Penalty?

[Swinglowandslow]

How would he have written a rule to cover this situation?

He would have included the requirement for the rule breaker to have had to have an intent to gain an advantage for a penalty to be imposed.
In this particular case it is clear that a loss of whereabouts is what caused the
hitting from the wrong place. Clearly no intent, so no penalty.😀

 

[Swango1980]

He would have included the requirement for the rule breaker to have had to have an intent to gain an advantage for a penalty to be imposed.
In this particular case it is clear that a loss of whereabouts is what caused the
hitting from the wrong place. Clearly no intent, so no penalty.😀

Although there was no intent, the player could still be gaining an advantage, they are still technically hitting a practice shot between holes. It may be the shot that sorts out their earlier driving woes. If they are still to play that hole later in the round, they definitely gain an advantage if they hit a decent shot, as they will know what club to hit when they play it for real. Unless someone is clearly cheating, it is probably fair to say that there is no intent for the vast majority of rule infringements. Teeing off the wrong tee pegs, hitting the wrong ball, not signing card, dropping in wrong place, etc. So, in all of those cases, should we just say if the player didn't intend to break the rule, let them off?

Ultimately, if you are new to the course, either check the card if available where the next hole is, and if you can't see the group you are following, at least check the sign on the tee. If there really is no signage at all on course or card, then you'd be justified in complaining to the club.

 

[chrisd]

I'm not aware of "intent" being a phrase used in any rules I've read, I've broken many a rule but never "intended" to do so

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I'm not aware of "intent" being a phrase used in any rules I've read, I've broken many a rule but never "intended" to do so

Yes, I'm aware that golf has many, most in fact, " absolute offence" rules, and I support nearly all of them.
However, I was asked how Descartes might have written the rule, and IMHO that was about how he would have done so. I.e requiring intent😀

It is a difficult judgement to make sometimes, whether some of the rules of golf are too draconian. I believe a few are.
In the case of disqualification on a technicality (e.g signing of the card) .In some cases a quick review of the situation by couple of organisers present at the competition could verify or otherwise the decision. Just having a little bit of discretion available for some situations can't be bad.






si

 

[Colin L]

Let's forget practising. Putting a ball into play to start a hole is part of your playing of that hole whether it is played correctly from the teeing area or incorrectly from anywhere else. Forget that in this instance it was incorrectly played from a different tee: that tee is just part of the general area. That it is normally used for teeing off on a different hole is irrelevant.
Intent comes into it only with respect to the fact that the stroke was intended to put a ball into play to start a hole.

 

[Colin L]

In the case of disqualification on a technicality (e.g signing of the card) .In some cases a quick review of the situation by couple of organisers present at the competition could verify or otherwise the decision. Just having a little bit of discretion available for some situations can't be bad.

That particular DQ situation can largely be avoiding by defining that a card is considered returned when the player has left the scoring area/room/clubhouse. That gives the scorer a chance to look at the card, pick up on something like its being unsigned and get the player to correct the error. Nothing much can be done for competitions where your card is just dropped into a box, though.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Let's forget practising. Putting a ball into play to start a hole is part of your playing of that hole whether it is played correctly from the teeing area or incorrectly from anywhere else. Forget that in this instance it was incorrectly played from a different tee: that tee is just part of the general area. That it is normally used for teeing off on a different hole is irrelevant.
Intent comes into it only with respect to the fact that the stroke was intended to put a ball into play to start a hole.

I agree with everything written here. However, IIRC, the situation described in the beginning was where a player " got confused on the course layout and completely began to play the wrong hole. Thinking he was playing the correct hole. He hit from the correct tee for the hole he was playing. Then, down the fairway , realised he was on the wrong hole.
He got his bearings, picked up his ball and went to the correct hole and carried on playing.
Some views said, "genuine error, let him carry on with no penalty.Others said,
" tough- he gets a penalty "
The genuine error boys argued that the bold phrase above is not what happened , in that he didn't put a ball into play to be playing of that hole.?

I can see an argument for both viewpoints looking at the bold phrase, but if it is a penalty, it is IMO, an example of a draconian rule😀

 

[Swinglowandslow]

That particular DQ situation can largely be avoiding by defining that a card is considered returned when the player has left the scoring area/room/clubhouse. That gives the scorer a chance to look at the card, pick up on something like its being unsigned and get the player to correct the error. Nothing much can be done for competitions where your card is just dropped into a box, though.

