Level of rules awareness to expect in UK

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

17-4/1

Ball Resting Against Flagstick Lifted Before Being Holed

Q.A player's ball is resting against the flagstick, but it is not holed because all of it is not below the level of the lip of the hole. However, the player, believing the ball is holed, picks it up. What is the ruling?
A.The player incurs a penalty stroke under Rule 20-1 for lifting his ball without marking its position. The player must replace the ball against the flagstick and may then apply Rule 17-4.

17-4. Ball Resting Against Flagstick

When a player’s ball rests against the flagstick in the hole and the ball is notholed, the player or another person authorized by him may move or remove the flagstick, and if the ball falls into the hole, the player is deemed to haveholed out with his last stroke; otherwise, the ball, if moved, must be placed on the lip of the hole, without penalty.

Ah - one shot pen - I felt a 2 shot pen was too harsh

 

[rulefan]

Sure, please let me know their opinion. I believe the conditions are crucial in this. You can have two very similar situations with different rulings on this. I think the important is the intention of the player who reported late and his ability to report early.

Whilst it may not be courteous or friendly, there is no rule requiring a player to prevent another player breaching a rule.
As it happens a referee has a duty to do so.

If the R&A/USGA had wanted to make it a breach they would have done so before now.

 

[woody69]

Ah - one shot pen - I felt a 2 shot pen was too harsh

Yeah one shot penalty for lifting without marking, but if he replaces it against the flagstick, lifts and the ball comes out, he gets to place it on the lip and tap it in effectively dropping 2 shots for a silly error.

 

[Foxholer]

Yeah one shot penalty for lifting without marking, but if he replaces it against the flagstick, lifts and the ball comes out, he gets to place it on the lip and tap it in effectively dropping 2 shots for a silly error.

Better that than a DQ for not finishing the hole!

 

[Colin L]

I thought that was what you meant, but needed to check.

While a fairly reprehensible act, I'm uncertain that a DQ (presumably under 1.4) is appropriate.

Maybe ColinL, or Rulefan, as qualified Refs, could comment.

The only possible rule which could be applied is 33-7 which allows the Committee to disqualify for a serious breach of etiquette but whilst deliberately not telling someone that he is about to play outside the teeing ground is very bad form, I wouldn't consider that this is what is meant by a "serious breach" of etiquette. In practical terms, who is going to admit to it anyway? If you are of mind to be that nasty, you wouldn't hesitate to lie and just say you didn't realise until it was too late. Too difficult to prove but certainly if there were suspicions, it could be worthy of a word with the player(s) concerned on a club basis.

 

[Foxholer]

Whilst it may not be courteous or friendly, there is no rule requiring a player to prevent another player breaching a rule.
As it happens a referee has a duty to do so.

If the R&A/USGA had wanted to make it a breach they would have done so before now.

The only possible rule which could be applied is 33-7 which allows the Committee to disqualify for a serious breach of etiquette but whilst deliberately not telling someone that he is about to play outside the teeing ground is very bad form, I wouldn't consider that this is what is meant by a "serious breach" of etiquette. In practical terms, who is going to admit to it anyway? If you are of mind to be that nasty, you wouldn't hesitate to lie and just say you didn't realise until it was too late. Too difficult to prove but certainly if there were suspicions, it could be worthy of a word with the player(s) concerned on a club basis.

Thanks guys...As I thought.

 

[dejf]

The only possible rule which could be applied is 33-7 which allows the Committee to disqualify for a serious breach of etiquette but whilst deliberately not telling someone that he is about to play outside the teeing ground is very bad form, I wouldn't consider that this is what is meant by a "serious breach" of etiquette. In practical terms, who is going to admit to it anyway? If you are of mind to be that nasty, you wouldn't hesitate to lie and just say you didn't realise until it was too late. Too difficult to prove but certainly if there were suspicions, it could be worthy of a word with the player(s) concerned on a club basis.

Interesting. I won't be probably able to find that ruling, so can't really argue about that, but I just can't imagine what could be worse than that and thus considered as a serious breach of etiquette. For me, this act would be the purest example of behavior against sportsmanship.

 

[Tashyboy]

In essence I tend to think that if you play off 28 your knowledge of the rules is to a 28 standard. If you play off scratch your knowledge is more or less scratch.
I think that there are definately exceptions to the rule, eg even pros get it wrong.

 

[palindromicbob]

In essence I tend to think that if you play off 28 your knowledge of the rules is to a 28 standard. If you play off scratch your knowledge is more or less scratch.
I think that there are definately exceptions to the rule, eg even pros get it wrong.

It's not a great way to think of it imo. How many times has a myth been posted starting with. "The club pro..." or " A guy at the club who plays off scratch said...."

 

[MadAdey]

Tell thing that I have always unbelievable is the fact that some golfers do not know what to do when in a hazard, wether it be yellow or red staked and the options open to them. Others do not understand how to take free relief from things like GUR and staked trees, c'mon people it is the nearest point of relief not the position that gives you the best angle on your next shot.

People need to get a grip with the basic rules that they encounter every round. At times circumstances arise that are difficult to work out, for instance:

"I hit my tee shot into the trees, I declare a provisional and hit that into play. I find my original ball and chip it out of the trees. I then hit it again at a point past where my provisional is lying. I pick up my provisional and proceed to my ball, but when I get to it I realize that it is not my ball"

what should I do next and how many shots have I played. That was a genuine question on the golf referee exam in Wales as told to me by an old golfing pal of my dads who was a qualified referee.

 

[Foxholer]

In essence I tend to think that if you play off 28 your knowledge of the rules is to a 28 standard. If you play off scratch your knowledge is more or less scratch.
I think that there are definately exceptions to the rule, eg even pros get it wrong.

