March Issue Test your Knowledge No3

[pelican55]

Is the answer correct?the rule 12.2 says otherwise.

 

[Colin L]

I'm in France just now so haven't seen the March issue. Can you indicate what the question and answer were?

 

[DCB]

Is the answer correct?the rule 12.2 says otherwise.

The ball was not marked before it was touched/moved/rotated hence the penalty of one stroke.

 

[backwoodsman]

The ball was not marked before it was touched/moved/rotated hence the penalty of one stroke.

Ditto.

 

[palindromicbob]

Colin. The example is basically a guy who attempts to identify a ball in a bunker under the procedure laid down in rule 12-2 but does not mark it.

Failure to mark means he didn't comply fully with the procedure laid down under 12-2.

It could also be argued that he should have progressed first under 12-1 and moved the sand not the ball therefore lifting/touching to identify the ball shouldn't have been necessary. Had he removed the sand he would not have been required to mark the ball and had the ball moved during the removal of sand he would have to replace it without penalty. He would then be required to recreate the original lie

 

[Colin L]

Thanks for taking that trouble, Bob. I agree, the better plan in those circumstances is first to brush the sand away to look for your identification mark and only if you can't then see it, mark and lift/rotate the ball.

 

[CMAC]

I keep a Paleantologist brush in my bag for just such occasions:smirk:

 

[JezzE]

Colin. The example is basically a guy who attempts to identify a ball in a bunker under the procedure laid down in rule 12-2 but does not mark it.

Failure to mark means he didn't comply fully with the procedure laid down under 12-2.

It could also be argued that he should have progressed first under 12-1 and moved the sand not the ball therefore lifting/touching to identify the ball shouldn't have been necessary. Had he removed the sand he would not have been required to mark the ball and had the ball moved during the removal of sand he would have to replace it without penalty. He would then be required to recreate the original lie

This is spot on.

We have had a number of queries about this question this month and will be running one of those emails with an R&A reply in the next issue, but palindromicbob has got it absolutely right here, with the player's initial actions indicating that he was proceeding under 12.2 rather than 12.1 and is therefore penalised for failing to mark his ball