Water Hazard Stakes - Ok to move?

[AmandaJR]

Scenario from yesterday and just want to be 100% sure of the correct rule for future reference. One person had a differing view to everyone else but would not accept the answer until a call was made to the R&A!

Ball in hazard but playable. Yellow Hazard stakes deemed as movable obstructions - as in not deemed immovable in local rules. Stake removed, shot taken, rather well if I may say so myself . Stake replaced to a "you can't move that". We had already had a long debate as same player was insistent I couldn't touch a single reed or blade of grass on my actual swing. She was adamant they could only be moved if you weren't actually in the hazard - the stakes that is.

Rulebooks to hand but couldn't find a definitive answer there - to which I was in the "if it doesn't say you can't, then you can" but in the end it remained a query. Debate continued long afterwards as pro agreed with everyone else but still the card was in query until a call to the R&A - at this point I'd given up!

So...just a query in my mind is this - stake not intefering with swing or stance but intefering with line of play - would it still be within the rules to remove it?

Thanks.

 

[Region3]

An obstruction is defined as (paraphrasing) "anything artificial blah blah blah except {3 exceptions}". Hazard stakes are not one of the exceptions. I can't find anything that specifically mentions stakes defining a water hazard.

If you want to really wind them up, let your club touch the grass as you address the ball. As long as the ground doesn't support the weight of the club that's fine too, but your pp will be apoplectic.

 

[Twire]

If you look at definitions under water hazard it states "Stakes used to define the margin of or identify a water hazard are obstructions".

An obstruction is a movable obstruction if it may removed without unreasonable effort, without unduly delaying play and without causing damage. Otherwise it is an immovable obstruction.

 

[AmandaJR]

Yep - just couldn't get pp (or her husband who she phoned!) to agree to that as she was convinced there was an exception. So long as I'm sure for the future that's good for me. I'd have hoped having been proven wrong on the same hole, about the same shot, she might have had cause to question herself.

 

[woody69]

Scenario from yesterday and just want to be 100% sure of the correct rule for future reference. One person had a differing view to everyone else but would not accept the answer until a call was made to the R&A!

Ball in hazard but playable. Yellow Hazard stakes deemed as movable obstructions - as in not deemed immovable in local rules. Stake removed, shot taken, rather well if I may say so myself . Stake replaced to a "you can't move that". We had already had a long debate as same player was insistent I couldn't touch a single reed or blade of grass on my actual swing. She was adamant they could only be moved if you weren't actually in the hazard - the stakes that is.

Rulebooks to hand but couldn't find a definitive answer there - to which I was in the "if it doesn't say you can't, then you can" but in the end it remained a query. Debate continued long afterwards as pro agreed with everyone else but still the card was in query until a call to the R&A - at this point I'd given up!

So...just a query in my mind is this - stake not intefering with swing or stance but intefering with line of play - would it still be within the rules to remove it?

Thanks.

What an absolute load of twaddle.

 

[Hosel Fade]

You can remove hazard stakes anytime you want so long as the course doesn't declare them immovable by local rule for fear of them not being put back properly

On future occasions take your rule book out of the bag, give it to the self proclaimed expert and ask them "show me where it says that"

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only stakes you cannot move are out of bounds markers?

 

[Foxholer]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only stakes you cannot move are out of bounds markers?

Correct! - unless defined as IOs by LR, or concreted in (or made immovable by some other means) as I have experienced occasionally!

 

[user2010]

@AmandaJR, I have this in my bag all the time, it is brilliant, with pictures and a handy size and is much easier to navigate than the official free book from the R&A.

www.golfbusinessnews.com/news/media/golf-rules-quick-reference-2016-edition/

It`s available from Amazon and stops disputes very quickly.:thup:

 

[Hosel Fade]

Also good to familiarise yourself with the procedure in 3-3 which allows you to play two balls in the case of there being a doubt in procedure.

 

[rulefan]

So...just a query in my mind is this - stake not intefering with swing or stance but intefering with line of play - would it still be within the rules to remove it?

Thanks.

Yes. You can remove a movable obstruction at any time providing you don't cause damage or undue delay.

 

[AmandaJR]

What an absolute load of twaddle.

