What have I done wrong?

[bobmac]

Is this based on a real event or are you just trying to make us think, Uncle bob?

I was just asking to see what the replies would be

 

[MashieNiblick]

I'm pretty sure you're in the clear Bob.

Even if player was deemed to be attending the flagstick in accordance with note 1 of Rule 17-1, that attendance was unauthorised by you as defined by note 2.

FC is it would seem therefore in breach of 17-2 Unauthorised Attendance. As you were off the green the eagle stands

*In stroke play, if a breach of Rule 17-2 occurs and the competitor’s ball subsequently strikes the flagstick, the person attending or holding it or anything carried by him, the competitor incurs no penalty. The ball is played as it lies, except that if the stroke was made on the putting green, the stroke is cancelled and the ball must be replaced and replayed.

 

[North Mimms]

Last week there was a thread about tending the flag when you are off the green, and i was mocked for asking "do you want it tended?" when someone is putting from off the green.
Would avoid the confusion in bob's scenario...:ears:

 

[Colin L]

The penalty for the FC is here

17-2. Unauthorised Attendance​

If an​

opponent or his caddie in match play or a fellow-competitor or his caddie​

in stroke play, without the player’s authority or prior knowledge, attends,removes or holds up the​

flagstick during the stroke or while the ball is inmotion, and the act might influence the movement of the ball, the opponent​

or fellow-competitor incurs the applicable penalty.

Yes, indeed. I was misdirecting myself by being over-generous in interpreting the FC's actions because nothing actually happened as a result of them. I was overlooking the word "might' in the rule and also Decision 17-2/1 which makes it clear that if unauthorised attendance might have influenced the movement of the ball there is a penalty. Nothing untoward actually has to happen. In this case we are told he decided to leave the pin in because the ball was going quite fast, so it is clear that his attendance could have influenced the ball's movement.

 

[duncan mackie]

I've almost driven a par 4
Just off the edge.
My fellow competitor has chipped on close and has just marked his ball.
I chip on, the ball rolls up to the hole, hits the pin and drops.
My fellow competitor, without my knowledge and without me asking has crept up to the flag to take it out after I've chipped on.
Why am I penalised?
What have I done wrong?

this is an excellent question Bob

whilst it is easy to say that 'you have to be there' in giving a ruling I would take the following into account if asked for one here;-

did the FC approach the flag from the position of marking his ball prior to your setting up for your stroke such that his status as attending the flag prior to your making your stroke was obvious to you?

as suggested, if he was so close to the flag that he could be deemed to be attending it it would be appropriate to you to protect your interests by stating 'I will have it left in please', in the same way as you would no doubt have said if he had walked up to the flag and stood holding it.

in the absence of the FC touching or removing the flagstick after you have made your stroke I cannot see a case for a breach (by him) of 17-2 (unauthorised attendance).
2. did the FC approach the flag

if there was any question of him attending the flag prior to you taking your shot you should clarify your requirements. In this situation, as you present it, you don't think he's attending it for you, he doesn't think he's attending it (from his actions) so I wouldn't rule a breach of 17-1.

it is a good question, and one I may also take further elsewhere. I suspect that the 'intent' word would be bought into play ie RO to FC - why were you standing where you were? FC - "I had just marked my ball at that position and, in order to play at a good speed, I was intending to remove the flag at the earliest opportunity once it became obvious that it wasn't going to influence Bob's ball. As usual his chip zoned in on the hole so I left it alone". RO to Bob "Did you ask for the flagstick to be attended?" Bob - "No, and I didn't think it was being attended prior to making my stroke". No penalties.

Whilst the rules appear clear with the D word (deemed) there are other elements in play - how close do you have to be to a player/flagstick to be able to establish whether he's close enough to touch the flagstick? Does this change when he's behind the flagstick (perspective)? What about a player, as here, who marked a ball right next to the hole but is heading away slowly but still close enough to touch it when you make a stroke?

 

[Colin L]

in the absence of the FC touching or removing the flagstick after you have made your stroke I cannot see a case for a breach (by him) of 17-2 (unauthorised attendance).

