no penalty, but, if you had a glove in your back pocket and whilst stood in the bunker it fell out onto the sand, it was a one shot penalty, discussion got animated and a few accused him of talking rubbish, eventually he had convinced them all.
Was he spreading a myth or was he correct?

It was rubbish.
Exception 1 to Rule 13-4 (Ball in Hazard; Prohibited Actions) says there is no penalty for setting clubs in a hazard. This would include taking your trolley in. There is also no penalty for dropping any of your equipment, eg, a glove, a club, in the hazard (unless of course it causes the ball to move, but that's a different Rule and applies anywhere on the course).
It's too bad someone didn't get the Rule book from behind the bar and ask him to show everyone the applicable Rule.

 

[RGDave]

Take anything you like into the bunker. Clubs, kitchen sink, disco shoes, iPhone 7.

Better not to hit your equipment when playing the shot though.... or cop a feel of the sand as you pick up said glove.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It was rubbish.
Exception 1 to Rule 13-4 (Ball in Hazard; Prohibited Actions) says there is no penalty for setting clubs in a hazard. This would include taking your trolley in. There is also no penalty for dropping any of your equipment, eg, a glove, a club, in the hazard (unless of course it causes the ball to move, but that's a different Rule and applies anywhere on the course).
It's too bad someone didn't get the Rule book from behind the bar and ask him to show everyone the applicable Rule.

Thanks for that, like I said it got animated and a few had a dig, was amusing watching it happen, by the end of it I was confused.

 

[duncan mackie]

From what I could gather he was saying something along the lines of, the trolley was not deemed as players equipment but the glove is!
I believe it would be a penalty if it caused the ball to move, but simply landing on the sand I didn't think so.

Indeed. My point was that the clue was in claiming that it was a 1 shot penalty; any breach of 13-4 (prohibited actions when ball in a bunker would carry a 2 shot penalty). The reference to touching the bunker with a towel in 13-4/0.5 confirms that this doesn't constitute testing the hazard - and a towel would have the same status (equipement) as a glove.

As others have clarified, the exception to 13-4 for clubs placed includes thrown, dumped and driven in a buggy. So not quite rubbish but taken to far with the glove, presumably for effect. However, it's possible that within his explanation he included loose impediments with the falling glove; it would only need to touch one in the hazard to create a penalty (2 shots not one)

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Indeed. My point was that the clue was in claiming that it was a 1 shot penalty; any breach of 13-4 (prohibited actions when ball in a bunker would carry a 2 shot penalty). The reference to touching the bunker with a towel in 13-4/0.5 confirms that this doesn't constitute testing the hazard - and a towel would have the same status (equipement) as a glove.

As others have clarified, the exception to 13-4 for clubs placed includes thrown, dumped and driven in a buggy. So not quite rubbish but taken to far with the glove, presumably for effect. However, it's possible that within his explanation he included loose impediments with the falling glove; it would only need to touch one in the hazard to create a penalty (2 shots not one)

Thanks Duncan

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Indeed. My point was that the clue was in claiming that it was a 1 shot penalty; any breach of 13-4 (prohibited actions when ball in a bunker would carry a 2 shot penalty). The reference to touching the bunker with a towel in 13-4/0.5 confirms that this doesn't constitute testing the hazard - and a towel would have the same status (equipement) as a glove.

As others have clarified, the exception to 13-4 for clubs placed includes thrown, dumped and driven in a buggy. So not quite rubbish but taken to far with the glove, presumably for effect. However, it's possible that within his explanation he included loose impediments with the falling glove; it would only need to touch one in the hazard to create a penalty (2 shots not one)

And if you accidentally drop a club into the bunker your ball is in, or if you use a club to hook up a rake lying in the bunker and touch the sand in doing so - both no penalty - is my believe?

 

[rulie]

And if you accidentally drop a club into the bunker your ball is in, or if you use a club to hook up a rake lying in the bunker and touch the sand in doing so - both no penalty - is my belief?

Your belief is correct.

 

[backwoodsman]

Indeed. My point was that the clue was in claiming that it was a 1 shot penalty; any breach of 13-4 (prohibited actions when ball in a bunker would carry a 2 shot penalty). The reference to touching the bunker with a towel in 13-4/0.5 confirms that this doesn't constitute testing the hazard - and a towel would have the same status (equipement) as a glove.

As others have clarified, the exception to 13-4 for clubs placed includes thrown, dumped and driven in a buggy. So not quite rubbish but taken to far with the glove, presumably for effect. However, it's possible that within his explanation he included loose impediments with the falling glove; it would only need to touch one in the hazard to create a penalty (2 shots not one)

Duncan, is that correct ? Decision 13-4/13 indicates that accidentally moving a loose impediment doesn't incur a penalty (if not relevant to the ball/stroke etc) - or am I missing something?

 

[rulefan]

Duncan, is that correct ? Decision 13-4/13 indicates that accidentally moving a loose impediment doesn't incur a penalty (if not relevant to the ball/stroke etc) - or am I missing something?

Picking a loose impediment would not be accidental.

 

[duncan mackie]

Duncan, is that correct ? Decision 13-4/13 indicates that accidentally moving a loose impediment doesn't incur a penalty (if not relevant to the ball/stroke etc) - or am I missing something?

It's my understanding (if it came to me for a ruling I would happily refer it up!)

There are a number of exceptions to 13-4c and within those exceptions the moving of a LI accidentally is permissable eg walking to ball, taking stance, moving obstruction...I take 13-4/13 as confirming this (but accept that it's not written conditionally).
To support my view you have 13-4/33 where it's accidental and there's no conditional that it improves lie/stroke etc (although I accept that there's an implication from the situation).

 

[backwoodsman]

Picking a loose impediment would not be accidental.

It's my understanding (if it came to me for a ruling I would happily refer it up!)

There are a number of exceptions to 13-4c and within those exceptions the moving of a LI accidentally is permissable eg walking to ball, taking stance, moving obstruction...I take 13-4/13 as confirming this (but accept that it's not written conditionally).
To support my view you have 13-4/33 where it's accidental and there's no conditional that it improves lie/stroke etc (although I accept that there's an implication from the situation).

Rulefan, Duncan: I wasn't thinking of an LI being picked up. Was just taking the OP description of the scenario being a glove accidentally dropping out of the back pocket? If it was on a LI near enough to possibly affect the ball/stance/area of swing I can see a penalty being necessary - but if not near enough to affect these, then thought it would fit the 13-4/13 situation ???

 

[Foxholer]

Sat having a brew after playing today and was listening to a discussion in the bar.

One of the guys convinced all around the table that you could take your trolley into a bunker with no penalty, but, if you had a glove in your back pocket and whilst stood in the bunker it fell out onto the sand, it was a one shot penalty, discussion got animated and a few accused him of talking rubbish, eventually he had convinced them all.
Was he spreading a myth or was he correct?

Notwithstanding several possible scenarios not included in the description (and the value of any penalty), the guy was talking twaddle!

 

[rulefan]

Bwm

I would agree with 13-4/13