Unknown ruling -- play 2 balls ??

[Foxholer]

I'm still hoping to hear what alternative would be seen to be better for matchplay than the simple process of needing a ruling, doing what you think is right and getting on with your game, with both players equally aware the result of that hole is in question. There seems to an awful lot of noise about nothing much.

The same (2nd ball) process as in Strokeplay.

 

[Foxholer]

So, if it is twaddle, are you saying the rule in match play (on proceeding when there is doubt as to a rule) IS adequate?

It certainly resolves the situation. But may not be as 'fair' as the one in Strokeplay. And 'fairness' is a pretty fundamental part of The Rules, if not 'the game'!

 

[Swango1980]

It certainly resolves the situation. But may not be as 'fair' as the one in Strokeplay. And 'fairness' is a pretty fundamental part of The Rules, if not 'the game'!

Therefore, you ARE saying it is inadequate in match play. As you think there is a more adequate procedure (I.e as in stroke play). Yet you highlighted this very statement as twaddle?

Strange.

 

[Colin L]

The same (2nd ball) process as in Strokeplay.

Which makes no difference whatsoever as you still won't know the result of the hole till later but it will unnecessarily take longer.

I genuinely don't get what is supposedly unfair when the situation is exactly the same for both players.

 

[phillarrow]

The same (2nd ball) process as in Strokeplay.

I think the point is that playing two balls in matchplay doesn't achieve anything.
The result of the hole, and therefore the match, still won't be known until the ruling has been made after the match has been completed. Therefore, playing the second ball literally has no benefit or hindrance - it's just a pointless exercise.

In strokeplay - as was your really good answer to the question I asked on the other thread about what to do if we believe OOB stakes have been positioned incorrectly - playing the second ball allows the player to complete the hole and then submit two possible final scores. These final scores could be several shots different, depending how the rest of the hole played out. Playing the second ball in stroke play prevents a possible DQ from a possible winning position. In match play it would only ever be one hole won, lost, or drawn - and that doesn't change by playing the second ball.

I know there's nothing here you don't already know but I'm just trying to articulate it all together because I think you've got bogged down a bit in your thinking on this one?

 

[Foxholer]

Which makes no difference whatsoever as you still won't know the result of the hole till later but it will unnecessarily take longer.
....

That's not a valid 'rule' reason.

I genuinely don't get what is supposedly unfair when the situation is exactly the same for both players.

The removal of the opportunity to avoid the 'automatic loss of hole' that might occur.

 

[Colin L]

That's not a valid 'rule' reason.

The removal of the opportunity to avoid the 'automatic loss of hole' that might occur.

The only reason you will lose the hole in question is because you got it wrong.

Night, night. My brain went off duty at 2359.

 

[Foxholer]

I think the point is that playing two balls in matchplay doesn't achieve anything.
The result of the hole, and therefore the match, still won't be known until the ruling has been made after the match has been completed. Therefore, playing the second ball literally has no benefit or hindrance - it's just a pointless exercise.
...

Wrong!
Strokeplay 2nd ball can be 'reverted to' if ruling deems 1st ball 'invalid'.
Matchplay equivalent means automatic loss of hole.

 

[Foxholer]

...
Night, night. My brain went off duty at 2359.

Apparently earlier than that!

 

[Foxholer]

I think the point is that playing two balls in matchplay doesn't achieve anything.
...

See post 68!

 

[Colin L]

Apparently earlier than that!

I'm in France at the moment, smarty pants.

 

[phillarrow]

Wrong!
Strokeplay 2nd ball can be 'reverted to' if ruling deems 1st ball 'invalid'.
Matchplay equivalent means automatic loss of hole.

But if you're correct about the ruling, then you've won the hole anyway - so the second ball was ultimately redundant.

And if you're wrong about the ruling, then you've lost the hole. In this scenario, the only possible way a second ball could help would be if you were wrong about the ruling but then won the hole with your second ball?

I can see how that looks like it's a benefit, but my view would be that if you're still winning a hole after playing 3 off the tee, then it's highly unlikely the match will come down to a single hole!

 

[Foxholer]

But if you're correct about the ruling, then you've won the hole anyway - so the second ball was ultimately redundant.

And if you're wrong about the ruling, then you've lost the hole. In this scenario, the only possible way a second ball could help would be if you were wrong about the ruling but then won the hole with your second ball?
...
!

Those aren't the only possible results!

...
I can see how that looks like it's a benefit, but my view would be that if you're still winning a hole after playing 3 off the tee, then it's highly unlikely the match will come down to a single hole!

That statement is rather daft!