Was I wrong and should he be DQ'd

[Fader]

Right so where to start and also worth noting I wasn't there as i'm not a member of this club but this event occurred in round 1 of this clubs, club championship!

Right so Par 3 18th hole when one guy (we'll call him player A) pulls his tee shot which then comes to rest on a pathway which is OOB! Now from the tee he couldn't see if the ball had settled just before the OOB stakes or if in fact it had crossed them onto the pathway and was OOB. But he did play another ball which was a provisional for 3 off the tee, so he could then go down identify his ball on the path and accept it is OOB and proceed with the other ball he played.

All simple so far pretty standard... Here's the complicated bit

After everyone in the 3 ball had tee'd off he walked down and placed his bag by his provisional and as he was in process of crossing back over the original ball to confirm what he thought and those on the balcony already knew that it was OOB. But.... as he started his walk of confirmation one of the members that was down below the balcony picked up the ball and threw it back in bounds toward another member of the 3 ball (we'll call this guy player B) who happened to be playing from the boundary side of the hole and could be heard saying "here's your ball back mate". However this ball didn't belong to player B, it was actually Player A's.

Still with me!... This is when the commotion started.. Player B motioned Player A to come over and showed him where the ball had been thrown to and finished which was back in bounds! A & B had a brief chat but both looked confused so they called in the 3rd member of the 3 ball (player C) for further discussion... Still head scratching continued so Player A along with Player B who had been the one like those on the balcony witnessed the whole incident approached the balcony and spoke to what I can only assume was club committee member/secretary, they spoke to him briefly and were given a ruling by him telling them "The guy who threw the ball back was an outside agency and the ball is now back in play so is the ball that should be used to finish the hole under no penalty"

Player A was a little uneasy about this but he got nods of approval from Player B, Committee/Secretary man and from another member on the balcony. So Player A returned to the "now" in play ball and played a peach of a chip shot, made the putt and signed for a Par 3.

Now the reason I know about the above incident from today is because I spoke to someone who knows both myself and Player A very well for a good 40 minutes about this and explained even though I wasn't there in my mind I believe this is wrong... His ball was at rest on the path and was OOB, there were enough people there to confirm it was at rest OOB and should have been classed as such despite what occurred. So I believe he should have been penalised under stroke and distance meaning the provisional would then have been officially 3 off the tee, with a single chip & putt that would be a double bogey 5. So factor that in now he signed for a Par 3, I believe in my mind at least this means that by accepting the incorrect ruling and playing the "back in bounds ball" he has now signed for an incorrect score that is lower than it should have been meaning a DQ!

So thoughts!

 

[Val]

As far as I'm led to believe a ball at rest and moved by outside agency must be replaced and played meaning the ball is OOB and player A should be playing his second ball so in essence he signed for a wrong score and should be dq'd

 

[CMAC]

Interesting scenario!

IMO the ball was OOB and he should be playing the provisional under S&D.........however, he was given a ruling by a committee member and playing partner so was proceeding under the impression all was above board, you did state he was uneasy though, so my thoughts are he should have played both balls, recorded both scores and sought final clarification before signing for his score.

 

[Foxholer]

Certainly agree with Val about the Outside Agency bit.
Here's the text of 18.1.
'If a ball at rest is moved by an outside agency, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced.'
There's a note about uncertainty, but that's not the case here.

I believe that also means a DQ.

If, however, the Committee/Secretary man actually has some status in the running of the comp, there may be an appeal available under 33-7 - for similar reason to Tiger's - that it had been 'ok-ed', then found not to be so.

What a bunch of drongos!

 

[Fader]

So it was what I thought under outside agency the ball must be replaced so in this case meaning the ball would be OOB, thus meaning under penalty of S&D his provisional was now in play and he is 3 off the tee.

3 off the tee meaning he has signed wrong score and is therefore DQ'd by default.

