Matchplay - Foursomes / Lining up a playing partner (2 parts)

[Steven Rules]

The penalty relates to the player making the stroke, not merely commencing to take a stance.

Salfordlad covered it in #20. The penalty can be avoided if the player and the other person (i.e. caddie/partner) back away before the stroke is made. The player would then re-take their stance with nobody standing in the restricted area. Rule 10.2b(4)

 

[salfordlad]

I know this is an old thread that I am writing in, but I read them occasionally to help me learn the rules, which I’m no expert on, but as savvy as most at our club

Re the above. - Having read posts 5 and 6, I then understood that the rule was breached as soon as the putter took his stance ( one foot was mentioned as taking stance?)
It did occur to me then, that if there was an occasion where the putter took his stance before the other chap had chance to move, then both then realising they were in danger of breaking the rule if he went ahead and putted, and so moving away to line up again,would be too late. Which would be really horrendous.
But these answers didn’t seem to make it clear….
Is it stance or stroke?
This is hypothetical in that I personally would not invoke a penalty at all if I was in a match and this happened. If I saw such assistance given by my opponents, the most I would do would be afterwards to give a quiet word of advice for future reference.
Anyone wanting to win a hole by demanding a penalty is iffy, in my book.

You have taken my words entirely out of context. Those words you cite (post #20) do not relate to the OP at all but solely to Orikuro's post #8, a very different scenario to the OP. Different facts get a different answer.
If you have further uncertainties in your mind, please state them in their entirety and they can be answered on their merits.

 

[louise_a]

I was playing last week mentioned this, both of the women I was playing with said their husbands lined up their putts and other shots. They did not know it was not allowed.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

You have taken my words entirely out of context. Those words you cite (post #20) do not relate to the OP at all but solely to Orikuro's post #8, a very different scenario to the OP. Different facts get a different answer.
If you have further uncertainties in your mind, please state them in their entirety and they can be answered on their merits.

No uncertainty worth worrying about about on a rule which I have said I wouldn’t invoke, whether there was a difference in stance or stroke depending on context
( though posts 11-13 seem to have no worry about context)
I would bet there are more playing golf in ignorance of this rule, than those who are aware of it - which I think may be a good thing

 

[rulie]

No uncertainty worth worrying about about on a rule which I have said I wouldn’t invoke, whether there was a difference in stance or stroke depending on context
( though posts 11-13 seem to have no worry about context)
I would bet there are more playing golf in ignorance of this rule, than those who are aware of it - which I think may be a good thing

You may choose to not apply this Rule to your opponents’ actions, but the opponents have every right to right to apply it to your side.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

You may choose to not apply this Rule to your opponents’ actions, but the opponents have every right to right to apply it to your side.

Yes, exactly. And I would accept that ( and form an opinion)
But to expand a little. I wouldn’t invoke it the first time, but , if having had a quiet word in between holes…. “ you know, that’s not really allowed but we/ I haven’t worried about it this time”, it is deliberately repeated , then I would take a different view.
A deliberate flouting of a rule , once politely pointed out, would call for a different reaction.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

As a result of SalfordLad telling me , quite rightly, to look beyond a first understanding , I have read the rule 10, and I’d be interested to see views about this rule and how I can see it’s intention ( by the rule makers)able to be overcome by a cunning player.
I know it’s unlikely, that we wouldn’t bother, etc, but is it a possible workaround?

1. The putter takes his stance, and his caddie( partner) stands in the restricted area and helps the putter line up. The putter mentally notes a point on the green not far in front of him that his club is lined up on.
I’ve seen this promoted as an aid to good putting in that the point, close to , is where to aim just before the stroke.
Before an attempt at the stroke , the putter and caddie move away from the stance and restricted area.
Potential penalty now avoided.
The putter resumes his stance . Alone. Caddie is well away from the area.
The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green , aims and makes his stroke.

Is this not a feasible way of getting away with assistance a putter isn’t meant to get? . To my mind it is a silly mistake to put that ‘get out’ in the rule.
I assume that the rule makers thought that when the putter resumes, having walked away and without the caddie, that he is starting ‘ with a clean sheet’, as it were. But, is he?

Personal opinion re this rule
Players playing as individuals , caddies should not be allowed on the green at all .
Only the player to assess his putt.
As for the occasions when the putter is in a team competition, then IMO, another team member should be allowed to assist .

 

[doublebogey7]

As a result of SalfordLad telling me , quite rightly, to look beyond a first understanding , I have read the rule 10, and I’d be interested to see views about this rule and how I can see it’s intention ( by the rule makers)able to be overcome by a cunning player.
I know it’s unlikely, that we wouldn’t bother, etc, but is it a possible workaround?

