I don't care if rules are rules, they need some discretion

Just not very well. :D
Click to expand...
Which bit do you need explaining?

In the above scenario there is no penalty for accidentally moving a ball in play if moved accidentally. However, if I spot the ball in the same hazard and intentionally give it a bit of leather wedge, there is a penalty.

Same lie different outcome, depending on intent.

Better?
 
Do you really believe those two scenarios to be the same or are you just being pedantic to try to back up your thoughts?
 
Do you really believe those two scenarios to be the same or are you just being pedantic to try to back up your thoughts?
Click to expand...

I don't see any pedantry, just a good example of how 'intent' is already in place in some rules of golf, so there is already a precedent in place to consider including it in future rule changes.

I think it's a good point, well made.

But I think it would be wrong to increase it's use into general play.

:p
 
I would also add, in those two scenarios, intent is normally easier to prove.

In the case of teeing off, if you've not addressed the ball and swung, then hit it, unless you have an unusual technique, its obvious you were not planning to hit the ball. Same if you address the ball and knock it off the peg, unless you have a 2" backswing normally, we can see it wasn't a normal stroke.

In the case of a ball in the rough, I would expect this rule came about, because when a ball is sitting down, accidentally moving it may be a completely unavoidable situation, and the only way to locate it. The same is not really true on a perfectly manicured green.
 
Kicking a ball you can see and touching a ball whilst searching for it under loose impediments are now the same?

Interesting. :D
 
I think if you move it in the rough while trying to find it, that's a penalty too. This is why pro's let the crowds and their partners do the finding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top