Rules Q

[Fyldewhite]

From your description it sounds like a penalty. Unless for some reason that was the only way he could get into the tree??

He could have easily taken a stance without touching the tree, however, he would have had a dodgy stance and prob not been able to hit a full shot at the green.

Sorry, missed this bit in earlier post as well as Chrisd's addition to the decisions. Certainly a penalty.

In situations like these it's usually pretty obvious what's fair and not fair at the time but there's inevitably a grey area. The key bit is taking a stance that improves things by the least possible amount to enable you to play it regardless of which direction you want to hit it.

 

[chrisd]

Thank you. That'll do for me, no penalty.

But he is only allowed to move, bend enough to play a shot, not so that he can play a full shot in any way he chooses. I dont think it's so cut and dried.


Chris

 

[viscount17]

Just above that bit in the decisions is this.....

Examples of actions which do constitute fairly taking a stance are:
backing into a branch or young sapling if that is the only way to take a stance for the selected stroke, even if this causes the branch to move out of the way or the sapling to bend or break.
bending a branch of a tree with the hands in order to get under the tree to play a ball.

^
^
^
Thank you. That'll do for me, no penalty.

and typical of the rules - contradicts others especially the bit about not breaking growing/attached branches etc (other than as part of backswing). so depending which bit you find first - everyone is right.