H'mm! I'm not certain about that analogy!

While a 28-capper is likely to know/understand the rules less than a lower one, they are also far more likely to encounter situations where a knowledge of the rules is required/helps. So those who realise and act upon that fact will tend to get a better knowledge of them than others. Likewise, there comes a point where low-cappers get stale and don't keep up with changes or even encounter situations where rules knowledge can help.

I wouldn't think that a Scratch player has much, if any, better knowledge of the Rules than an 8-10 capper. And Pros certainly should not be considered as Rules experts!

 

[Colin L]

In essence I tend to think that if you play off 28 your knowledge of the rules is to a 28 standard. If you play off scratch your knowledge is more or less scratch.
I think that there are definately exceptions to the rule, eg even pros get it wrong.

If your knowledge is scratch, does that not mean you know nothing?

Now, I know that's not what you meant and so for what it is worth, there are two qualified referees in my club: my handicap is 17 and my colleague's is higher than that. On two occasions last season, I had to put two former club champions right on rules matters. None of which really signifies much. Generalising from particulars is a dangerous process.

 

[North Mimms]

"I hit my tee shot into the trees, I declare a provisional and hit that into play. I find my original ball and chip it out of the trees. I then hit it again at a point past where my provisional is lying. I pick up my provisional and proceed to my ball, but when I get to it I realize that it is not my ball"

The correct answer to this question is "get new glasses"

 

[dejf]

The only possible rule which could be applied is 33-7 which allows the Committee to disqualify for a serious breach of etiquette but whilst deliberately not telling someone that he is about to play outside the teeing ground is very bad form, I wouldn't consider that this is what is meant by a "serious breach" of etiquette. In practical terms, who is going to admit to it anyway? If you are of mind to be that nasty, you wouldn't hesitate to lie and just say you didn't realise until it was too late. Too difficult to prove but certainly if there were suspicions, it could be worthy of a word with the player(s) concerned on a club basis.

Colin L: One last thought on this, if I may. What do you think, in this very context, of 33-7/9? Does it not give us a clue on what a serious breach is here? In our situation, the intentions of the FC and his behavior are the same as in this decision, just the consequences are slightly worse for the player.

 

[dejf]

Tell thing that I have always unbelievable is the fact that some golfers do not know what to do when in a hazard, wether it be yellow or red staked and the options open to them. Others do not understand how to take free relief from things like GUR and staked trees, c'mon people it is the nearest point of relief not the position that gives you the best angle on your next shot.

People need to get a grip with the basic rules that they encounter every round. At times circumstances arise that are difficult to work out, for instance:

"I hit my tee shot into the trees, I declare a provisional and hit that into play. I find my original ball and chip it out of the trees. I then hit it again at a point past where my provisional is lying. I pick up my provisional and proceed to my ball, but when I get to it I realize that it is not my ball"

what should I do next and how many shots have I played. That was a genuine question on the golf referee exam in Wales as told to me by an old golfing pal of my dads who was a qualified referee.

Yes, these are, in my opinion, the hardest things in rules among those that actually happen quite often (that is probably why they put them in the exams ...). I always lose the count somewhere in the middle.
I can remember the crucial is "Strokes made by a competitor with a wrong ball do not count in his score" and then it should be "just" the math.

 

[Colin L]

It's a bit more than just the maths. It depends on finding the original ball or not. When the player realises he has played a wrong ball he should correct that by finding and playing the correct ball. If he can do that he will be playing his 4th stroke with it. (1 off the tee, 2 penalty strokes for wrong ball). If he cannot find his original ball, he must continue with his provisional ball by replacing it (if he knows the exact spot) or more likely dropping as near to where it had been. He will then be playing his 7th stroke (1 off the tee, 2 penalty strokes for wrong ball, 1 penalty stroke for lost ball, stroke from tee with provisional ball and 1 penalty stroke for having moved his provisional ball).

 

[Colin L]

Colin L: One last thought on this, if I may. What do you think, in this very context, of 33-7/9? Does it not give us a clue on what a serious breach is here? In our situation, the intentions of the FC and his behavior are the same as in this decision, just the consequences are slightly worse for the player.

I see these as quite different situations. Our player who doesn't tell his FC he has played outside the teeing ground till after he has played has behaved badly, but he has not, as the player in 33-7/9 connived to ignore someone else's breach of the rules with the deliberate intention of allowing him to submit a false score. The implication in 33-7/9 is of deliberate deceit with the purpose of assisting another player to cheat. That's a long way from our man who has drawn his FC's attention to a breach and ensured that the penalty is applied and the correct procedure followed. His timing may be dodgy, but his belated action is correct.

 

[rulefan]

Exactly.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

If I was playing Matchplay against someone and they played from the wrong tee as is being discussed, could this be pointed out and I say to him, no penalty take it from the correct place? Obviously if I saw it about to happen I would stop them before the shot was taken but if I was rummaging in my bag I may miss it. Assuming we got on I would not want them to be penalised for something that is silly rather than deliberate. I understand in strokeplay there are other people to consider but in Matchplay it is only me. Can I make that call or is the penalty automatic?

 

[chrisd]

If I was playing Matchplay against someone and they played from the wrong tee as is being discussed, could this be pointed out and I say to him, no penalty take it from the correct place? Obviously if I saw it about to happen I would stop them before the shot was taken but if I was rummaging in my bag I may miss it. Assuming we got on I would not want them to be penalised for something that is silly rather than deliberate. I understand in strokeplay there are other people to consider but in Matchplay it is only me. Can I make that call or is the penalty automatic?

You can overlook it in Matchplay, in any event there is no penalty and you can only ask the player to play again from inside the teeing area