Mole Hills

[drewster]

On Saturday, in our medal, my ball came to rest immediately in front of a fresh molehill so evidence of burrowing animal activity was without doubt. With the ball at rest immediately in front of the molehill i can confirm that the said molehill didn't interfere with my stance or backswing but obviously badly affected the playing of my shot with the only option being to dig a wedge about 25 yards forward. Because of the difference of opinion in our group i opted to play the ball as it lies and dug it forward 25 yards but wondered in this instance if a drop would have been permissible. I'm sure there's precedent and if i knew exactly where to look I could find the answer myself but thought i'd consult the experts on here instead. Thanks for reading. Andy

 

[Foxholer]

Free Drop! Molehills are casts from burrowing animals.

Same applies to those that are no longer 'hills' but are flat. Though in this case it's often a better lie as it is!

It's not just stance and swing for which you get relief. You also get relief if ball touches or is in the 'abnormal ground or condition' - which seems to describe your situation perfectly.

25-1. Abnormal Ground Conditions

a. Interference
Interference by an abnormal ground condition occurs when a ball lies in or touches the condition or when the condition interferes with the player's stance or the area of his intended swing. If the player's ball lies on the putting green, interference also occurs if an abnormal ground condition on the putting green intervenes on his line of putt. Otherwise, intervention on the line of play is not, of itself, interference under this Rule.

.....

 

[drewster]

Thanks foxholer. The wording of the relevant rule most relevant to this is "intended swing" . Whilst it didn't affect my backswing or my ability to get the club to the back of the ball it most definitely affected my swing path and follow through. I was playing with a committee member and a respected senior member and the jury was split. I felt like it should have had a drop but none of us had a rule book in our bag so i took the safe option. Cost me a shot and a handicap cut but i've now learned something and will be wiser and more informed next time.

 

[Foxholer]

Thanks foxholer. The wording of the relevant rule most relevant to this is "intended swing" . Whilst it didn't affect my backswing or my ability to get the club to the back of the ball it most definitely affected my swing path and follow through. I was playing with a committee member and a respected senior member and the jury was split. I felt like it should have had a drop but none of us had a rule book in our bag so i took the safe option. Cost me a shot and a handicap cut but i've now learned something and will be wiser and more informed next time.

That's where Rule 3.3 (Doubt as to Procedure) is useful. Be aware that that rule has its own (quite reasonable) quirks. You have to nominate which ball you wish to be your scoring ball, should the reason you played it be valid. You must also report the facts of the situation to the Committee before he signs the Scorecard, otherwise player is DQ-ed! This is so The committee can make a decision and the correct score entered and signed for. The nomination of ball used effectively means that there is only actually 1 ball that will count for the score.

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-03

 

[backwoodsman]

Unless anyone corrects me, I've always understood that for relief from AGC or obstructions, "area of intended swing" covers the full swing path - from "top" of backswing to "top" of follow through. So although the ball might be well on its way by the time the swing is actually affected, you still get relief. I guess the rationale is based on avoiding damage to player or equipment?

 

[rulefan]

Unless anyone corrects me, I've always understood that for relief from AGC or obstructions, "area of intended swing" covers the full swing path - from "top" of backswing to "top" of follow through. So although the ball might be well on its way by the time the swing is actually affected, you still get relief. I guess the rationale is based on avoiding damage to player or equipment?

Correct

 

[Robobum]

Have I read the bit about relief from a flattened molehill correctly? In that you are still entitled to relief?

I ask, because I called the RO over for this very thing at the Devon mid am this year. I wasn't sure on the ruling and as he was on our fairway anyway, called him over.

Man from Del Monte say no - as it was flat, it was no longer a molehill so play it as it lies.

30yd fat duly followed

 

[Colin L]

Have I read the bit about relief from a flattened molehill correctly? In that you are still entitled to relief?

I ask, because I called the RO over for this very thing at the Devon mid am this year. I wasn't sure on the ruling and as he was on our fairway anyway, called him over.

Man from Del Monte say no - as it was flat, it was no longer a molehill so play it as it lies.

30yd fat duly followed

Did he not think it was identifiable as the remains of a molehill ?

Decision 25/23
Molehills are casts made by a burrowing animal. Accordingly, a player having interference from a molehill, or the remains of a molehill, is entitled to relief under Rule 25-1b, provided, in the latter instance, the remains are still identifiable as a cast made by a burrowing animal.

 

[Robobum]

Did he not think it was identifiable as the remains of a molehill ?

Decision 25/23
Molehills are casts made by a burrowing animal. Accordingly, a player having interference from a molehill, or the remains of a molehill, is entitled to relief under Rule 25-1b, provided, in the latter instance, the remains are still identifiable as a cast made by a burrowing animal.

As above. Acknowledged that it was a molehill at one point but, now that it was flattened, it was no longer classed as one.

Lesson learned.

 

[Colin L]

As above. Acknowledged that it was a molehill at one point but, now that it was flattened, it was no longer classed as one.

Lesson learned.

I'm not sure what lesson you have learned. If the referee recognised that the flattened earth was created by a mole before being flattened, he should have known he was looking at the remains of a molehill and should have granted relief.

 

[Robobum]

I'm not sure what lesson you have learned. If the referee recognised that the flattened earth was created by a mole before being flattened, he should have known he was looking at the remains of a molehill and should have granted relief.

The lesson learned is now knowing the rule.

 

[Hosel Fade]

I'm not sure what lesson you have learned. If the referee recognised that the flattened earth was created by a mole before being flattened, he should have known he was looking at the remains of a molehill and should have granted relief.

The lesson for me is to look at 3-3 once more so that when I inevitably have such a disagreement I know how to follow the procedure. That should really be posted billboard sized on every 1st tee anywhere as next to no one knows about it.

 

[Colin L]

The lesson learned is now knowing the rule.

Great! I wasn't quite sure.

 

[McFade]

Please keep in mind, that there might be no relief for standing on a flattened mole hill.
The committee may make a local rule according to the note to 25-1a:

Note: The Committee may make a Local Rule stating that interference by an abnormal ground condition with a player's stance is deemed not to be, of itself, interference under this Rule.

 

[rulefan]

Please keep in mind, that there might be no relief for standing on a flattened mole hill.
The committee may make a local rule according to the note to 25-1a:

It is not clear from the words whether that LR can be used to distinguish between new and flattened molehills, unless the active (or flattened) are identified specifically.
I reckon it can but have heard others disputing it.

Incidentally, how would one determine when it is 'flattened'? Is height a factor? Is how it came to be 'flat', ie either by being done deliberately or eroded by the weather?

 

[Colin L]

Overweight moles.