Should you be able to get relief from divots in the fairway?

[Orikoru]

Is this an animal scrape? No. If you need to ask, it isn't. I am taking relief from etc, or I am not. There is no grey area. If it is, then it is as grey for them, as it is for you. Therefore, it isn't.
Is it on the path? Only you can answer this, and if it is not clear to you, then it will not be clearer to someone else, and it isn't.
Is this the nearest point of relief? There is only one nearest point. Asking someone else would arrive at the same point.

if you need to ask, either you do not know how to proceed, or, you don't like the answer.

I disagree. If I'm playing in a comp with some older members they often have a greater knowledge of the rules than me, indeed they may have been in the exact situation I find myself in, and thus able to advise based on how they proceeded in the past.

 

[Orikoru]

This is a popular misconception amongst golfers, it is not an automatic penalty if you knock something off a tree with a practice swing.
It is only a penalty if that action improves the area of your intended swing.

I would say that's another rule that's open to interpretation. It's impossible to say 100% if that twig would have affected your final swing or not if it's no longer there when you take your stance.

 

[r0wly86]

Is this an animal scrape? No. If you need to ask, it isn't. I am taking relief from etc, or I am not. There is no grey area. If it is, then it is as grey for them, as it is for you. Therefore, it isn't.
Is it on the path? Only you can answer this, and if it is not clear to you, then it will not be clearer to someone else, and it isn't.
Is this the nearest point of relief? There is only one nearest point. Asking someone else would arrive at the same point.

if you need to ask, either you do not know how to proceed, or, you don't like the answer.

it's simply a courtesy, and I would fine someone saying I am taking relief from this and dropping here to be quite rude. Animal scarpings are not clear cut, to use your example, on the tour the pros often get the referee over to make a ruling on what is and what isn't relievable. So why do you think your knowledge is to a standard that the pros don't have.

Of course things are or they aren't, but it isn't always incredibly obvious what is it. If I saw my playing partner pick the ball up and take relief I would want to know why as that is odd. Instead if they said, hey guys, animal scraping he's so going to take a drop here is that okay? then no issue.

It is purely being courteous to your playing partners and keeping them updated with what you are doing

 

[chrisd]

Is this an animal scrape? No. If you need to ask, it isn't. I am taking relief from etc, or I am not. There is no grey area. If it is, then it is as grey for them, as it is for you. Therefore, it isn't.
Is it on the path? Only you can answer this, and if it is not clear to you, then it will not be clearer to someone else, and it isn't.
Is this the nearest point of relief? There is only one nearest point. Asking someone else would arrive at the same point.

if you need to ask, either you do not know how to proceed, or, you don't like the answer.

Like you Murph, I rarely ask and that's for two reasons, I think I'm pretty clued up on the rules and the guys I'm playing with in a comp are not refereeing so I dont want to get into an argument, but I'm happy to give an opinion if asked. I know you're clued up to as are quite a few of the forum guys I've played with.

 

[r0wly86]

This is a popular misconception amongst golfers, it is not an automatic penalty if you knock something off a tree with a practice swing.
It is only a penalty if that action improves the area of your intended swing.

I know why it would be a penalty, just pointing out the the nature of the rules are not clear cut. Improving you lies doesn't have to be deliberate so You could be standing in the exact same place, do the exact same thing and for the drop of one twig you could get a penalty or not

 

[chrisd]

I disagree. If I'm playing in a comp with some older members they often have a greater knowledge of the rules than me, indeed they may have been in the exact situation I find myself in, and thus able to advise based on how they proceeded in the past.

Believe me, many of the older guys are good on the rules but dont always keep up to date with them, I've had a few disagreements and had to prove that the rule they refer to changed years ago.

 

[chrisd]

I know why it would be a penalty, just pointing out the the nature of the rules are not clear cut. Improving you lies doesn't have to be deliberate so You could be standing in the exact same place, do the exact same thing and for the drop of one twig you could get a penalty or not

Improving your swing path is probably the hardest rule in the book to call i reckon, but I've seen it said that taking 100 leaves off a tree with many thousands may not improve your line but taking two leaves off a tree with huge leaves may do so. It is one of the few rules that are genuinely arguable imo

 

[DanFST]

Do you not understand the basic principles of golf - that would be like stopping tackling in football.

Really? I assume your clubs stay in the garage when preferred lies comes about? Seeing as it's not golf anymore!

 

[Whereditgo]

Believe me, many of the older guys are good on the rules but dont always keep up to date with them, I've had a few disagreements and had to prove that the rule they refer to changed years ago.

And very often false rulings have become ingrained over the years, I still regularly hear people "declaring" their ball lost, "you just roll the ball out of it's pitch mark" etc etc

Best one I can remember was back when the phone apps first became popular, but weren't allowed in competitions. I quietly mentioned to a F/C that he shouldn't be using his and he got quite heated, insisted we took it up with the pro. The pro just laughed and said I can use this laser range finder in competitions and it can calculate elevation, so if I can use this you lot can certainly use your phones.

