One Planer
Global Moderator
I'm hoping someone can tell me whether I was in the right, or the wrong on this.
Last night I played a few holes of twilight golf with a work collegue.
Our second hole is a 330 yard par 4, with a tree lined fairway. I hit my tee shot a little left of where I was intending, straight into a tree.
We walkd down to the tree in question, looked around on the floor, but the ball was nowhere to be found. I looked up into the tree and could see my ball, sat in a crease in the bark where the branch of the tree joins the trunk.
I could positively identify it as mine, due to how my ball is marked, as the logo (Titleist) and my mark (Blue dot next to the 'T' of Titleist) were clearly visable from the ground. The ball was too high to be recoverd.
This is when the discussion started.
I argued that because I could positively identify that it was my ball. The ball was not 'lost' but in an unplayable lie. I should be able to take a drop there, at the base of the tree (2 club lengths),under penalty, and play my 3rd shot from there.
My partner argued that, although I could identify may ball, the ball was effectively 'lost' and I would have to go back to the tee box and play 3 off the tee.
As it was just a knock, I did as per my thoughts, with his agreement (Under protest ). It just so happend I hit the ball to 2 feet and tapped in for what I considered 'Par'.
Could someon clarify who was correct in the above scenario?
Last night I played a few holes of twilight golf with a work collegue.
Our second hole is a 330 yard par 4, with a tree lined fairway. I hit my tee shot a little left of where I was intending, straight into a tree.
We walkd down to the tree in question, looked around on the floor, but the ball was nowhere to be found. I looked up into the tree and could see my ball, sat in a crease in the bark where the branch of the tree joins the trunk.
I could positively identify it as mine, due to how my ball is marked, as the logo (Titleist) and my mark (Blue dot next to the 'T' of Titleist) were clearly visable from the ground. The ball was too high to be recoverd.
This is when the discussion started.
I argued that because I could positively identify that it was my ball. The ball was not 'lost' but in an unplayable lie. I should be able to take a drop there, at the base of the tree (2 club lengths),under penalty, and play my 3rd shot from there.
My partner argued that, although I could identify may ball, the ball was effectively 'lost' and I would have to go back to the tee box and play 3 off the tee.
As it was just a knock, I did as per my thoughts, with his agreement (Under protest ). It just so happend I hit the ball to 2 feet and tapped in for what I considered 'Par'.
Could someon clarify who was correct in the above scenario?