 

[bozza]

This is the reason I carry one of the small rule books in my bag, a quick look would have confirmed all this and saved the possible DQ.

Funny how people that think that just because someone is on a comitee, captain etc they know the rules better than other players.

Hope your friend doesn't get a DQ but it doesn't look good.

 

[Tommo21]

Committees cannot override rules, especially as basic as this.

 

[Colin L]

Committees cannot override rules, especially as basic as this.

Committees cannot override the rules, but committee members and referees can make mistakes. A player should not be penalised for a referee/committee error. You would need to be sure of the status of the person who told Player A his ball was in play. If he was indeed a Committee member, I would say there should be no penalty and no DQ. A's score stands. See Decision 34-3/3.3
http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-34/#d34-3/3.3

If the person was not a committee member, then his "ruling" has no authority and Player A should have continued with his provisional ball because his original was OOB. It is his responsibility to know the rules.

 

[MashieNiblick]

Recent discussion on a similar OOB issue here

http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?58225-Outside-agency-moves-ball

Ball was at rest OOB. When moved it should have been replaced OOB and player should have continued with provisional. How can so many people have been so wrong!

Now the tricky bit. Player A asked for a ruling and got one, albeit wrong.

As I undrstand it it all depends on the staus of the person(s) who advised him. If it was was an official "referee" or persons effectively acting as the Committee then I belive Player A is OK. The referee's/committee's decsion is final, even if wrong.

Rule 34-2 - Referee’s Decision

If a referee has been appointed by the Committee, his decision is final.

Decision 34-2/2 Referee Authorises Player to Infringe a Rule

Q. In error, a referee authorised a player to infringe a Rule of Golf. Is the player absolved from penalty in such a case?

A. Yes. Under Rule 34-2, a referee's decision is final, whether or not the decision is correct.

Rule 34-3 - Committee’s Decision

In the absence of a referee, any dispute or doubtful point on the Rules must be referred to the Committee, whose decision is final.

 

[Fader]

Right I've now had this straight from the horses mouth so to speak from Player A in question. He tells me he was given the decision by the competition secretary so proceeded under his guidance (clearly though this was wrong guidance). He has since last night rung the comp secretary to DQ himself and withdraw after researching rule 18-1.

He has been advised by comp secretary that he is responsible for the ruling given and as such score will stand and no DQ is to be applied so can therefore continue with playing in the Club Championship. I'm assuming based on ColinL post above this is ok to do.

Still sits uneasy with me as i believe this is a simple rule that should have been addressed and doesn't it state under 18-1 that if a ball is not replaced having known to be moved by an outside agency that if it isn't replaced its a 2 shot penalty! So even with the ruling he has failed to apply a different penalty and still signed for a wrong score. Though i may have that totally wrong.

My brain hurts!

 

[duncan mackie]

Right I've now had this straight from the horses mouth so to speak from Player A in question. He tells me he was given the decision by the competition secretary so proceeded under his guidance (clearly though this was wrong guidance). He has since last night rung the comp secretary to DQ himself and withdraw after researching rule 18-1.

He has been advised by comp secretary that he is responsible for the ruling given and as such score will stand and no DQ is to be applied so can therefore continue with playing in the Club Championship. I'm assuming based on ColinL post above this is ok to do.

Still sits uneasy with me as i believe this is a simple rule that should have been addressed and doesn't it state under 18-1 that if a ball is not replaced having known to be moved by an outside agency that if it isn't replaced its a 2 shot penalty! So even with the ruling he has failed to apply a different penalty and still signed for a wrong score. Though i may have that totally wrong.

My brain hurts!

don't know why your brain hurts -

1. you can't DQ yourself
2. player A would have been DQ'd if he played his provisional as the 'committee' had ruled that his original ball was the ball in play - how would he have felt then!!! Just accept it.

why do people get so wound up, I bet there were at least 50 rule breaches during the competition that, if established between the time the players had returned their cards and the competition was closed would mean players DQ'd......(most will involve dropping).

well meaning committee members will also make many mistakes this weekend - doesn't need a Mail on Sunday exposee. it shouldn't happen but does.