1. The putter takes his stance, and his caddie( partner) stands in the restricted area and helps the putter line up. The putter mentally notes a point on the green not far in front of him that his club is lined up on.
I’ve seen this promoted as an aid to good putting in that the point, close to , is where to aim just before the stroke.
Before an attempt at the stroke , the putter and caddie move away from the stance and restricted area.
Potential penalty now avoided.
The putter resumes his stance . Alone. Caddie is well away from the area.
The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green , aims and makes his stroke.

Is this not a feasible way of getting away with assistance a putter isn’t meant to get? . To my mind it is a silly mistake to put that ‘get out’ in the rule.
I assume that the rule makers thought that when the putter resumes, having walked away and without the caddie, that he is starting ‘ with a clean sheet’, as it were. But, is he?

Personal opinion re this rule
Players playing as individuals , caddies should not be allowed on the green at all .
Only the player to assess his putt.
As for the occasions when the putter is in a team competition, then IMO, another team member should be allowed to assist .

How is the player ganing any more advantage than if the caddie had simply pointed out a place on the ground where the player should lie uip their putter too. Nothing thier against the rules either, effect is the same, so not sure why thew rule makers would be concerned.

 

[clubchamp98]

As a result of SalfordLad telling me , quite rightly, to look beyond a first understanding , I have read the rule 10, and I’d be interested to see views about this rule and how I can see it’s intention ( by the rule makers)able to be overcome by a cunning player.
I know it’s unlikely, that we wouldn’t bother, etc, but is it a possible workaround?

1. The putter takes his stance, and his caddie( partner) stands in the restricted area and helps the putter line up. The putter mentally notes a point on the green not far in front of him that his club is lined up on.
I’ve seen this promoted as an aid to good putting in that the point, close to , is where to aim just before the stroke.
Before an attempt at the stroke , the putter and caddie move away from the stance and restricted area.
Potential penalty now avoided.
The putter resumes his stance . Alone. Caddie is well away from the area.
The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green , aims and makes his stroke.

Is this not a feasible way of getting away with assistance a putter isn’t meant to get? . To my mind it is a silly mistake to put that ‘get out’ in the rule.
I assume that the rule makers thought that when the putter resumes, having walked away and without the caddie, that he is starting ‘ with a clean sheet’, as it were. But, is he?

Personal opinion re this rule
Players playing as individuals , caddies should not be allowed on the green at all .
Only the player to assess his putt.
As for the occasions when the putter is in a team competition, then IMO, another team member should be allowed to assist .

Who attends or takes out the flag?

I agree though nobody should help in lining up anywhere
That’s the skill in golf some have it some struggle.!

 

[Steven Rules]

I know it’s unlikely,

It's not unlikely. It happens a lot. In fact, at the elite level, the caddie pointing out a spot on the putting green probably happens more often than not.

The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green

As you say, picking a spot on the green to aim at is a well recognised putting technique. Since 2019 it has been permissible to actually touch that spot prior to making the stroke.

Nothing 'cunning' (your word) or underhand about it. All perfectly llegal and within both the letter and spirit of the Rule.

Nothing to see here.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

It's not unlikely. It happens a lot. In fact, at the elite level, the caddie pointing out a spot on the putting green probably happens more often than not.


As you say, picking a spot on the green to aim at is a well recognised putting technique. Since 2019 it has been permissible to actually touch that spot prior to making the stroke.

Nothing 'cunning' (your word) or underhand about it. All perfectly llegal and within both the letter and spirit of the Rule.

Nothing to see here.

Steven, are you saying that the caddie can assist the putter on aim and line?
If so, are you being careful to not say that he can do it from the “restricted area”

I say that because reading this part of the rule 10
‘

(4)​

• Aiming. The caddie must not stand in the restricted area to help the player with aiming. This help includes when the caddie moves away without saying anything but, by doing so, is giving a signal to the player that they are correctly aimed at the intended target. But there is no penalty if the player backs away before making the stroke and the caddie moves away from the restricted area before the player again begins to take a stance for the stroke.’

However, the last sentence of that is what prompted my earlier post ( about finding a point etc)
As I say, I can’t see why that sentence is there because it seems to allow the caddie to be in the restricted area for aiming purposes, but says there won’t be a penalty if they move away as described , and the player alone resumes.

And if that is the case then it allows an excuse for the intentions as stated here on the USGA Website

• Allowing a caddie to stand behind a player taking a stance so as to direct the player how to line up undermines the player’s need to use his or her own alignment skills and judgment.

We believe that an appropriate line is drawn between allowing advice from a caddie and prohibiting the caddie from being involved in directing the player in the act of taking a stance to play the ball.”

 

[Steven Rules]

The player and caddie can (and often do) do exactly as you described in #67.

The putter takes his stance, and his caddie( partner) stands in the restricted area and helps the putter line up. The putter mentally notes a point on the green not far in front of him that his club is lined up on.
I’ve seen this promoted as an aid to good putting in that the point, close to , is where to aim just before the stroke.
Before an attempt at the stroke , the putter and caddie move away from the stance and restricted area.
Potential penalty now avoided.
The putter resumes his stance . Alone. Caddie is well away from the area.
The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green , aims and makes his stroke.

