Stakes indicating boundary

[Colin L]

Looking for quick answer from a qualified colleague. A boundary is defined by in or beyond a ditch. White stakes on the courseindicate that there is a boundary. I think these are movable obstructions not boundary objects. Confirmation or contradiction would be appreciated.

 

[Neilds]

Our scorecard states the stakes are "immovable, no free relief" but no exact reference is stated

 

[Colin L]

Thanks Neil. That would suggest your rules person took them to be movable obstructions, hence the need for that local rule.

 

[wjemather]

The definition of a boundary object states "artificial objects defining or showing out of bounds", so your stakes are boundary objects.
MLR-A6 allows them to be treated differently (as immovable/movable obstructions).

 

[Colin L]

The definition of a boundary object states "artificial objects defining or showing out of bounds", so your stakes are boundary objects.
MLR-A6 allows them to be treated differently (as immovable/movable obstructions).

Thanks. It was the word “showing” that prompted me to question my initial (and logical) presumption that being on the course they weren’t boundary objects and to consult.

 

[Steven Rules]

The last part of the definition of Out of Bounds indicates to me that the stakes are boundary objects:

Lines: When defined by a painted line on the ground, the boundary edge is the course-side edge of the line, and the line itself is out of bounds. When a line on the ground defines the boundary edge, stakes may be used to show where the boundary edge is located.
When stakes are used to define or show the boundary edge, they are boundary objects.

 

[Colin L]

Thanks, Steven and wjemather. Chapter and verse.

I hate finding lacunae in my knowledge and so it's great to fill them in.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

On a related matter.

For one specific stretch the boundary to our land is fenced. Just inside the fence (maybe a foot from it) we have a hedge running parallel with the fence. Some of the hedge is supported by cane ‘stakes’. The canes are a relic from when the hedge was planted…they are not now required but a few are still there.

My understanding is that I do not get relief from stakes in a staked hedge if the hedge is a boundary hedge. But I’m not sure if this hedge is indeed a boundary hedge as it does not define the actual boundary of our land - the fence does that. We have no white boundary stakes along this stretch.

Scenario. My ball is beyond the hedge at rest against the fence. I do not get relief from the fence. But do I get free relief from a stake in the hedge if I could somehow take a stance; do I have to be able to take a stance to demonstrate the stake is impacting my swing to get free relief as a result of it being there. If I can get free relief from a stake in the hedge I could take a free drop away from the fence?

I assume that if the hedge is the course boundary, then a ball through it resting against the fence will be OoB?

 

[DickInShorts]

Presumably this should be stated in the LRs for the course?
I’ve played a course (Buckpool) where it’s the course side of a ditch rather than the hedge beyond which is the OOB line

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Presumably this should be stated in the LRs for the course?
I’ve played a course (Buckpool) where it’s the course side of a ditch rather than the hedge beyond which is the OOB line

Indeed we have an OoB LR

1. Out of Bounds (Rule 18.2)

All land beyond any white stakes, fences, hedges and banks bounding the course

 

[Steven Rules]

On a related matter.

For one specific stretch the boundary to our land is fenced. Just inside the fence (maybe a foot from it) we have a hedge running parallel with the fence. Some of the hedge is supported by cane ‘stakes’. The canes are a relic from when the hedge was planted…they are not now required but a few are still there.

My understanding is that I do not get relief from stakes in a staked hedge if the hedge is a boundary hedge. But I’m not sure if this hedge is indeed a boundary hedge as it does not define the actual boundary of our land - the fence does that. We have no white boundary stakes along this stretch.

Scenario. My ball is beyond the hedge at rest against the fence. I do not get relief from the fence. But do I get free relief from a stake in the hedge if I could somehow take a stance; do I have to be able to take a stance to demonstrate the stake is impacting my swing to get free relief as a result of it being there. If I can get free relief from a stake in the hedge I could take a free drop away from the fence?

I assume that if the hedge is the course boundary, then a ball through it resting against the fence will be OoB?

From your description, and the wording of the Local Rule ("All land beyond any white stakes, fences...."), the fence is the boundary, not the hedge.

Therefore you ask a valid question about whether you are entitled to immovable obstruction relief from the stakes in the hedge. From your description, it sounds to me that the stakes are very inaccessible inside the hedge. ("...a stake in the hedge if I could somehow take a stance; do I have to be able to take a stance ....)

I draw to your attention Rule 16.1a(3):

No Relief When Clearly Unreasonable.

There is no relief under Rule 16.1:

When playing the ball as it lies is clearly unreasonable because of something from which the player is not allowed to take free relief (such as when a player is unable to make a stroke because of where the ball lies in a bush), or

When interference exists only because a player chooses a club, type of stance or swing or direction of play that is clearly unreasonable under the circumstances.

It is impossible to be definitive without being there and seeing the situation but, if I was called for a ruling, where the ball is up against the fence, and the stake nestled deep in the hedge, I'd certainly be paying close attention to whether the stroke you are trying to play (or trying to demonstrate that there is interference from the stake) is clearly unreasonable under the circumstances.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Taking a stance and making a stroke are totally impossible - not just unreasonable - so that sorts that aspect of it thankyou With back in line not an option, the only options are then back to where last stroke played from or drop under penalty within two club lengths not nearer the hole.