I started by reckoning there was no penalty to the FC because in the end he had not actually taken any kind of action; then was persuaded to take a closer look at the wording of 17-2 and related decisions; and ended up reckoning he was subject to penalty because even if he does nothing, the act of attending the pin without authority is a breach of 17-2 because the sole act of tending the pin when that might influencethe movement of the ball is a breach. Decision 17-2/1 penalises a player for attending the pin without authority, even though he steps away when asked to by his FC, on the grounds that his tending the pin might have influenced the movement of the ball. That player has not acted in any way (eg taking the pin out).


I can’t see any doubt that Bob’s FC saw himself as attending the pin. We are told (that’s in Scene iii, by the way) that he decided to leave the flag in because the ball was coming towards the hole at a fair pace.(@Bob, how do we know that - did he say so?) That to me is even more convincing: his non-action was a deliberate attempt to influence movement.


I’m sticking with a breach of 17-2 for the FC. I take we are all agreed that Bob, head down, busy tucking his putter into his navel, is innocent because he did not know the pin was being attended?


As you say, Duncan, it’s an interesting situation.

 

[duncan mackie]

I started by reckoning there was no penalty to the FC because in the end he had not actually taken any kind of action; then was persuaded to take a closer look at the wording of 17-2 and related decisions; and ended up reckoning he was subject to penalty because even if he does nothing, the act of attending the pin without authority is a breach of 17-2 because the sole act of tending the pin when that might influencethe movement of the ball is a breach. Decision 17-2/1 penalises a player for attending the pin without authority, even though he steps away when asked to by his FC, on the grounds that his tending the pin might have influenced the movement of the ball. That player has not acted in any way (eg taking the pin out).


I can’t see any doubt that Bob’s FC saw himself as attending the pin. We are told (that’s in Scene iii, by the way) that he decided to leave the flag in because the ball was coming towards the hole at a fair pace.(@Bob, how do we know that - did he say so?) That to me is even more convincing: his non-action was a deliberate attempt to influence movement.


I’m sticking with a breach of 17-2 for the FC. I take we are all agreed that Bob, head down, busy tucking his putter into his navel, is innocent because he did not know the pin was being attended?


As you say, Duncan, it’s an interesting situation.

Unfortunately Bob's 'clarifications' in posts 5 and 12 are contradictory. The situation indicated in post 1 + post 12 is straightforward in that the FC believes that he is attending and then deliberately leaves the flag to positively influence Bob's ball. This falls under (your favorite) 1-2 in this case and the FC would be penalised. Bad news for Bob is that he would then have to replay the shot!

If the FC left the flagstick in to cause Bob to get a penalty under 17-3 then the FC is DQ under 33-7 - Bob's replaying it again......

If the FC was simply distracted ie ignoring post 12, possibly by Bob shouting over about v-easy swing aids, and fails to remove the flagstick then the good news for Bob is that he doesn't have to replay the shot - bad news is 2 shot penalty under 17-3.

Now, all of the above revolve around the player attending the flag and, if he hasn't moved from prior to Bob playing his shot then he is deemed to be attending it and Bob is deemed to have authorised it. If he moves closer, into a position that would constitute attendance after Bob has settled to his stroke then 17-2 comes into play.

The really interesting bit (for me) relates to the FC having no intention of attending the flagstick, and Bob not believing he was either, but that the position of the FC relative to the flag alone creates a situation that, under 17-1/1, deems the flagstick attended - this is the nature of the question posed in post's 1 and 5. Here I cannot see how the FC can be penalised under any of the above as they are deliberate acts associated with knowing he is attending the flag; if he doesn't know he's attending then he can't be penalised. Bob, on the other hand, cannot be excused under 17-3.

So the question becomes, if the FC is standing in a position from which he can touch the flagstick prior to Bob playing and without anything being said, is 17-1, note 1, and 17-1/1, the end of it or does intent come into it? I have raised it elsewhere.

 

[Colin L]

Thanks Duncan. I'll look forward to following the discussion.

