Jump to content


 

Photo

Rule 1-2 Exerting Influence On Ball


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#31 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24279 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 26 June 2018 - 04:34 PM

I doubt that any of us would want to make an issue of it.
Player A is not going to replace his ball and continue as he has already wiped the hole. Player B was just helping out.

But the original question was 'which rule?'. Only if there was some misunderstanding of the circumstances would the answer be relevant.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.


#32 ColinCL

ColinCL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationEdinburgh, Scotland

Posted 26 June 2018 - 06:30 PM

Which Rule? :rolleyes:

 

Weren't Post #24 and #26 clear enough.  Not to mention your own citing of the rule numbers in #25 :)



#33 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24279 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 26 June 2018 - 10:20 PM

Which Rule? :rolleyes:
 
Weren't Post #24 and #26 clear enough.  Not to mention your own citing of the rule numbers in #25 :)


I wasn't asking, just referring to the OP.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.


#34 ColinCL

ColinCL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationEdinburgh, Scotland

Posted 27 June 2018 - 05:47 AM

I wasn't asking, just referring to the OP.

Thought you were asking but obviously misunderstood.



#35 Monty85

Monty85

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1597 posts
  • LocationWestern Sydney

Posted 28 June 2018 - 09:13 AM

I doubt that any of us would want to make an issue of it.
Player A is not going to replace his ball and continue as he has already wiped the hole. Player B was just helping out.

 

I'm certain most people wouldn't but I've seen some crazy things over the years.

 

I've seen penalties given for things not even in the rules. I've seen a Rules Official tell players incorrect relief options. Even seen a player actually disqualified for not getting a drop from casual water observed by his group.


| GolfLink 


#36 languid

languid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1901 posts

Posted 28 June 2018 - 11:35 AM

Here is a case I experienced as a Match Referee.
Player A second shot on the green, but not close. Player B hits second shot 1 foot from the hole.
When Players get to the green Player B concedes A’s next Stroke.
Player A attends the Flagstick.
Player B putts from maybe 15 plus metres, slightly uphill. B’s putt is good but just sliding slowly past the hole. While B’s Ball is still moving A bends down and picks it up from about 1 foot past the hole. (Realistically there was not likelihood of B’s Ball stopping then rolling back into the hole).

#37 ColinCL

ColinCL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationEdinburgh, Scotland

Posted 28 June 2018 - 02:03 PM

Here is a case I experienced as a Match Referee.
Player A second shot on the green, but not close. Player B hits second shot 1 foot from the hole.
When Players get to the green Player B concedes A’s next Stroke.
Player A attends the Flagstick.
Player B putts from maybe 15 plus metres, slightly uphill. B’s putt is good but just sliding slowly past the hole. While B’s Ball is still moving A bends down and picks it up from about 1 foot past the hole. (Realistically there was not likelihood of B’s Ball stopping then rolling back into the hole).

 

And you ruled.......?  

 

R1-2 states [my bold]

 A player must not (i) take an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play or (ii) alter physical conditions with the intent of affecting the playing of a hole. 

 

Does the phrase in bold apply to both (i) and (ii)?  If so, the player in your has not breached the rule since in effect the playing of the hole was over.  I have my doubts, however, whether the structure of the sentence and the repetition of with the intent to  allows for that reading of it.  But even if it doesn't, I wouldn't penalise A.

 

Strictly speaking, you could  have the stroke  cancelled and replayed, giving the player another chance to halve the hole but I would let it be.  A is doing no more than helpfully retrieving B's ball and saving him the trouble.  


Edited by ColinCL, 28 June 2018 - 02:04 PM.


#38 languid

languid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1901 posts

Posted 28 June 2018 - 03:44 PM

And you ruled.......?  
 
R1-2 states [my bold]
 A player must not (i) take an action with the intent to influence the movement of a ball in play or (ii) alter physical conditions with the intent of affecting the playing of a hole. 
 
Does the phrase in bold apply to both (i) and (ii)?  If so, the player in your has not breached the rule since in effect the playing of the hole was over.  I have my doubts, however, whether the structure of the sentence and the repetition of with the intent to  allows for that reading of it.  But even if it doesn't, I wouldn't penalise A.
 
Strictly speaking, you could  have the stroke  cancelled and replayed, giving the player another chance to halve the hole but I would let it be.  A is doing no more than helpfully retrieving B's ball and saving him the trouble.  


Colin,
I agonised in the short time available. No radio check available.
I ruled the hole was halved. I had Rule 2 in mind where player incurs a penalty after he has holed out. The Rule refers to the opponent having a stroke to play for a half. Well he didn’t but I suppose if the stroke was cancelled he would.
So I was mixed up with that and Rule 1-2.
I told the players that the hole was halved on my understanding of the Rules.
If A , the player who had the nice birdie conceded had asked for my decision to be reviewed I would have agreed because I was quite concerned that I could be wrong. That didn’t happen.
I thought A though disappointed, felt he had been rather gung-ho at the time and not totally surprised by the Ruling.
I believe now I ruled incorrectly and my Ruling would have been reversed if reviewed.
As you know it is very hard to find Decisions in the minutes from finishing a hole and reaching the next tee. I think there isn’t actually a Decision to find.

#39 ColinCL

ColinCL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationEdinburgh, Scotland

Posted 28 June 2018 - 06:53 PM

More diffiult on the spot than from an armchair, isn't it.

 

I think 2-2 applies to a penalty incurred after the player has holed out but before his opponent has played, the idea being that what the player did  could impact on the opponent's play.    D2-2/1 illustrates that but I say it without certainty.

 

It's a rule I've never been comfortable with and more than likely will forget if the occasion arose to apply it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users