As it happens the latter would find the ball still within, or at best close to the hedge. But what then of the cane stakes in the hedge. If when taking penalty relief from the boundary fence the relief point still within hedge then tough - still unreasonable to claim relief from stakes. But if just out or at very edge I might just be able to take some sort of a stance - but with a very severely impaired swing (maybe just able to try to nudge the ball away from the hedge). However if there was a stake within 'reach' of a stance and swing for such a shot, free relief? That would take me away from the hedge and with much better swing and shot options.

 

[salfordlad]

Indeed we have an OoB LR

1. Out of Bounds (Rule 18.2)

All land beyond any white stakes, fences, hedges and banks bounding the course

You need to clarify if 'beyond' that specific hedge is OOB. Those LR words are completely ambiguous if there is both a hedge and a fence - which one counts?

But assuming for discussion that the fence is the boundary and the hedge is on the course, you also need to confirm whether the hedge is a relief situation or whether these canes are simply outdated relics with no current role defining a relief situation. If the latter is the case, you have interference with a boundary object and you also have interference with an artificial object - the cane stake. If these are the facts, I see two possible rulings: a) If that cane can be removed then it is a movable obstruction and you can pull it out and you get no relief for the position of the ball. b) If by some chance the cane can't be moved but it is in a hedge, there is no relief from the cane because the scenario fails the 16.1a(3) test - the stroke is unreasonable because of something other than the obstruction.

Edit: I now see Steven has also gotten into this space.

 

[Steven Rules]

you also need to confirm whether the hedge is a relief situation

Yes. I must confess I didn't pay much attention to this possibility when writing #11.

What, if anything, do the Local Rules say about free relief from the hedge, or 'staked trees', and do those relics of stakes afford some special relief status from the hedge?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

You need to clarify if 'beyond' that specific hedge is OOB. Those LR words are completely ambiguous if there is both a hedge and a fence - which one counts?

But assuming for discussion that the fence is the boundary and the hedge is on the course, you also need to confirm whether the hedge is a relief situation or whether these canes are simply outdated relics with no current role defining a relief situation. If the latter is the case, you have interference with a boundary object and you also have interference with an artificial object - the cane stake. If these are the facts, I see two possible rulings: a) If that cane can be removed then it is a movable obstruction and you can pull it out and you get no relief for the position of the ball. b) If by some chance the cane can't be moved but it is in a hedge, there is no relief from the cane because the scenario fails the 16.1a(3) test - the stroke is unreasonable because of something other than the obstruction.

Edit: I now see Steven has also gotten into this space.

The cane stakes are 99.99% likely to be 'relics' from when the hedge was planted. Now if I were able to claim free relief from such a cane stake then from your a) why would I try and pull it out to cancel out that free relief - maybe I didn't fully understand your point.

On your b) and free relief from a stake applies if I could take some form of stance, albeit in a very restricted way?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Yes. I must confess I didn't pay much attention to this possibility when writing #11.

What, if anything, do the Local Rules say about free relief from the hedge, or 'staked trees', and do those relics of stakes afford some special relief status from the hedge?

Nothing specific for the scenario.

Though under Relief from Immovable Obstructions (16.1b): Young trees, if staked, the ball MUST be lifted.

I guess it's one of these 'it'll never or only very rarely happen' scenarios....though tbh I think it probably happens not uncommonly as the hedge and fence are not that far off the back of a green - and as one of my playing companions did on Sunday - thinned pitch over the green, through hedge and up against the fence.

 

[Steven Rules]

On your b) and free relief from a stake applies if I could take some form of stance, albeit in a very restricted way?

Taking a cramped or restricted stance doesn't sound clearly unreasonable under the circumstances. In fact it sounds quite necessary.

But, once the stance is taken, demonstrating interference by the stakes - which are buried deep in the hedge - to either the stance or the swing does sound to me like it is clearly unreasonable.

 

[salfordlad]

The cane stakes are 99.99% likely to be 'relics' from when the hedge was planted. Now if I were able to claim free relief from such a cane stake then from your a) why would I try and pull it out to cancel out that free relief - maybe I didn't fully understand your point.

On your b) and free relief from a stake applies if I could take some form of stance, albeit in a very restricted way?

On a) if the stake is movable, the ONLY relief available to you is to move the stake, that is the way relief from a movable obstruction works, you are not entitled to move your ball. So move the stake and have at it.
On b) as Steven touches on, if that immovable obstruction is entirely surrounded by a natural object from which there is no relief, there is no relief from the immovable obstruction due to the operation of Rule 16.1a(3). Another example is a bunch of tree roots and your ball is among them and unplayable but your ball is in a rabbit hole. No relief from the rabbit hole because the reason you have an interfered with (or no) stroke is not the rabbit hole, it is the roots. If it is something other than the ACC that is making a stroke unreasonable, the ACC condition is irrelevant and there is no (free) relief.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Thanks guys.

I've asked our Handicap Sec (a qualified R&A referee) the basic question - what constitutes the course boundary - the hedge or the fence. And I'll take things from there.

 

[salfordlad]

Thanks guys.

I've asked our Handicap Sec (a qualified R&A referee) the basic question - what constitutes the course boundary - the hedge or the fence. And I'll take things from there.

I suggest there would also be merit in querying the status of the cane stakes. If the response is, as you suggest, they have no continuing role, I would simply pull them out, they can only lead to confusion if left.