New rules myths

[chrisd]

In yesterdays 4bbb one of our opponents landed in the woods, his ball was leaning up against a thick branch which he moved and it caused the ball to move. When we got to the green his playing partner says to me "we rebuilt the scene as it was before he moved the branch and, as I understand the new rules, if your ball accidentally moves there is no penalty" I asked him where in deliberately moving a branch laying against the ball is the movement of the ball accidental.

 

[Backache]

In yesterdays 4bbb one of our opponents landed in the woods, his ball was leaning up against a thick branch which he moved and it caused the ball to move. When we got to the green his playing partner says to me "we rebuilt the scene as it was before he moved the branch and, as I understand the new rules, if your ball accidentally moves there is no penalty" I asked him where in deliberately moving a branch laying against the ball is the movement of the ball accidental.

To be fair in removing a loose impediment even if the ball is next to it moving the ball may be entirely accidental , I guess it's just their misunderstanding of the ball accidentally moved whilst searching.

 

[rulefan]

Accidental has nothing to do with it.

• A player must not deliberately remove a loose impediment that, if moved when the ball was at rest, would have been likely to have caused the ball to move.
• If the player does so, he or she gets one penalty stroke, but the removed loose impediment does not need to be replaced.

 

[chrisd]

Accidental has nothing to do with it.

• A player must not deliberately remove a loose impediment that, if moved when the ball was at rest, would have been likely to have caused the ball to move.
• If the player does so, he or she gets one penalty stroke, but the removed loose impediment does not need to be replaced.

I did tell him that he should have just added the penalty and played on

 

[Orikoru]

In yesterdays 4bbb one of our opponents landed in the woods, his ball was leaning up against a thick branch which he moved and it caused the ball to move. When we got to the green his playing partner says to me "we rebuilt the scene as it was before he moved the branch and, as I understand the new rules, if your ball accidentally moves there is no penalty" I asked him where in deliberately moving a branch laying against the ball is the movement of the ball accidental.

What does that even mean?? (in bold)

 

[chrisd]

He said that after the ball had moved they put everything back as it was and his partner played the ball as it had originally lay.

 

[Colin L]

He said that after the ball had moved they put everything back as it was and his partner played the ball as it had originally lay.

He was confusing Rule 8.1c which allows a player who has improved the conditions affecting a stroke to escape a penalty if, in certain circumstances, he can put them back the way they were and Rule 15.1b which tells us there is no way of avoiding the penalty if we have moved our ball in the process of removing a loose impediment.

 

[Green Bay Hacker]

A couple of weeks ago I putted out and pulled the ball and flagstick out at the same time as I had left it in. A player leaving a nearby tee shouted across that you can't do that and an argument ensued. Apparently he had been pulled up on it many years ago by a referee. As we walked off the 18th the same player came across and said he had rung the R&A for confirmation and that he was wrong.

 

[williamalex1]

A couple of weeks ago I putted out and pulled the ball and flagstick out at the same time as I had left it in. A player leaving a nearby tee shouted across that you can't do that and an argument ensued. Apparently he had been pulled up on it many years ago by a referee. As we walked off the 18th the same player came across and said he had rung the R&A for confirmation and that he was wrong.

Not a rule , but frowned on at my place , as it can easily damage the hole.

 

[Orikoru]

A year ago I briefly toyed with an aimpoint-style green read of standing with one foot either side of the hole. This chap I was playing with, who apparently is a bit of a rules buff, said he wasn't sure you were allowed straddle the line of your putt! I said I've seen Justin Rose and others do it on TV so it should be fine. He said he'd still have to check. Never heard back from him so I guess he quietly ate his words.

 

[chrisd]

A year ago I briefly toyed with an aimpoint-style green read of standing with one foot either side of the hole. This chap I was playing with, who apparently is a bit of a rules buff, said he wasn't sure you were allowed straddle the line of your putt! I said I've seen Justin Rose and others do it on TV so it should be fine. He said he'd still have to check. Never heard back from him so I guess he quietly ate his words.

As he should.
When you did an Aimpoint course (before the new rule changes) you were told to straddle the line and if you need to walk down to take more reading you walk down on the low side holding your putter pointing the handle at your intended line of the putt. If you are then challenged you just say that you didnt walk on YOUR intended line and it didnt matter whether it was the accuser's line they would have chosen and that you pointed to your line

 

[Crow]

A year ago I briefly toyed with an aimpoint-style green read of standing with one foot either side of the hole. This chap I was playing with, who apparently is a bit of a rules buff, said he wasn't sure you were allowed straddle the line of your putt! I said I've seen Justin Rose and others do it on TV so it should be fine. He said he'd still have to check. Never heard back from him so I guess he quietly ate his words.

I believe that this was the main reason for the rule change about allowing players to touch their line of putt, to do away with the ambiguity of whether Aimpointers were touching the line of putt.

 

[chrisd]

I believe that this was the main reason for the rule change about allowing players to touch their line of putt, to do away with the ambiguity of whether Aimpointers were touching the line of putt.

It might have had a bearing on the rules changes but the way it was explained to me no one would deliberately walk on their line, hence the reason for pointing to it whilst walking and also the "intended line of putt" was in the players choosing not anyone else's

 

[Crow]

It might have had a bearing on the rules changes but the way it was explained to me no one would deliberately walk on their line, hence the reason for pointing to it whilst walking and also the "intended line of putt" was in the players choosing not anyone else's

I believe that no one would deliberately walk on their line but I've rarely if ever seen any Aimpointer pointing their intended line out as they walk down it.
The rule change does away with any doubt and so enables Aimpointers to do their straddling unfettered.

 

[clubchamp98]

A year ago I briefly toyed with an aimpoint-style green read of standing with one foot either side of the hole. This chap I was playing with, who apparently is a bit of a rules buff, said he wasn't sure you were allowed straddle the line of your putt! I said I've seen Justin Rose and others do it on TV so it should be fine. He said he'd still have to check. Never heard back from him so I guess he quietly ate his words.

I thought the rule was you could not straddle the line to make a stroke!
You can more or less do what you want now but you still can’t straddle the line to make your stroke don’t think that changed.

 

[Colin L]

I thought the rule was you could not straddle the line to make a stroke!
You can more or less do what you want now but you still can’t straddle the line to make your stroke don’t think that changed.

That's as it was. The potential breach with Aimpoint was touching your line of putt. Straddling it was fine as long as you kept your feet sufficiently apart. You are still not permitted to straddle your line of play when making a stroke.