 

[bobmac]

As far as the FC is concerned, he is NOT tending the flag. I have not asked him to, he's not holding the flag stick and I'm off the green so why would he ?
He marked his ball and stepped away a few paces while I prepared for my shot. As I bent over to take my shot he edged closer to the flag so after I had played my shot and the ball was not challenging the hole, he would simply remove the flag.
As it was a bit quick he realised the flagstick might stop the ball so he left the flag in.
I didn't say anything to him, nor him to me and he acted on his own without any influence from me.
I did not see him edge close to the flag, I was in the zone.
Is that any help?

 

[Foxholer]

I've almost driven a par 4
Just off the edge.
My fellow competitor has chipped on close and has just marked his ball.
I chip on, the ball rolls up to the hole, hits the pin and drops.
My fellow competitor, without my knowledge and without me asking has crept up to the flag to take it out after I've chipped on.
Why am I penalised?
What have I done wrong?

You are not, well should not be, penalised.

You have done nothing wrong, though it might pay more attention to what FCs are doing in future.

Whether your FC is penalised depends on whether he's close enough to be deemed to be attending the flag (without authorisation) - 2 shots if he was.

 

[Colin L]

As it was a bit quick he realised the flagstick might stop the ball so he left the flag in.

Bob, that's the critical point for me. He made a decision to leave the flagstick in which says to me that his intention was to attend it. To decide to leave it in implies that he considered taking it out.

But hey ho, you got your eagle in my view :thup:

 

[MashieNiblick]

As far as the FC is concerned, he is NOT tending the flag. I have not asked him to, he's not holding the flag stick and I'm off the green so why would he ?
He marked his ball and stepped away a few paces while I prepared for my shot. As I bent over to take my shot he edged closer to the flag so after I had played my shot and the ball was not challenging the hole, he would simply remove the flag.
As it was a bit quick he realised the flagstick might stop the ball so he left the flag in.
I didn't say anything to him, nor him to me and he acted on his own without any influence from me.
I did not see him edge close to the flag, I was in the zone.
Is that any help?

So Bob given the above why do you think you would be penalised? I'm confused. Did this actually happen, was a Referee involved or are you just messing with our heads?

 

[bobmac]

It's just a hypothetical situation. But I have seen things happen similar to the situation I described

 

[North Mimms]

As far as the FC is concerned, he is NOT tending the flag. I have not asked him to, he's not holding the flag stick and I'm off the green so why would he ?
He marked his ball and stepped away a few paces while I prepared for my shot. As I bent over to take my shot he edged closer to the flag so after I had played my shot and the ball was not challenging the hole, he would simply remove the flag.
As it was a bit quick he realised the flagstick might stop the ball so he left the flag in.
I didn't say anything to him, nor him to me and he acted on his own without any influence from me.
I did not see him edge close to the flag, I was in the zone.
Is that any help?

There's a lot of mind reading going on here

 

[Colin L]

If Bob needs an alternative career he should try the theatre as stage crew - all this scene shifting has to be good experience

 

[bobmac]

all this scene shifting has to be good experience

I haven't changed anything, if people cant read thats not my fault

 

[DappaDonDave]

No penalty, iirc hitting the pin is fine from off the green, he wasn't attending the flag, there was no interference. The only issue I guess would be if the ball had not fully dropped below the edge of the hole. Rule 17-4 would then be used. But that refers to authorized person or player, whether our partner is classed as authorized...that's probably another rule

Otherwise..no bother

 

[Phil2511]

I was always of the belief that playing from off the green if you do not request the flag to be removed or tended then it is ok to hit the pin. As far as you were aware there was no tending being done and no matter what your opponent does is of no impairment to you.

 

[Region3]

As it was a bit quick he realised the flagstick might stop the ball so he left the flag in.

Bob, that's the critical point for me. He made a decision to leave the flagstick in which says to me that his intention was to attend it. To decide to leave it in implies that he considered taking it out.

The way I've read it, the FC was intending to take the flag out when it became apparent that it would have no influence on the motion of the ball. Since that moment didn't come, he left the flag as he had no intention of attending it. No harm, no foul, eagle.

BTW Bob, where is this course with sub 220yd par 4's? :ears:

 

[DappaDonDave]

Must've been 16th at Stanley park from the yellows