Is it worth it - again??

[palindromicbob]

As I understand it, YES. Once you have played 3 off the tee then that is the ball in play - even if you find the original ball, in play or not.

As I understand it, NO, No, No.... If you are VC that the ball is in the water hazard and playing another off the tee, then you are playing 3 off the tee, not a provisional. You can't play a provisional just in case you can't find the original that may/may not be in a water hazard because if you are not VC that it is in and can't find it, then it isn't in and is lost.

If I'm wrong then I accept the incoming flak. If I'm right then someone far more erudite than me will explain the rule in easy to assimulate way.

Why is rule 27-2 seemingly so hard to grasp.

If you hit a ball toward a hazard and it may be lost outside the hazard then you may announce your intention to play a provisional. If you get to the area and fail to find the ball and there is no information to indicate that the ball is in the hazard then the ball is considered to have been lost outside the hazard and you can continue play with the provisional.

If information becomes available that indicates the ball is lost in the hazard (such as someone in another group telling you they saw it go in the water) then you can take options available under rule 26-1 and the provisional must be abandoned unless a local rule is in place to prevent you taking the options for relief under rule 26-1.

See decision 26-1/1 which clarifies the meaning of known or virtually certain.

 

[delc]

If you are uncertain that a ball has entered a water hazard and may be lost or OOB, you can play a provisional ball. If you find the original ball either inside or outside the water hazard you must abandon the provisional ball and continue as normal including any penalty strokes under Rule 26-1 if in the hazard. If you can't find the original ball, then it is lost and you continue with the provisional ball under stroke and distance penalty.

P.S. Decision 27-2a/2.2 covers this scenario.

Q. Is it true that, if a player’s original ball may have come to rest in a water hazard, the player is precluded from playing a provisional ball?

A. No. Even though the original ball may be in a water hazard, the player is entitled to play a provisional ball if the original ball might also be lost outside the water hazard or out of bounds. In such a case, if the original ball is found in the water hazard, the provisional ball must be abandoned – Rule 27–2c.

 

[Leftie]

Must remember not to post when it's way past my bedtime.

 

[rickg]

Must remember not to post when DelC posts

Corrected! :whoo:

 

[pogle]

Hardly anyone knows all the rules so its likely we've all transgressed and benefitted (or not) from a situation where we shouldn't, that's not cheating in my opinion and when it happens we hope we learn the correct action in the future. I just worry when people play regularly in competitions and don't even know the very basics and, like I had last week, someone who acknowledged that I do study the rules and that he didn't, but argued vehemently that if you play a provisional and find your first ball in a water hazard you have to play the provisional come what may! How many others will he misadvise

Chris,

You mentioned in your previous thread that you hope to take a rules course in the future and perhaps gain more credibility by doing so. (This is from memory so forgive me if I've got it wrong). Believe me, even when you're refereeing at a tournament , you will still find someone prepared to argue that you're wrong over even the most basic stuff.

 

[Leftie]

In my defemce, your honour, in his post to which I replied there was no suggestion that the ball might have gone OOB or lost in the dodah.



Nursie. My Horlicks and medication please.

 

[chrisd]

Chris,

You mentioned in your previous thread that you hope to take a rules course in the future and perhaps gain more credibility by doing so. (This is from memory so forgive me if I've got it wrong). Believe me, even when you're refereeing at a tournament , you will still find someone prepared to argue that you're wrong over even the most basic stuff.

I'm sure that you're right! I'm just not good at saying " well if that's what you think, good luck" when they argue for half an hour over it

 

[palindromicbob]

Chris,

You mentioned in your previous thread that you hope to take a rules course in the future and perhaps gain more credibility by doing so. (This is from memory so forgive me if I've got it wrong). Believe me, even when you're refereeing at a tournament , you will still find someone prepared to argue that you're wrong over even the most basic stuff.

Did Monty not argue with a ref at the USPGA because the NPR for relief from casual water was in the first cut and his ball was on the fairway?

 

[chrisd]

Did Monty not argue with a ref at the USPGA because the NPR for relief from casual water was in the first cut and his ball was on the fairway?

He did mention it during his commentary afterwards. At the end of the day rules is rules!

 

[Colin L]

And when he turned into a commentator later he was talking about how ridiculous it was to hit a drive straight down the middle and end up dropping off the fairway. Perhaps he was more arguing that play should still have been suspended than about where his NPR was? I'm not sure.

 

[rulefan]

Did Monty not argue with a ref at the USPGA because the NPR for relief from casual water was in the first cut and his ball was on the fairway?

I wonder if he would have been so upset if his ball had been in the rough in CW and the relief was on the fairway?

 

[MadAdey]

You can't play a provisional just in case you can't find the original that may/may not be in a water hazard because if you are not VC that it is in and can't find it, then it isn't in and is lost. .

i thought that was the idea of hitting a provisionalprovisional

 

[Fyldewhite]

i thought that was the idea of hitting a provisionalprovisional

Just to add to this. I think what confuses the issue are the words.....as always follow literally. You can hit a provisional if your ball may be lost outside a hazard. At the time you do this on the tee it may not be virtually certain that the ball is in the hazard (the surrounding ground conditions etc may be a factor in deciding). If, on the other hand you are stood on the tee and see the ball skipping 3 times over a pond only to sink in the middle, or your mates on the next hole start making swimming actions and laughing etc then it's virtually certain straight away and you can't hit a provisional (would be 3 off the tee).