Again, this is right. Just thinking of the Roberto de Vicenzo ( hope I got that right) case, where he got DQ from winning the Open . Everyone knew his correct score and it was more than verifiable, TV etc. That was very tough, though to the letter of the rule. So, the rule overcame the facts.

 

[Colin L]

I agree with everything written here. However, IIRC, the situation described in the beginning was where a player " got confused on the course layout and completely began to play the wrong hole. Thinking he was playing the correct hole. He hit from the correct tee for the hole he was playing. Then, down the fairway , realised he was on the wrong hole.
He got his bearings, picked up his ball and went to the correct hole and carried on playing.
Some views said, "genuine error, let him carry on with no penalty.Others said,
" tough- he gets a penalty "
The genuine error boys argued that the bold phrase above is not what happened , in that he didn't put a ball into play to be playing of that hole.?

I can see an argument for both viewpoints looking at the bold phrase, but if it is a penalty, it is IMO, an example of a draconian rule😀

See post #71. It is not a matter of a "view", just matter of applying what Rule 6.1 plainly states.

See 6.1a which says that the hole has started even if the stroke was made from outside the teeing area.

See 6.1b(2) which tells what happens in stroke play if you start from outside the teeing area including from tee markers for a different hole.

Search in vain for any exception which excuses a player from the penalty because he has been a dozy plonker.

 

[rulefan]

He hit from the correct tee for the hole he was playing.

But he didn't. He hit from the tee for the hole he thought he was playing. And we all know what thought did.

However the words are very specific.
If a player who is starting a hole plays a ball from outside the teeing area (including from a wrong set of tee markers for a different teeing location on the same hole or a different hole):
......

 

[Swinglowandslow]

See post #71. It is not a matter of a "view", just matter of applying what Rule 6.1 plainly states.

See 6.1a which says that the hole has started even if the stroke was made from outside the teeing area.

See 6.1b(2) which tells what happens in stroke play if you start from outside the teeing area including from tee markers for a different hole.

Search in vain for any exception which excuses a player from the penalty because he has been a dozy plonker.

And a reply to Rulefans post


But reading 6.1a and 6.1b(2), as quoted above by Colin, it seems predicated on when the hole has started. It seems to me that the hole referred to in "hole has started" is the one he is meant to be playing next.
The fact is that when this chap, who is completely physically yards and yards away from that hole, hits the ball, he is not in fact starting the hole he is meant to be playing next,; and if that is the case, where he is starting from is irrelevant in regards to whether it's "outside the teeing area, " or "from tee markers for a different hole"- because those phrases relate to the " hole has started"
If a rule said that he is penalised if he plays his next shot from anywhere except the teeing area of the next hole which he should be playing, then clearly he should be penalised.
But I'm not so sure that the rule above says that. Is there a rule that plainly says
"Holes are to be played in the correct sequence.If a player begins any hole, other than in the sequence as determined for that competition, then he is penalised.....etc". Or words to that effect?
I am beginning more and more to believing that the rule quoted above, pertains only to the next hole that he should be playing., E.g 5 after 4: 7 after 6 etc. And as we know, he wasn't doing that.
And as far as I know, all holes in golf competitions should be played in sequence. This chap was not doing that, I know, but was a rule broken😀

 

[backwoodsman]

And a reply to Rulefans post


But reading 6.1a and 6.1b(2), as quoted above by Colin, it seems predicated on when the hole has started. It seems to me that the hole referred to in "hole has started" is the one he is meant to be playing next.
The fact is that when this chap, who is completely physically yards and yards away from that hole, hits the ball, he is not in fact starting the hole he is meant to be playing next,; and if that is the case, where he is starting from is irrelevant in regards to whether it's "outside the teeing area, " or "from tee markers for a different hole"- because those phrases relate to the " hole has started"
If a rule said that he is penalised if he plays his next shot from anywhere except the teeing area of the next hole which he should be playing, then clearly he should be penalised.
But I'm not so sure that the rule above says that. Is there a rule that plainly says
"Holes are to be played in the correct sequence.If a player begins any hole, other than in the sequence as determined for that competition, then he is penalised.....etc". Or words to that effect?
I am beginning more and more to believing that the rule quoted above, pertains only to the next hole that he should be playing., E.g 5 after 4: 7 after 6 etc. And as we know, he wasn't doing that.
And as far as I know, all holes in golf competitions should be played in sequence. This chap was not doing that, I know, but was a rule broken😀

