He could declare he’s only aiming for his own ball.
Striking two balls at the same time
- Thread starter Steven Rules
- Start date
Would that change his lie as there would be a void where the other ball was.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2020
- Messages
- 650
Not necessary. You may play a ball that has interference with a movable obstruction, which is what the stray ball is. But there is another piece of rules detail that hasn't been aired yet.
For the first question, he can't lift his own ball but the 'other ball' is a movable obstruction - so it can be moved. If players own ball moves as a result, it has to be replaced on its original spot. If it won't stay there - which it probably won't - there is a procedure.
Second question. Struggling a bit but I'd say it depends on how close the two balls are. (You don't actually say - only that it's 'under'). If there's a degree of separation I'd say you could use the ' no intention/no stroke' argument as the player only ever intended to hit their own ball. But if they are very close, then I'd say there had to be an intention to hit the other ball - in order to be making a proper stroke at the correct ball. So a penalty? Help ...
Second question. Struggling a bit but I'd say it depends on how close the two balls are. (You don't actually say - only that it's 'under'). If there's a degree of separation I'd say you could use the ' no intention/no stroke' argument as the player only ever intended to hit their own ball. But if they are very close, then I'd say there had to be an intention to hit the other ball - in order to be making a proper stroke at the correct ball. So a penalty? Help ...
But (?) even though it is a movable obstruction, i dont think you can make a stroke at another ball without penalty? Or can you?
I'm guessing that even if it's OK, then presumably the ball at rest moved by moving ball rules come into play?
I'm guessing that even if it's OK, then presumably the ball at rest moved by moving ball rules come into play?
If it’s classed as a movable obstruction it’s not classed as another ball.
so not making a stroke at another ball.
only guessing though.
so not making a stroke at another ball.
only guessing though.
Thread starter
#29
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2022
- Messages
- 305
If the ball is on a movable obstruction (such as the stray ball) other than on the putting green, free relief may be taken by lifting the ball, removing the movable obstruction and dropping a ball.
The reference point is the estimated point right under where the ball was at rest on the movable obstruction. The relief area is one club-length from the reference point not nearer to the hole.
In this situation, the presence or otherrwise of a void is irrelevant and the lie is not recreated.
The reference point is the estimated point right under where the ball was at rest on the movable obstruction. The relief area is one club-length from the reference point not nearer to the hole.
In this situation, the presence or otherrwise of a void is irrelevant and the lie is not recreated.
Thread starter
#31
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2022
- Messages
- 305
It is variously and simultaneously a movable obstruction, outside influence and wrong ball. Being one of these doesn't preclude it from being another at the same time.
Depending on the actual lie
In my view the ball has not come to rest as per the rules
In Play
The status of a player’s ball when it lies on the course and is being used in the play of
a hole:
Therefore the ball must be lifted the other ball removed and the original ball dropped
In my view the ball has not come to rest as per the rules
In Play
The status of a player’s ball when it lies on the course and is being used in the play of
a hole:
Therefore the ball must be lifted the other ball removed and the original ball dropped
Thread starter
#33
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2022
- Messages
- 305
I am afraid I am not following the logic of this post at all. Why is the ball not at rest? What does the definition of 'in play' have to do with it? You might need to expand a bit more to make the argument clearer.
Depending upon the precise situation the ball is at rest on top of another ball, it is not at rest on the course.
Therefore the ball must be dropped and not placed which is what would be done if it was just resting against a movable obstruction.
Therefore the ball must be dropped and not placed which is what would be done if it was just resting against a movable obstruction.
Oops. Am conflating the OP question with that posed later by Colin L
Hmm. I think Colin needs to be more precise in setting out the scenario of his 'wee twist'?
Are the two balls actually touching each other - ie is one actually sitting on the other. Or are they just one above the other - separated by grass perhaps? Because I think in one scenario you are permitted to lift your ball to move the movable obstruction, but in the other, you aren't. (My post at #26 was assuming ball's weren't actually touching). Or am I up the wrong tree?
Are the two balls actually touching each other - ie is one actually sitting on the other. Or are they just one above the other - separated by grass perhaps? Because I think in one scenario you are permitted to lift your ball to move the movable obstruction, but in the other, you aren't. (My post at #26 was assuming ball's weren't actually touching). Or am I up the wrong tree?