 

[Jimaroid]

I prefer not to spend ten minutes trying to find the ruling in an app, if everyone in the group agrees on a ruling that's good enough for me. I'm only going to look it up if we have no idea, or are directly opposed on what the ruling should be.

I don't fancy a comp at your place much.

 

[jim8flog]

There are loads of areas open to interpretation in much the same way, like what constitutes a path or not, nearest point of relief, embedded ball, etc etc.

.

I would say all those points are clearly defined within the rule book. It is just a players failure to read the rule book which is another matter.

Embedded ball - see the drawings on page 101 of the rule book
When is a path not a path where you get relief? In the absence of a local rule the point at which it ceases to be artificially surfaced.
Nearest point of relief is always that. If there is more than one because they are equidistant the player is permitted to choose which point to use.

 

[r0wly86]

I would say all those points are clearly defined within the rule book. It is just a players failure to read the rule book which is another matter.

like with all rules and laws in all sports, just because something is defined doesn't mean it is opened to interpretation as well.

Take rugby, everything is defined in the law book, but incidents on the pitch are all determined by how the referee interpreted the event against the law, or even interpreted the laws themselves. Even if we get into the actual law, everything is defined, but will be interpreted by the judges

 

[chrisd]

And very often false rulings have become ingrained over the years, I still regularly hear people "declaring" their ball lost, "you just roll the ball out of it's pitch mark" etc etc

Best one I can remember was back when the phone apps first became popular, but weren't allowed in competitions. I quietly mentioned to a F/C that he shouldn't be using his and he got quite heated, insisted we took it up with the pro. The pro just laughed and said I can use this laser range finder in competitions and it can calculate elevation, so if I can use this you lot can certainly use your phones.

Pretty typical of what I've had too. I had the " you cant brush anything off the green with anything other than the back of your hand" that one probably changed 10 years ago!

 

[chrisd]

like with all rules and laws in all sports, just because something is defined doesn't mean it is opened to interpretation as well.

Take rugby, everything is defined in the law book, but incidents on the pitch are all determined by how the referee interpreted the event against the law, or even interpreted the laws themselves. Even if we get into the actual law, everything is defined, but will be interpreted by the judges

Any examples come to mind?

 

[DanFST]

Any examples come to mind?

Scotland Red card this weekend is a perfect example.

 

[jim8flog]

like with all rules and laws in all sports, just because something is defined doesn't mean it is opened to interpretation as well.

Take rugby, everything is defined in the law book, but incidents on the pitch are all determined by how the referee interpreted the event against the law, or even interpreted the laws themselves. Even if we get into the actual law, everything is defined, but will be interpreted by the judges

see my edited post #158

 

[Whereditgo]

like with all rules and laws in all sports, just because something is defined doesn't mean it is opened to interpretation as well.

Take rugby, everything is defined in the law book, but incidents on the pitch are all determined by how the referee interpreted the event against the law, or even interpreted the laws themselves. Even if we get into the actual law, everything is defined, but will be interpreted by the judges

I don't think there is a comparison, in your example of rugby the referee may have to interpret intent, take the attempted interception for example resulting in a knock-on. Plus referee's in many other sports are looking at moving objects and moving people. In golf it's pretty much a matter of fact of where the ball is etc and even when there is conjecture (ball hit towards a penalty area) the amount of certainty required is defined.

 

[r0wly86]

Any examples come to mind?

sure, take the England game last Saturday, was Johnny May diving for the line or jumping to avoid a tackle. One interpretation means a try is scored and one means a penalty against. The referee on the day gave the try, Nigel Owens on social media said it should have been a penalty.

In cricket you cannot score leg byes unless you are playing a shot or taking evasive action, but it down to the interpretation of the umpire whether the there was genuine shot being offered or if evasive action was being taken

In law theft is defined as permanently depriving someone of something, most times it is straight forward but that doesn't mean the judge cannot interpret the facts and come to a different conclusion

Knowing the rules in black and white does not necessarily mean you can interpret them all the time correctly. Which is why just a courtesy word with your PPs is normal behaviour in my experience. You are not looking for a new ruling or questioning the rules, you are simply saying this is what has happened, this is how I interpret it, are you okay with that.

This won't be everything obviously, if I have hit into a lake I will take a drop as prescribed, but if there were animal scrapes I would as a courtesy say this as it is less obvious to my PPs what I am doing

 

[chrisd]

Scotland Red card this weekend is a perfect example.

I meant in golf, may not have made that clear

 

[r0wly86]

I don't think there is a comparison, in your example of rugby the referee may have to interpret intent, take the attempted interception for example resulting in a knock-on. Plus referee's in many other sports are looking at moving objects and moving people. In golf it's pretty much a matter of fact of where the ball is etc and even when there is conjecture (ball hit towards a penalty area) the amount of certainty required is defined.

sometimes it is intent, often it is an interpretation of the laws and the actions themselves. See the Johnny May try above