Yes

Holes have to be played in the correct sequence (rule 5.1), and individual holes have to be started from the teeing area pertinent to that hole (rule 6.1b)

Quite simple really. Hole 2 follows hole 1. So when you have completed hole 1, the next hole to be played is hole 2 - and there is only one permissible place to start it - the teeing area of hole 2. Make your next stroke from anywhere other than the teeing area of hole 2 and you're breaking rule 6.1b

 

[rulefan]

but was a rule broken😀

Yes. Rule 6.1b

A “round” is 18 or fewer holes played in the order set by the Committee.
A player has started a hole when he or she makes a stroke to begin the hole.
The hole has started even if the stroke was made from outside the teeing area (see Rule 6.1b) or the stroke was cancelled under a Rule.
A player must start each hole by playing a ball from anywhere inside the teeing area under Rule 6.2b.
If a player who is starting a hole plays a ball from outside the teeing area (including from a wrong set of tee markers for a different teeing location on the same hole or a different hole):
The player gets the general penalty (two penalty strokes) and must correct the mistake by playing a ball from inside the teeing area:

 

[bobmac]

Imagine you're driving your car at 33mph in a 40 mph zone so obeying the speed limit and you're pulled by the police for speeding.
The police tell you the speed limit is 30 but the 30 sign has been obscured by overgrown foliage, should the police use his/her discretion and give you a warning or should you be done?

 

[rulefan]

I'm afraid in the situation re the wrong teeing area, the police have no discretion.

 

[Swango1980]

And a reply to Rulefans post


But reading 6.1a and 6.1b(2), as quoted above by Colin, it seems predicated on when the hole has started. It seems to me that the hole referred to in "hole has started" is the one he is meant to be playing next.
The fact is that when this chap, who is completely physically yards and yards away from that hole, hits the ball, he is not in fact starting the hole he is meant to be playing next,; and if that is the case, where he is starting from is irrelevant in regards to whether it's "outside the teeing area, " or "from tee markers for a different hole"- because those phrases relate to the " hole has started"
If a rule said that he is penalised if he plays his next shot from anywhere except the teeing area of the next hole which he should be playing, then clearly he should be penalised.
But I'm not so sure that the rule above says that. Is there a rule that plainly says
"Holes are to be played in the correct sequence.If a player begins any hole, other than in the sequence as determined for that competition, then he is penalised.....etc". Or words to that effect?
I am beginning more and more to believing that the rule quoted above, pertains only to the next hole that he should be playing., E.g 5 after 4: 7 after 6 etc. And as we know, he wasn't doing that.
And as far as I know, all holes in golf competitions should be played in sequence. This chap was not doing that, I know, but was a rule broken😀

You are getting to far hung up on the fact that the rule probably doesn't apply because you think the player hasn't actually started the hole, as it's the wrong hole. This is almost an absurd interpretation of this rule, when in plain English it then goes on to clarify that the penalty also applies if you tee off the WRONG HOLE. When, in your interpretation, could a player be penalised from playing off the wrong hole as per the rule? I can't imagine a player would ever intentionally play from the wrong hole after all.

 

[bobmac]

I'm afraid in the situation re the wrong teeing area, the police have no discretion.

You haven't answered the question.

 

[Backache]

Imagine you're driving your car at 33mph in a 40 mph zone so obeying the speed limit and you're pulled by the police for speeding.
The police tell you the speed limit is 30 but the 30 sign has been obscured by overgrown foliage, should the police use his/her discretion and give you a warning or should you be done?

You still can be done for speeding , whether you will be or not is a matter of discretion in all matters under UK law , the rules of golf have defined penalties for defined situations.

 

[bobmac]

You still can be done for speeding , whether you will be or not is a matter of discretion in all matters under UK law , the rules of golf have defined penalties for defined situations.

So the police can use their discretion when the signs aren't clear

It's signage from hole to hole. We have 2 instances where there's a tee box nearer the previous green than the actual next tee box.
Visitors always getting it wrong..
How much does a small sign cost?

 

[Colin L]

@Swinglowandslow

I think you need to let go of this. Maybe re-read my explanations and Rulefan's explanations.

It doesn't matter where you play from to start the next hole in the sequence laid down if it isn't from the correct teeing area. Whether 5 centimetres in front of the tee markers or or 100 metres away on the wrong tee, it's all the same. And it doesn't matter why you made the mistake. In stroke play, take 2 penalty strokes and play from the correct teeing area, the stroke made in error not counting.

That's not an opinion. It's what the rules state and is very simple to apply.