Odd Local Rule on Club Web Site

[rulie]

Yes. So in this scenario, if the PL is, say, one card length, what the player cannot do is directly place the ball in the immovable obstruction relief area more than one card length from the ball's original position. There would be a wrong place penalty if ball was played after that action.

Agree, after some re-reading to fully understand! If taking the preferred lie first, the "relief area" is still what that Local Rule provides. As discussed above, the player could take preferred lie first, and if there is still interference by the sprinkler head, take that relief (Rule 16.1) by dropping the ball in that one club-length relief area, and then take preferred lies again. The savvy player may benefit by ultimately changing his relief area for interference by the sprinkler head.

 

[Colin L]

Agree, after some re-reading to fully understand! If taking the preferred lie first, the "relief area" is still what that Local Rule provides. As discussed above, the player could take preferred lie first, and if there is still interference by the sprinkler head, take that relief (Rule 16.1) by dropping the ball in that one club-length relief area, and then take preferred lies again. The savvy player may benefit by ultimately changing his relief area for interference by the sprinkler head.

In other words, whatever relief the player choses to take and in whichever sequence, the ball must be place/dropped correctly at each stage.

 

[WGCRider]

The savvy player may benefit by ultimately changing his relief area for interference by the sprinkler head.

So hang on - lets say is questionable that I should get relief from the sprinkler or my opponent says no. Could I place my ball a scorecard closer to the sprinkler so that now it's certain I get relief?

 

[SammmeBee]

So hang on - lets say is questionable that I should get relief from the sprinkler or my opponent says no. Could I place my ball a scorecard closer to the sprinkler so that now it's certain I get relief?

Yes or better still just prefer your lie onto the sprinkler itself if you can!

 

[Colin L]

Firstly, it's up to you to decide what you can and can't do.

Yes, you may take the preferred lie relief so as to have interference from the sprinkler. Nothing questionable about that.

 

[salfordlad]

So hang on - lets say is questionable that I should get relief from the sprinkler or my opponent says no. Could I place my ball a scorecard closer to the sprinkler so that now it's certain I get relief?

As Colin says, it is up to you what you do and this issue is worth laying out a bit. Your opponent has no say in your choices and actions (beyond recalling a stroke played out of order or from outside the teeing area). The rules determine what you can and cannot do and if the opponent thinks you are operating outside the rules he/she can seek a ruling and the referee/Committee will need to resolve the issue.

 

[salfordlad]

We have discussed above when you can take preferred lies a second time after your ball comes to rest and before it gets played again. It would also be useful to affirm when you cannot take preferred lies a second time. There are two categories here: first is when you have taken preferred lies but then decide you have placed somewhere unfortunate and you would like to do it again; second category is when you have placed under preferred lies but the ball subsequently moves due to either natural forces - in which case the ball must now be played as lies - or the ball subsequently moves due to 9.4, 9.5 or 9.6 drivers (you, your opponent or an outside influence) - in these cases the ball must be replaced. In both of these categories, no further preferred lies is permitted.
Lucky the rules have been simplified. There are also multiple preferred lies questions and scenarios that the ruling bodies have not yet come up with answers to.

 

[jim8flog]

Agree, after some re-reading to fully understand! If taking the preferred lie first, the "relief area" is still what that Local Rule provides. As discussed above, the player could take preferred lie first, and if there is still interference by the sprinkler head, take that relief (Rule 16.1) by dropping the ball in that one club-length relief area, and then take preferred lies again. The savvy player may benefit by ultimately changing his relief area for interference by the sprinkler head.

Re read it again coupled with reading the allowable local rule

The OP has suggested that the ball is in the sprinkler head. Just because the head is in the fairway it does not mean the ball is on an area of closely mown grass. So they must take relief from the sprinkler head first.

Interference with stance or area of intended swing when the ball is close to the sprinkler head does allow the player to chose the order of relief.

 

[rulefan]

Re read it again coupled with reading the allowable local rule

The OP has suggested that the ball is in the sprinkler head. Just because the head is in the fairway it does not mean the ball is on an area of closely mown grass. So they must take relief from the sprinkler head first.

Aren't 'closely mown' and 'fairway' virtually synonymous?

 

[rulie]

Re read it again coupled with reading the allowable local rule

The OP has suggested that the ball is in the sprinkler head. Just because the head is in the fairway it does not mean the ball is on an area of closely mown grass. So they must take relief from the sprinkler head first.
n
Interference with stance or area of intended swing when the ball is close to the sprinkler head does allow the player to chose the order of relief.

The ball just needs to be in the "area" that the Local Rule specifies, it does not need to be on closely-mown grass. If the sprinkler head is in the specified area, the ball is in the specified area.

 

[jim8flog]

Aren't 'closely mown' and 'fairway' virtually synonymous?

The point I was making although it needs further 'adjudication' is -
Is a ball that is actually in a sprinkler head on the fairway in an area of closely mown grass? I.e. does the relief from the sprinkler head need to be taken first.

see Rulie's # 30 post

 

[rulefan]

The point I was making although it needs further 'adjudication' is -
Is a ball that is actually in a sprinkler head on the fairway in an area of closely mown grass? I.e. does the relief from the sprinkler head need to be taken first.

see Rulie's # 30 post

That was my point. It is the area not the object.

 

[jim8flog]

That was my point. It is the area not the object.

So taking that a step further - a golf course (I know of at least one) has a footpath running through the fairway. The club has a LR saying no relief from the foot path. Can I then claim relief under the winter rule for preferred lies?

 

[Foxholer]

So taking that a step further - a golf course (I know of at least one) has a footpath running through the fairway. The club has a LR saying no relief from the foot path. Can I then claim relief under the winter rule for preferred lies?

As I understand it, the 'preferred lies' LR only refers to 'closely mown' areas, so no. I would expect, however, that, given the existence of the footpath, to see a note that continues the 'no relief from foot path' - or otherwise. FWIW, it seems, to me, a bit daft to not allow relief from a path, at least in the fairway/closely mown area.

 

[rulefan]

As I understand it, the 'preferred lies' LR only refers to 'closely mown' areas, so no. I would expect, however, that, given the existence of the footpath, to see a note that continues the 'no relief from foot path' - or otherwise. FWIW, it seems, to me, a bit daft to not allow relief from a path, at least in the fairway/closely mown area.

The model LR refers to "a part of the general area cut to fairway height or less ". IMO a path would not qualify. However it wouldn't hurt to add a rider.
But it would seem nonsensible for 6" relief to be taken if the ball is in the middle of the path

 

[rulie]

The model LR refers to "a part of the general area cut to fairway height or less ". IMO a path would not qualify. However it wouldn't hurt to add a rider.
But it would seem nonsensible for 6" relief to be taken if the ball is in the middle of the path

Based on your "cut" statement, could a player use preferred lies if his ball was on a six inch section of bare dirt within the closely-mown area? This bare dirt patch was obviously not "cut".

 

[rulefan]

Hmmm

 

[SammmeBee]

Based on your "cut" statement, could a player use preferred lies if his ball was on a six inch section of bare dirt within the closely-mown area? This bare dirt patch was obviously not "cut".

It’s cut just not in the sense of physically been cut - the mower has gone over it…..

 

[SammmeBee]

A path (not grass) would not be cut in the same sense…..

 

[salfordlad]

Based on your "cut" statement, could a player use preferred lies if his ball was on a six inch section of bare dirt within the closely-mown area? This bare dirt patch was obviously not "cut".

How would we even know that the cutters did not go over the patch?