What am i Missing here ?

[bladeplayer]

I know im missing something here , can someone please tell me what ..?

From the R&A rules quiz below ,


Q5of 10


A player's provisional ball played from the tee strikes and moves his original ball. The player incurs a one-stroke penalty for moving his ball in play.


A TRUE

B FALSE


Answer is False

Decision
There is no penalty and the original ball must be replaced. See Decision 18-5/2 in the Rules Explorer.


If you can actually see your first ball (ie you see the provisional hitting it) why would you be playing a provisional .?

I got it right by the way ..

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

I know im missing something here , can someone please tell me what ..?

From the R&A rules quiz below ,


Q5of 10


A player's provisional ball played from the tee strikes and moves his original ball. The player incurs a one-stroke penalty for moving his ball in play.


A TRUE

B FALSE


Answer is False

Decision
There is no penalty and the original ball must be replaced. See Decision 18-5/2 in the Rules Explorer.


If you can actually see your first ball (ie you see the provisional hitting it) why would you be playing a provisional .?

I got it right by the way ..

Nowhere does it say you can see it..... A friendly spectator may have seen it?

 

[bladeplayer]

Nowhere does it say you can see it..... A friendly spectator may have seen it?

Yea i did think that but as it didnt say , "you were told it struck your original ball" , i kinda assumed thats not what it meant ..


Assume ! what is it they say ? it makes an ass out of u and me (Ass u me )

Thanks for reply

 

[Slab]

Leads me to ask if a spectator (or A.N other person outwith player, marker, caddy, ref) actually has any official standing/recognition within the rules of golf

In this example spectator says provisional hit 1st ball which leads to, ball must be replaced (I assume using the spectator indication of the original spot)
Same situation but not seen by a spectator means 1st ball will be played from the wrong place (unknowingly)


Seems a bit like noise of a tree falling in forest etc in that if no one sees it, its not a penalty (how can it be) even though the exact physical actions still happened!

So on the basis of information from a 3rd party (accuracy and validity unknown) the score must be changed, which brings me back to what standing they have during a comp?

 

[MadAdey]

Does appear to be a strange one.........

like you said, why play a provisional if you can see the first one and if it was a spectator that saw it, then how valid is their input? I think it just shows that the rules have to be able to give a decision in every possible situation, no matter how obscure.

 

[Smiffy]

Like you said, why play a provisional if you can see the first one

"Provisional Preet" does it all the time

 

[BTatHome]

Have seen a tv broadcast where the spectators saw two balls collide on the green, the players and referee couldn't see because the green was above them. The spectators were advising where the original ball lay .... whilst not quite the same scenario (as it was two competitors balls) they still were being advised and informed of the situation by the gallery.

 

[Colin L]

A spectator's input is valid. Spectators have no "standing" but it is sensible and permissible to seek assistance from them in terms of what happened. That goes for players on their own or referees called in to make a ruling.

 

[Fyldewhite]

Spectators can be involved in a few situations. Looking for balls is the obvious one, or telling players where to look, or even helping to move a large "loose" impediment

 

[atticusfinch]

You're chasing a ghost. The question posed is a hypothetical and all facts stated mus t be taken as true. It makes no difference how the facts are known. I think this kind of red herring is why people get quiz answers wrong. They spend energy questioning the facts in the problem and get off track. The facts must be taken as true unless the problem states otherwise.