 

[Fader]

It hurts because as with all things in golf rules its to easy for things to be misconstrued and the fact that Player A is actually well in with a shout of winning the club championship at the club and I wouldn't want his character besmirched by others at his club should he win as a result of a favourable ruling.

In golf we know much if this game is about integrity and I don't want Player A's integrity to be questioned if he wins by say 1 shot a shot that could easily have been a worse score with the correct decision. There's nothing worse than a golf club for someone to get snide remarks if somebody else feels aggrieved by a decision.

Why do i care so much about a club championship at a club I'm not a member at or a player in that competition well simple Answer is Player A is my brother.

 

[Colin L]

......Still sits uneasy with me as i believe this is a simple rule that should have been addressed and doesn't it state under 18-1 that if a ball is not replaced having known to be moved by an outside agency that if it isn't replaced its a 2 shot penalty! So even with the ruling he has failed to apply a different penalty and still signed for a wrong score. Though i may have that totally wrong.
My brain hurts!

As Duncan says, take it easy! It doesn't matter what any rule says, if a referee or committee member gives a wrong ruling, the player has to abide by the decision and is exonerated from any penalty. The only person who might feel uncomfortable in this is the committee member who got it wrong - bit of a red face I expect.

 

[duncan mackie]

It hurts because as with all things in golf rules its to easy for things to be misconstrued and the fact that Player A is actually well in with a shout of winning the club championship at the club and I wouldn't want his character besmirched by others at his club should he win as a result of a favourable ruling.

In golf we know much if this game is about integrity and I don't want Player A's integrity to be questioned if he wins by say 1 shot a shot that could easily have been a worse score with the correct decision. There's nothing worse than a golf club for someone to get snide remarks if somebody else feels aggrieved by a decision.

Why do i care so much about a club championship at a club I'm not a member at or a player in that competition well simple Answer is Player A is my brother.

all of which is why I pointed out no 2 in my post!

he has to abide by what the CS ruled - it cannot be an issue for the player, if anything it's an issue for the CS.

your brother is mentally at least 2 shots down playing today, because of what he perceives as an issue - he should just go out and do his best.

the CS is the one that anything should be directed to/at in due course.

if he really really feels it all a problem then he can sign for an additional 2 shots on the first hole today - job done.

 

[Fader]

Duncan:thup:

hadn't really thought of it in that way. Appreciate the insight and will see how he goes, I'm not playing till later so I'll speak to him to see how he got on before I go off to play this afternoon.

 

[CMAC]

Doesn't acting as per post 3 solve all the heartache?

 

[Colin L]

There wouldn't be much point in invoking Rule 3-3 and playing both balls in order to get a Committee ruling on a Committee ruling.

 

[CMAC]

There wouldn't be much point in invoking Rule 3-3 and playing both balls in order to get a Committee ruling on a Committee ruling.

But who's to say the person was an official comp official? OP only assumed he was a committee person, Better safe than DQ'd and having all the issues as above

 

[Ethan]

Sounds line a good faith mistake but it is now done and the result stands.

 

[Colin L]

But who's to say the person was an official comp official? OP only assumed he was a committee person, Better safe than DQ'd and having all the issues as above

Indeed, had there been doubt about the status of the person. I was thinking the player was satisfied that this was a committee member - and as such he would have the authority to make a ruling.

As Duncan says, there will be many many breaches every medal round up and down the country. I watched a player from the clubhouse taking relief from GUR by going from where his ball had been to the fairway at right angles to the direction of the hole which simple geometry tells you must be nearer the hole. I've no reason to doubt he thought he was doing the right thing and little reason to imagine he was the only one that day. Did I abandon my rather nice pint of Belhaven Black and rush out to deal? Too right I didn't. :cheers: