Provisional Ball/Lost Ball/5 Minutes Search

[Deleted member 16999]

Played in a County Strokeplay event today, event is played a 3 Balls, on a Par 4 one of the other guys hit his second off the fairway and pulled it left in to the light rough about 160-170 yds away, upon reaching the area we thought his ball should be, we coukdn't find it and started to search, nobody looked at the clock to actually time the search, after, imo, 2-3 minutes the guy stated he would go back and play another while we continue to search, as he addressed his second ball and before he played it I found his first ball, I was about to shout when the 3rd guy in our group told me not to, as, as he had abandoned the search and gone back to play another he had in fact declared the first ball lost, I disagreed and thought so long as he was in the five minutes we had found his ball he coukd play the now found ball, as we disagreed, player 2 played both balls, scoring a 5 with the original and an 8 with the second.
Upon handing in the cards we asked the County Officials for a ruling and three of them disagreed and have said they will refer it to the County Senior Rules Official.
One lesson I take immediately is that I should look at my watch as I had no exact knowledge of how long we searched for, I cannot state 100% if I found his ball within 5 minutes, if I was 100% certain it was outside 5 minutes then I believe the situation was much clearer.

 

[duncan mackie]

I have no idea what they struggled with as to a ruling - it's very basic.

The ball was only found after the player had dropped another ball with the intention of proceeding under stroke and distance. As such that ball is now the ball in play and the original ball is lost.

Time has now become irrelevant.

The actions of the FC in suggesting that you don't tell him until after he played is irrelevant ( but silly IMO unless that player was really really certain of the rules, which from the wording he was wrong... but as you found it didn't save time as 3-3 then came into it but from a difficult position. If the player had gone back the the tee and re teed it would have cost the player!)

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I have no idea what they struggled with as to a ruling - it's very basic.

The ball was only found after the player had dropped another ball with the intention of proceeding under stroke and distance. As such that ball is now the ball in play and the original ball is lost.

Time has now become irrelevant.

The actions of the FC in suggesting that you don't tell him until after he played is irrelevant ( but silly IMO unless that player was really really certain of the rules, which from the wording he was wrong... but as you found it didn't save time as 3-3 then came into it but from a difficult position. If the player had gone back the the tee and re teed it would have cost the player!)

Cheers Duncan, So him saying he's going back to play a provisional iOS irrelevant then? and as soon as he takes the drop and not actually hits the ball is the point his 2nd ball is in play?

Rule 27/16 caused the confusion

 

[duncan mackie]

Cheers Duncan, So him saying he's going back to play a provisional iOS irrelevant then? and as soon as he takes the drop and not actually hits the ball is the point his 2nd ball is in play?

Yes and yes.

Going back to the tee and teeing up is not the same - the ball isn't in play until a stroke is made. This is what causes most players a little confusion. Rules officials shouldn't have that problem!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Yes and yes.

Going back to the tee and teeing up is not the same - the ball isn't in play until a stroke is made. This is what causes most players a little confusion. Rules officials shouldn't have that problem!

Unfortunately the County Guys were not the rules officials, merely had the book and were helping out with the event.

Thanks once again for your help

 

[scubascuba3]

If he says provisional on the tee vs provisional from where he last played the shot what is the difference?

 

[pbrown7582]

If he says provisional on the tee vs provisional from where he last played the shot what is the difference?

Nothing if it's played at the time, but as it was into light rough you wouldn't generally think there was any need to play a provisional?

 

[scubascuba3]

Nothing if it's played at the time, but as it was into light rough you wouldn't generally think there was any need to play a provisional?

Understandable he didnt play a provisional initially. It sounds like in future take the full 5 minutes to look before walking back.

I'm still slightly surprised that if less than 5 minutes walks back and then plays a provisional why this is an issue. Drop or not should be irrelevant as provisional and less than 5 mins.Maybe its in the decisions somewhere.

 

[duncan mackie]

Understandable he didnt play a provisional initially. It sounds like in future take the full 5 minutes to look before walking back.

I'm still slightly surprised that if less than 5 minutes walks back and then plays a provisional why this is an issue. Drop or not should be irrelevant as provisional and less than 5 mins.Maybe its in the decisions somewhere.

You can't 'walk back' and play a provisional.

 

[Colin L]

Cheers Duncan, So him saying he's going back to play a provisional iOS irrelevant then? and as soon as he takes the drop and not actually hits the ball is the point his 2nd ball is in play?

Rule 27/16 caused the confusion

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional and the ruling that his substituted ball was in play when dropped, rendering the original ball lost is based on his coming back to put another ball into play under stroke and distance.

Had he mistakenly thought he could go back and play a provisional and said that was what he was going to do, the ruling would be different. In that case his ball is not dropped in accordance with the rules and he could lift it under Rule 20-6 and proceed to play his original ball. (Decision 27-2a/5)

 

[Region3]

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional

The OP mentioned it in post #3

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional and the ruling that his substituted ball was in play when dropped, rendering the original ball lost is based on his coming back to put another ball into play under stroke and distance.

Had he mistakenly thought he could go back and play a provisional and said that was what he was going to do, the ruling would be different. In that case his ball is not dropped in accordance with the rules and he could lift it under Rule 20-6 and proceed to play his original ball. (Decision 27-2a/5)

Apologies if I didn't state it in the OP, the player certainly said he was going back to play a provisional while we continued to search.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The OP mentioned it in post #3

Cheers

 

[MashieNiblick]

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional and the ruling that his substituted ball was in play when dropped, rendering the original ball lost is based on his coming back to put another ball into play under stroke and distance.

Had he mistakenly thought he could go back and play a provisional and said that was what he was going to do, the ruling would be different. In that case his ball is not dropped in accordance with the rules and he could lift it under Rule 20-6 and proceed to play his original ball. (Decision 27-2a/5)

Wow that's interesting. Seems player in decision is actually better off due not to proceeding within the Rules.

 

[duncan mackie]

Apologies if I didn't state it in the OP, the player certainly said he was going back to play a provisional while we continued to search.

Paul - my apologies for not picking up you post 3# fully and responding too quickly.

I was careful in my initial response to make it clear that the players intention mattered.

Colin has quoted the relevant decision if the player believes he can play a provisional here - 27-1/2 covers the situation as I read your original post.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional and the ruling that his substituted ball was in play when dropped, rendering the original ball lost is based on his coming back to put another ball into play under stroke and distance.

Had he mistakenly thought he could go back and play a provisional and said that was what he was going to do, the ruling would be different. In that case his ball is not dropped in accordance with the rules and he could lift it under Rule 20-6 and proceed to play his original ball. (Decision 27-2a/5)

Colin, having read the rule and decision that you've posted am I now understanding that the player who went back to play a provisional was entitled to do so and the only remaining question is, did I find his ball within the 5 minutes Decision 27/5.5(excuse my ignorance if I've got it wrong)

 

[Colin L]

Colin, having read the rule and decision that you've posted am I now understanding that the player who went back to play a provisional was entitled to do so and the only remaining question is, did I find his ball within the 5 minutes Decision 27/5.5(excuse my ignorance if I've got it wrong)

I misread your post #3 as a "what if" development of the original question. Now that it's clear that the player did say he was returning to play a provisional, then Decision 27-2a/5 applies to the original situation. I need to clarify, however, as there is a misunderstanding in your reading of it.

The player who has walked forward and is searching for his ball is not entitled to go back and play a provisional. If he says he is going to do so, he is proceeding wrongly. Rule 20-6, however, allows him to correct the error after he has put a ball into play by dropping it.

So when your man drops a ball with the intention of its being a provisional, he is wrong: the rules do not allow that. Because he is wrong, R20-6 allows him to correct his mistake by lifting his ball before playing it and doing the right thing. In this case, the right thing is to play his original ball provided it was found within 5 minutes of his beginning the search.

The opportunity to correct an error under R20-6 is ended as soon as you make a stroke. Had your man made a stroke at the ball and his original ball been found, he could not then continue with the original. He is considered to have played under stroke and distance and his original is lost.

The player who in this situation goes back intending to play under stroke and distance cannot invoke Rule 20-6 if his original is found after dropping a ball, because he has proceeded correctly.

 

[backwoodsman]

I accept all that Colin & Duncan have said - but am i wrong to think that decision 27-2a/5 is a bit unsatisfactory?

It hinges on the players intention but the outcome is based on what he said? In OP scenario, they looked for a ball and player obviously thought it was not going to be found. (Else why would he consider walking all the way back). So what was his intention or belief as he walked back? To me it could only be one thing - player thought his original was doomed and he needed to get another ball in play. In telling his fellow partners what he was doing, he mistakenly used a wrong phrase. He said "I'll go back and play a provisional" when he could and should have used one of many other phrases. In my opinion, in this instance the dropped ball should be the ball in play. I accept it isn't- but it should be. Ah well ...

(Ps: l can think of a couple of circumstances where a player may genuinely, but erroneously, believe a provisional ball (in the proper sense) is the right thing to do, so 27-2a/5 could be valid. But, to me, not the OP scenario)

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I misread your post #3 as a "what if" development of the original question. Now that it's clear that the player did say he was returning to play a provisional, then Decision 27-2a/5 applies to the original situation. I need to clarify, however, as there is a misunderstanding in your reading of it.

The player who has walked forward and is searching for his ball is not entitled to go back and play a provisional. If he says he is going to do so, he is proceeding wrongly. Rule 20-6, however, allows him to correct the error after he has put a ball into play by dropping it.

So when your man drops a ball with the intention of its being a provisional, he is wrong: the rules do not allow that. Because he is wrong, R20-6 allows him to correct his mistake by lifting his ball before playing it and doing the right thing. In this case, the right thing is to play his original ball provided it was found within 5 minutes of his beginning the search.

The opportunity to correct an error under R20-6 is ended as soon as you make a stroke. Had your man made a stroke at the ball and his original ball been found, he could not then continue with the original. He is considered to have played under stroke and distance and his original is lost.

The player who in this situation goes back intending to play under stroke and distance cannot invoke Rule 20-6 if his original is found after dropping a ball, because he has proceeded correctly.

Thanks Colin, really helped you spelling it out. Also see the importance of starting the clock on the 5 minute search rather than guessing.

 

[scubascuba3]

The OP made no suggestion that the player went back with the intention of playing a provisional and the ruling that his substituted ball was in play when dropped, rendering the original ball lost is based on his coming back to put another ball into play under stroke and distance.

Had he mistakenly thought he could go back and play a provisional and said that was what he was going to do, the ruling would be different. In that case his ball is not dropped in accordance with the rules and he could lift it under Rule 20-6 and proceed to play his original ball. (Decision 27-2a/5)

So based on that and he said he was going back to play a provisional he can take the original ball?
BTW ive looked through the decisions and i can't see 27-2a/5. It only appears to go up to 27-2a/4 ( maybe I'm using an old version, Decisions 2012-2013)