I didn't say that (being a new member!) but thought it - and more!

You can remove hazard stakes anytime you want so long as the course doesn't declare them immovable by local rule for fear of them not being put back properly

On future occasions take your rule book out of the bag, give it to the self proclaimed expert and ask them "show me where it says that"

I tried to politely do that but just got the "I'm right, you're wrong and we'll confirm that after play" (or after a phone call to HID)!

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only stakes you cannot move are out of bounds markers?

I also stated that rule in the hope it might help...

@AmandaJR, I have this in my bag all the time, it is brilliant, with pictures and a handy size and is much easier to navigate than the official free book from the R&A.

www.golfbusinessnews.com/news/media/golf-rules-quick-reference-2016-edition/

It`s available from Amazon and stops disputes very quickly.:thup:

Cheers - will check that out.

Also good to familiarise yourself with the procedure in 3-3 which allows you to play two balls in the case of there being a doubt in procedure.

She was keen we carry on with a "query" but as it was medal Foursomes I said we'd just be DQd so returned to take the shot again with stake still in place. Was that the right course of action? Finish hole with original ball/score and also with the 2nd one?

Yes. You can remove a movable obstruction at any time providing you don't cause damage or undue delay.

Thanks. I try to be up to speed with the rules but when someone is so forceful and adamant it causes me doubt...as it did to the other 2 in the group even though we all agreed in our opinions.

 

[Foxholer]

She was keen we carry on with a "query" but as it was medal Foursomes I said we'd just be DQd so returned to take the shot again with stake still in place. Was that the right course of action? Finish hole with original ball/score and also with the 2nd one?

Check out the required procedure in Rule 3.3. It's not just a simple case of playing a 2nd ball. there are a couple of announcements you need to make - the fact that you are playing a 2nd ball AND which ball is to count if the Rules allow. The first is simply equivalent to announcing a Provisional. The 2nd is important, because 'choice' needs to be eliminated - you may make a hash of the hole with your first ball, but if what you did was valid, then it's THAT score that counts! And you need to check with The Committee asap to get their ruling, otherwise it's a DQ!!

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-03

 

[AmandaJR]

Check out the required procedure in Rule 3.3. It's not just a simple case of playing a 2nd ball. there are a couple of announcements you need to make - the fact that you are playing a 2nd ball AND which ball is to count if the Rules allow. The first is simply equivalent to announcing a Provisional. The 2nd is important, because 'choice' needs to be eliminated - you may make a hash of the hole with your first ball, but if what you did was valid, then it's THAT score that counts! And you need to check with The Committee asap to get their ruling, otherwise it's a DQ!!

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-03

Thanks. We did the right thing then as recorded the score with the 1st ball (5) and then also the 2nd ball which we declared as a ball to cover the rules query if what we thought was in fact incorrect. We took a 6 with that and at the end were a shot ahead of our pp if the rule was as we believed. Perhaps that is why it went on so flipping long afterwards!

 

[rulefan]

Thanks. I try to be up to speed with the rules but when someone is so forceful and adamant it causes me doubt...as it did to the other 2 in the group even though we all agreed in our opinions.

This is the rule you want.

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-24,24-1

You will see there is no restriction on where.

But there is for an Immovable Obstruction.
Except when the ball is in a water hazard or a lateral water hazard, a player may take relief from interference by an immovable obstruction

 

[WillC]

Thanks. We did the right thing then as recorded the score with the 1st ball (5) and then also the 2nd ball which we declared as a ball to cover the rules query if what we thought was in fact incorrect. We took a 6 with that and at the end were a shot ahead of our pp if the rule was as we believed. Perhaps that is why it went on so flipping long afterwards!

This is sensible, but i didn't know it was allowed! Will bear it in mind if I ever have a query that cannot be settled until afterwards.

 

[rulefan]

Rule 3-3 can be a player's best friend

 

[duncan mackie]

Rule 3-3 can be a player's best friend

I've suggested many times that the only 2 rules a player needs to really know, and fully understand, are 3-3 & 2-5

 

[Old Skier]

And to avoid future issues explain to the player that you were correct pointing out the relevant rule .