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Just to add to this. I think what confuses the issue are the words.....as always follow literally. You can hit a provisional if your ball may be lost outside a hazard. At the time you do this on the tee it may not be virtually certain that the ball is in the hazard (the surrounding ground conditions etc may be a factor in deciding). If, on the other hand you are stood on the tee and see the ball skipping 3 times over a pond only to sink in the middle, or your mates on the next hole start making swimming actions and laughing etc then it's virtually certain straight away and you can't hit a provisional (would be 3 off the tee).

So in the context of a ball going into a water hazard - as Known is equivalent to Virtually Certain (because they are used together separated by the word 'or') - if I know that my ball has gone straight into the water hazard then I cannot play a provisional. You just wouldn't would you - you know your ball is in the water! If I play another ball at that point I know I am putting another ball into play. And so if my ball is VC to have gone into the hazard - with Known and VC being equivalent - then a second ball I play at that point is the ball in play.

I admit that I hadn't really thought this through in accordance with the rules - though the occasions I have to consider this are very, very rare (no water at around my track and I don't play away from home very much)

 

[MadAdey]

Just to add to this. I think what confuses the issue are the words.....as always follow literally. You can hit a provisional if your ball may be lost outside a hazard. At the time you do this on the tee it may not be virtually certain that the ball is in the hazard (the surrounding ground conditions etc may be a factor in deciding). If, on the other hand you are stood on the tee and see the ball skipping 3 times over a pond only to sink in the middle, or your mates on the next hole start making swimming actions and laughing etc then it's virtually certain straight away and you can't hit a provisional (would be 3 off the tee).

That was a reply to what leftie said. Everyone knows that if you are VC it is in a hazard then you go and play under penalty of a stroke, but leftie said "it may/may not be in the hazard" so that says that you are entitled to play a provissional.

 

[AmandaJR]

I had my own partner argue with me today in a foursomes match regarding a concession. We conceded a putt and the player looked as if she might knock it in so my partner shrieked "don't do that, if you miss..." etc. So when I explained the rule she said someone told her that if it's conceded but putted out and missed it counts. Explained the rule again which all 3 accepted but then heard some comment about "straight from the rule book"...I figure rather that than straight from the mouths of folk who haven't a clue what they're talking about but accept as gospel something somebody told them sometime ago!

 

[MadAdey]

I had my own partner argue with me today in a foursomes match regarding a concession. We conceded a putt and the player looked as if she might knock it in so my partner shrieked "don't do that, if you miss..." etc. So when I explained the rule she said someone told her that if it's conceded but putted out and missed it counts. Explained the rule again which all 3 accepted but then heard some comment about "straight from the rule book"...I figure rather that than straight from the mouths of folk who haven't a clue what they're talking about but accept as gospel something somebody told them sometime ago!

I think you have highlighted the problem, a lot of players do not actually read or use a rule book so most of what they know is from hearsay from someone else who has never picked the rule book up. I will never claim to be a master of the rules, but I do carry a copy in my bag should I ever need it as you do not need legal training to work it out.

 

[chrisd]

I had my own partner argue with me today in a foursomes match regarding a concession. We conceded a putt and the player looked as if she might knock it in so my partner shrieked "don't do that, if you miss..." etc. So when I explained the rule she said someone told her that if it's conceded but putted out and missed it counts. Explained the rule again which all 3 accepted but then heard some comment about "straight from the rule book"...I figure rather that than straight from the mouths of folk who haven't a clue what they're talking about but accept as gospel something somebody told them sometime ago!

It works the other way sometimes Amanda, in a 4bbb final my playing partner was going to putt simply so I could read the line, they said that he can't putt as he already had played more shots than they were in for, we went ahead much to their annoyance and after the hole finished I said that if they had only conceded his putt he would have had to accept the concession and pick up. Luckily we had a referee walking with us!

 

[AmandaJR]

It works the other way sometimes Amanda, in a 4bbb final my playing partner was going to putt simply so I could read the line, they said that he can't putt as he already had played more shots than they were in for, we went ahead much to their annoyance and after the hole finished I said that if they had only conceded his putt he would have had to accept the concession and pick up. Luckily we had a referee walking with us!

I went on to explain that element of the rule too - until I got the glazed eyes looks! On the next hole my partner whispered to me "she's not allowed to do that" as an opponent marked her ball and then took some time re-adjusting it until she was happy with the line on the ball being in the right spot. Again I said what was actually correct so long as her marker remained in place but could tell that one wasn't going in either because "someone told me"...why don't they listen to the someone who has taken the time to find out the correct rule??

 

[chrisd]

I


why don't they listen to the someone who has taken the time to find out the correct rule??

Exactly what I asked a guy last week!