There is nothing 'cunning', tricky or underhanded about it. It is permitted by the Rules. It is a common routine among players and caddies.

Caddies often help their player look for an aiming point and they often do it from the restricted area while the player is simulating the stance and stroke. As long as they both back away before the stance for the actual stroke is taken then all is well. As you have observed:

there is no penalty if the player backs away before making the stroke and the caddie moves away from the restricted area before the player again begins to take a stance for the stroke.’

 

[Steven Rules]

Footnote. Instead of looking solely at the 'Aiming' bullet point in 10.2b(4), you also need to look at the introductory words at the start of 10.2b(4) to understand when it applies:

When a player begins taking a stance for the stroke (which means they have at least one foot in position for that stance) and until the stroke is made....

The limitations only apply from when a player begins taking a stance for the stroke, not during other aspects of the lead up, and not while the player and caddie are faffing about working with each other to try to read the line of the putt.

 

[salfordlad]

As a result of SalfordLad telling me , quite rightly, to look beyond a first understanding , I have read the rule 10, and I’d be interested to see views about this rule and how I can see it’s intention ( by the rule makers)able to be overcome by a cunning player.
I know it’s unlikely, that we wouldn’t bother, etc, but is it a possible workaround?

1. The putter takes his stance, and his caddie( partner) stands in the restricted area and helps the putter line up. The putter mentally notes a point on the green not far in front of him that his club is lined up on.
I’ve seen this promoted as an aid to good putting in that the point, close to , is where to aim just before the stroke.
Before an attempt at the stroke , the putter and caddie move away from the stance and restricted area.
Potential penalty now avoided.
The putter resumes his stance . Alone. Caddie is well away from the area.
The putter ‘finds’ his point on the green , aims and makes his stroke.

Is this not a feasible way of getting away with assistance a putter isn’t meant to get? . To my mind it is a silly mistake to put that ‘get out’ in the rule.
I assume that the rule makers thought that when the putter resumes, having walked away and without the caddie, that he is starting ‘ with a clean sheet’, as it were. But, is he?

Personal opinion re this rule
Players playing as individuals , caddies should not be allowed on the green at all .
Only the player to assess his putt.
As for the occasions when the putter is in a team competition, then IMO, another team member should be allowed to assist .

As DB7 and Steven point out, what is proscribed is tightly defined and caddies (and partners) are free to provide a range of other assistance including identifying spots and alignment to those spots.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Well, to my mind a rule not very well written. I shall leave it at that.

 

[Steven Rules]

Well, to my mind a rule not very well written. I shall leave it at that.

What do you think is the bit that causes confusion?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Re-reading this thread I now see the source of my confusion in my posts. I was confused by statements of the sort…’a player cannot help another player line up their putt’.

Now I will regularly help a team member or partner determine the line of their putt prior to them taking their stance…but having done that I have walked away before they take their stance…leaving them to sort themselves to the line agreed.

I can’t recall ever standing behind a team member or partner as they took their stance to putt, and then help them adjust things to the agreed line for their putt. So not ever doing as in The Golden Shot…left a bit, left a bit, right a bit…fire.

As I have never done the latter I thought that the constraints on me in the rules applied to the former. Hence my confusion.

 

[Slab]

Re-reading this thread I now see the source of my confusion in my posts. I was confused by statements of the sort…’a player cannot help another player line up their putt’.

Now I will regularly help a team member or partner determine the line of their putt prior to them taking their stance…but having done that I have walked away before they take their stance…leaving them to sort themselves to the line agreed.

I can’t recall ever standing behind a team member or partner as they took their stance to putt, and then help them adjust things to the agreed line for their putt. So not ever doing as in The Golden Shot…left a bit, left a bit, right a bit…fire.

As I have never done the latter I thought that the constraints on me in the rules applied to the former. Hence my confusion.

Yeah, as usual the RoG have to be read only as written without the reader applying any of their own understanding, interpretation, colloquialisms, assumptions etc

edit; it may actually be easier for a non-golfer to understand the RoG than it is for someone that's played for years picking up loads of (mis)interpretations along the way

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Yeah, as usual the RoG have to be read only as written without the reader applying any of their own understanding, interpretation, colloquialisms, assumptions etc

edit; it may actually be easier for a non-golfer to understand the RoG than it is for someone that's played for years picking up loads of (mis)interpretations along the way

My confusion was simply one of five decades of never doing an actual assist, and having never thought of doing it, because from the word Go I either knew (having been told) or assumed that it was not allowed - time dims the recollection.

 

[backwoodsman]

My confusion was simply one of five decades of never doing an actual assist, and having never thought of doing it, because from the word Go I either knew (having been told) or assumed that it was not allowed - time dims the recollection.

Quite frankly, if you’ve not done for five decades so far, why start now? Probably not worth the bother.