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2020
- Messages
- 650
There is public USGA guidance on this issue. If your ball is touching the course and touching a movable obstruction (in this case a stray golf ball), the applicable rule is 15.2a(1) (relief from movable obstruction), not 15.2b (ball on movable obstruction). Does this matter? It does, because in the 15.2a world the player needs to move the movable obstruction, not lift the ball and if the player's ball moves (inevitable here), the player attempts to replace and if the ball won't come to rest then follow the guidance of 14.2e. If your ball is entirely on the MO and not touching the course, 15.2b guides - lift ball and drop in a 1CL relief area based on a reference point directly under the MO (in same area of course and not nearer the hole).
https://www.facebook.com/groups/RulesOfGolf/permalink/3381592671896405/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/RulesOfGolf/permalink/3381592671896405/
Thread starter
#38
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2022
- Messages
- 305
The suspense is eatng at me. I am struggling to think what the other piece of rules detail might be. All I can think of is that you might have in mind the unlikely possibility that the stray ball is actually the ball in play of another player playing on the course. I assume that's not what you're thinking of?
Salfordlad has it, of course.
There you have it from the lad from Salford, Either move the obstruction and then replace the balll in play after the inevitable movement or lift the ball, move the obstruction and drop a ball depending on whether ball in play is touching the course. I would suggest that the player's ball is inevitably going to be touching the course. If it weren't, you would have the situation of one spherical object balanced without any other support precisely on top of another. How likely is that? Whether the two balls are touching each other or not, the player's ball will be touching the ground It doesn't matter whether the two balls are touching each other, the upper one will in either case be touching the course which means the relief procedure has to be to remove the obstruction first and then replace the ball, dealing as is likely with the problem of the lie.
He is not obliged to take relief from a movable obstruction and so yes to the first part.
I don't see any problem in his hitting the stray ball first. it is not his ball in play; he is not hitting it in the belief that it is the ball in play; he is simply hitting a movable obstruction in the process of making a stroke at his ball in play. (Why he would do so when he could take relief is another matter). No penalty then, though the outcome might not be good.
All open to challenge of course!
There you have it from the lad from Salford, Either move the obstruction and then replace the balll in play after the inevitable movement or lift the ball, move the obstruction and drop a ball depending on whether ball in play is touching the course. I would suggest that the player's ball is inevitably going to be touching the course. If it weren't, you would have the situation of one spherical object balanced without any other support precisely on top of another. How likely is that? Whether the two balls are touching each other or not, the player's ball will be touching the ground It doesn't matter whether the two balls are touching each other, the upper one will in either case be touching the course which means the relief procedure has to be to remove the obstruction first and then replace the ball, dealing as is likely with the problem of the lie.
He is not obliged to take relief from a movable obstruction and so yes to the first part.
I don't see any problem in his hitting the stray ball first. it is not his ball in play; he is not hitting it in the belief that it is the ball in play; he is simply hitting a movable obstruction in the process of making a stroke at his ball in play. (Why he would do so when he could take relief is another matter). No penalty then, though the outcome might not be good.
All open to challenge of course!
Does 'in play' have anything to do with it? Most 'wrong balls' on the course aren't in play but they are still wrong balls? (Otherwise the wrong ball rule is a nonsense)
So, what about my thoughts in #26?
Eg. Player knows (can see) 'other ball' is there
Other ball is in very close proximity to players ball.
Whilst 'other ball' is a movable obstruction, it is still 'a ball' (ie a wrong ball which you are not allowed to make a stroke at without penalty
To hit own ball, player knows they'll have to also hit other ball - ie can't hit own ball without intending to hit 'other ball' as well
So is the player making a stroke at a wrong ball? Should there be a penalty.
Ps - only asking, not arguing.
So, what about my thoughts in #26?
Eg. Player knows (can see) 'other ball' is there
Other ball is in very close proximity to players ball.
Whilst 'other ball' is a movable obstruction, it is still 'a ball' (ie a wrong ball which you are not allowed to make a stroke at without penalty
To hit own ball, player knows they'll have to also hit other ball - ie can't hit own ball without intending to hit 'other ball' as well
So is the player making a stroke at a wrong ball? Should there be a penalty.
Ps - only asking, not arguing.