Three Q's from the Weekend's golf

[tallpaul]

Three (amicable) disagreements arose during my round on Saturday. Please could you confirm the correct ruling in each case?

1) FC hit shot toward lateral hazard. I was certain the ball was in the water but FC produced a new ball and declared they were playing a provisional... Did he have this option?

2) On the green, FC1's ball was on the line of the FC2's putt. He asked that the ball be marked away from his line. FC1 placed putter toe next to the ball, at 90° to the putting line, and placed a marker behind the putters heel. Before FC1 lifted his ball, FC2 declared that the ball must be marked before it was lifted. Was the putter toe sufficient to mark the balls original position relative the location of the marker or should the ball be marked, lifted and then the position of the marker moved?

3) FC's shot resulted in his ball resting on a path. There was also a bench on the path between the ball and the pin. His nearest point of relief still left the bench between his ball and the pin. Was he also entitled to further relief from the bench?

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Foxholer]

1. Yes - but that (normally) rules out any claim that a ball, not found, is in the Hazard. In The Rules, Provisional is only an option if ball may be Lost or OOB (Rule 27), not of the Water Hazards one (Rule 26).

2. Yes. Rules require ball to be marked. They don't demand a certain way. As long as ball can be Replaced, then 'all good'.

3. No. Unless specifically permitted by LR. You generally get relief for Lie, but not line of sight. Tournaments tend to have a 'Line of Sight' LR to cover Advertising Hoardings and the like. BTW. On some courses don't (eg St Andrews) you don't get relief from roads/tracks either, so check the card before lifting the ball!

 

[tallpaul]

Thanks for the response.

Regarding 1). If he had played his 'provisional' ball and subsequently found his first ball outside the lateral hazard, could he have played it without penalty? Does the classification of hazard have any relevance?

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Foxholer]

Yes. Once the original ball is found (within 5 minutes etc), the provisional ball becomes irrelevant - irrespective of where the original ball is found. So type of hazard doesn't matter either.

Playing a Provisional when the ball may be 'lost in the hazard' does carry a 'risk' though. As stated in 1st reply, it removes the option of claiming that ball is actually 'lost in the hazard' - as by applying the 'may be lost' Rule you cannot claim that you 'Know or are virtually certain' that a ball, that you couldn't find when you searched, is actually in the hazard. Whether you could, if you hadn't played the Provisional, is a completely different question!

 

[MashieNiblick]

2) On the green, FC1's ball was on the line of the FC2's putt. He asked that the ball be marked away from his line. FC1 placed putter toe next to the ball, at 90° to the putting line, and placed a marker behind the putters heel. Before FC1 lifted his ball, FC2 declared that the ball must be marked before it was lifted. Was the putter toe sufficient to mark the balls original position relative the location of the marker or should the ball be marked, lifted and then the position of the marker moved?


Cheers,

Paul

Either is fine so long as you use the same method in reverse when replacing the ball. Decsion 20-1/16 Method Used to Mark Position of Ball, says

"When moving a ball or ball-marker to the side to prevent it from interfering with another player's stance or stroke, the player may measure from the side of the ball or ball-marker. In order to accurately replace the ball on the spot from which it was lifted, the steps used to move the ball or ball-marker to the side should be reversed."