or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Ignorant

So, at this point   - Rulesman says that it is NOT allowed to invoke D20-1/0.7 because the ball was not embedded.   - Colin L says that it IS allowed to invoke D20-1/0.7 because the ball was not embedded.   - Rogolf says that it IS allowed to invoke D20-1/0.7   Who are we to believe here?
 I wonder where you got that? Embedding is only one of the two options mentioned in the Dec, it certainly does not cover all the possible situations where the Dec would apply. Would you care to explain your view?
 I wonder why you did that as I was only referring to the situation at hand..?   What about D20-1/0.7: 20-1/0.7Lifting Ball to Determine Application of RuleQ. May a player lift his ball to determine whether he is entitled to reliefunder a Rule (e.g. to determine whether his ball is in a hole made by aburrowing animal or is embedded)?A. In equity (Rule 1-4), if a player has reason to believe he is entitled torelief from a condition, the player may lift his ball, without...
 That is why I said we would have to see the situation in order to be certain. Also bear in mind that mud is not CW but a ball plugs deep in mud quite easily. Same thing with soft sand (eg. in wastelands).
 Maybe you are right. But then again...  if you consider the basic principle of getting a free relief from CW it is because of the water. Should you drive your ball into the ground you are in trouble. Is getting a free relief because of some water under the ball in line with that principle?
 Wouldn't it be the same if your ball is lost in a puddle of CW, or found there between two rocks and impossible to make a stroke at? Isn't that what the Exception is all about? You tell me. Besides, the original question was about hitting one's ball into the ground and only after that to examine whether there is CW under the ball. IMO quite different situation than what you presented.
  The only Rule the player might invoke for a free relief is 25-1b(i) (casual water). Exception to that Rule says: Exception: A player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interferenceby anything other than an abnormal ground condition makes the stroke clearlyimpracticable...  So, if that ball is so deep in the ground that it is impracticable to make a stroke at it there is no free relief under 25-1b(i).
 If that ball was clearly unplayable it might be questionable to grant relief. But we would have to see the situation in order to be certain.
 Now you got the picture. And in the worst case, he might think he will be disqualified and picks up his ball. The bottom line here is that once there is incorrect or contraddictory information distributed to the players more or less anything can happen. If and when the players in your competitions are as ignorant of the Rules as I have been told here they couldn't possible find anything from the Rule Book let alone be bold enough to say that their Hard Card or whichever...
 Rogolf, that is why I wrote 'so to say' as I was being brief. We teach all referees that we are on the course to help the players, not to punish them. Besides the Committee really enforces certain Rules such as 6-2, 6-3, 6-6, 6-7 and 6-8, just to name some. AFA educating the player is concerned one can twist the issue (and other posters' words) as one wants. I have said that it is not the Committee's task to educate the players, and by that I mean and have meant by...
New Posts  All Forums: