What to do when hazard poorly marked

[mikejohnchapman]

Had a problem recently in a match when my opponents ball came to rest on a bridge made of sleepers over a hazard.

The ball was at the end of the bridge but still on the wood. The sleepers were set into the bank of the ditch and my opponent maintained the ball wasn't in the hazard.

We agreed the hazard extended vertically but he said that the sleepers extended beyond the hazard.

The problem was the hazard was not lined and as the ditch curved the yellow posts didn't give a definitive line.

I maintained the hazard followed the natural line of the ditch which meant his ball was in the hazard, but he disagreed.

How do you determin the line of the hazard when it isn't lined.

 

[rosecott]

Had a problem recently in a match when my opponents ball came to rest on a bridge made of sleepers over a hazard.

The ball was at the end of the bridge but still on the wood. The sleepers were set into the bank of the ditch and my opponent maintained the ball wasn't in the hazard.

We agreed the hazard extended vertically but he said that the sleepers extended beyond the hazard.

The problem was the hazard was not lined and as the ditch curved the yellow posts didn't give a definitive line.

I maintained the hazard followed the natural line of the ditch which meant his ball was in the hazard, but he disagreed.

How do you determin the line of the hazard when it isn't lined.

Local rule?

 

[Foxholer]

Had a problem recently in a match when my opponents ball came to rest on a bridge made of sleepers over a hazard.

The ball was at the end of the bridge but still on the wood. The sleepers were set into the bank of the ditch and my opponent maintained the ball wasn't in the hazard.

We agreed the hazard extended vertically but he said that the sleepers extended beyond the hazard.

The problem was the hazard was not lined and as the ditch curved the yellow posts didn't give a definitive line.

I maintained the hazard followed the natural line of the ditch which meant his ball was in the hazard, but he disagreed.

How do you determin the line of the hazard when it isn't lined.

Check out the definition of 'Water Hazard' in the Rules. Where stakes (only) exist, boundary of hazard is between outside edge of stakes. The 'natural contours' applies where neither lines nor stakes exist.

It's also nothing to do with whether the sleepers extend past the WH. It's where the ball is that matters!

Check to see whether an LR exists for the situation. I've seen one that confirms that a bridge is IN the WH

 

[Colin L]

One or two thoughts on this.

Firstly, your opponent reckoned that his ball was not in the hazard and on that basis he could either play as it lay on the bridge or take relief from the bridge which is an obstruction. From your point of view, if he played it as it lay, it wouldn't matter whether the bit of the bridge where his ball lay was in the hazard or not. But if he took relief from it and you thought it was in the hazard you would have had to make a claim at the time and get the matter resolved by the Committee afterwards.

As to knowing what part of the bridge is in and which is out of the hazard, the yellow stakes do in fact give a definitive line as Foxholer says. Any part of a bridge over a hazard that extends beyond the line between the outside of the stakes is not in the hazard. If a ball lies on the bit of the bridge within the hazard there is no relief but the ball can be played from it and your club can be grounded. If it lies on the bit outside the hazard, it can be played as it lies or relief can be taken.

There has been a period of lenten-worthy abstinence, but there is just no escaping the temptation: here is a diagram.

 

[duncan mackie]

Colin's given a good account, but extending the issue of making a claim a little in the hope that it helps someone sometime!

If you believe that it's in the hazard and he thinks it's not then you should advise him that if he takes relief you will be claiming the hole for a breach of rule 18 -2 (moving ball and not replacing it). Now, depending on the relative scores on the hole at that time the other player may well just decide to accept that the balls in the hazard and proceed on that basis - it's a big gamble otherwise.

If he does take relief you then play the match out on the basis of both results for that hole (if they differ) and report the incident to the committee for a ruling if the result for that hole is a factor in the outcome. The underlying issue should be brought to the committees attention anyway!

The real advantage of doing this is that someone will mark the bridge properly and avoid future issues!