• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
CraiginKSA

Ball blown off of tee

7 posts in this topic

The player makes a swing at the ball which is teed up in the teeing area.  Before he makes contact, the ball blows off of the tee.

I think he has to count the stroke for the miss and then play it as it lies.

There are a couple of rules, but none that covers this exact scenario:

11-3 . Ball Falling off Tee

If a ball, when not in play , falls off a tee or is knocked off a tee by the player in addressing it, it may be re-teed, without penalty. However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not , the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.

ALL FALLING OFF TEE

11-3/1

Stroke Misses Ball; Ball Then Accidentally Knocked Off Tee

Q. A player teed his ball within the teeing ground. He made a stroke at the ball but missed it. He addressed the ball again and accidentally knocked it off the tee. What is the ruling?

A. When the player made a stroke at the ball , it was in play and Rule 11-3 no longer applied. When the ball in play moved after it was addressed, the player incurred a penalty stroke and was obliged to replace the ball (Rule 18-2b ).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Originally Posted by CraiginKSA

The player makes a swing at the ball which is teed up in the teeing area.  Before he makes contact, the ball blows off of the tee.

I think he has to count the stroke for the miss and then play it as it lies.

There are a couple of rules, but none that covers this exact scenario:

11-3. Ball Falling off Tee

If a ball, when not in play, falls off a tee or is knocked off a tee by the player in addressing it, it may be re-teed, without penalty. However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not, the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.

ALL FALLING OFF TEE

11-3/1

Stroke Misses Ball; Ball Then Accidentally Knocked Off Tee

Q.A player teed his ball within the teeing ground. He made a stroke at the ball but missed it. He addressed the ball again and accidentally knocked it off the tee. What is the ruling?

A.When the player made a stroke at the ball, it was in play and Rule 11-3 no longer applied. When the ball in play moved after it was addressed, the player incurred a penalty stroke and was obliged to replace the ball (Rule 18-2b).

If the player makes a forward movement of the club with the intent to strike the ball, then he has made a stroke.  If he checks his swing before the club gets to the ball, then no stroke has been made.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by CraiginKSA

The player makes a swing at the ball which is teed up in the teeing area.  Before he makes contact, the ball blows off of the tee.

I think he has to count the stroke for the miss and then play it as it lies.

There are a couple of rules, but none that covers this exact scenario:

11-3. Ball Falling off Tee

If a ball, when not in play, falls off a tee or is knocked off a tee by the player in addressing it, it may be re-teed, without penalty. However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not, the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.

ALL FALLING OFF TEE

11-3/1

Stroke Misses Ball; Ball Then Accidentally Knocked Off Tee

Q.A player teed his ball within the teeing ground. He made a stroke at the ball but missed it. He addressed the ball again and accidentally knocked it off the tee. What is the ruling?

A.When the player made a stroke at the ball, it was in play and Rule 11-3 no longer applied. When the ball in play moved after it was addressed, the player incurred a penalty stroke and was obliged to replace the ball (Rule 18-2b).

This is the important and relevant part of the rule

However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not , the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.

See also Decision 14/1.5

14/1.5

Intent to Strike Ball Ceases During Downswing; Club Not Stopped But Path of Clubhead Altered to Avoid Striking Ball

Q. A player begins his downswing with the intention of striking the ball but decides during the downswing not to strike the ball. The player is unable to stop the club before it reaches the ball, but he is able to swing intentionally over the top of the ball. Is the player deemed to have made a stroke?

A. No. The player is considered to have checked his downswing voluntarily by altering the path of his downswing and missing the ball even though the swing carried the clubhead beyond the ball.

If the player had not successfully checked his downswing (i.e., he had struck the ball), he is considered to have made a stroke.

Any doubt regarding the player's intent must be resolved against the player.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to add that the player did make a stroke at the ball, and actually struck the now empty tee!  The ball blew off just before contact would have been made, so there was no time to check the swing or alter the swing path.

Does the player get to re-tee the ball or does he have to play it as it lies AND take a penalty?  So would he be hitting his third shot from the tee box, but off the deck?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Rulesman

This is the important and relevant part of the rule

However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not, the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.

See also Decision 14/1.5

14/1.5

Intent to Strike Ball Ceases During Downswing; Club Not Stopped But Path of Clubhead Altered to Avoid Striking Ball

Q.A player begins his downswing with the intention of striking the ball but decides during the downswing not to strike the ball. The player is unable to stop the club before it reaches the ball, but he is able to swing intentionally over the top of the ball. Is the player deemed to have made a stroke?

A.No. The player is considered to have checked his downswing voluntarily by altering the path of his downswing and missing the ball even though the swing carried the clubhead beyond the ball.

If the player had not successfully checked his downswing (i.e., he had struck the ball), he is considered to have made a stroke.

Any doubt regarding the player's intent must be resolved against the player.

The Kevin Na defence!

Off topic - where has he been this season?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by CraiginKSA

I forgot to add that the player did make a stroke at the ball, and actually struck the now empty tee!  The ball blew off just before contact would have been made, so there was no time to check the swing or alter the swing path.

Does the player get to re-tee the ball or does he have to play it as it lies AND take a penalty?  So would he be hitting his third shot from the tee box, but off the deck?

He has two options.  Since the original stroke counts, and he did not knock the ball off the tee, there's no penalty.  He can play the ball as it lies is now hitting 2.  Or, as always, he has the option of replaying the original shot, in this case from the tee, under penalty of one stroke.  In that case, he would be hitting 3.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Case pretty much closed. But the thread title made me think of this.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Golf Evolution
  • Posts

    • Iron Game Suffers when Driver Going Well
      For high handicappers myself included, this is typical.   I think it is b/c we don't have the same swing for irons and longer clubs.  If we get them both right in the same round, it is probably by pure luck or coincidence.  Grin and bear, and enjoy the journey.
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      The topic title is the question who is the greatest golfer, the poll is the question who was the best. Two different things in my opinion. There's no doubt to me Tiger was a better golfer. How could he not? Spieth, McIlroy, Day but even guys like Wiesberger, Luiten and Donaldson play better golf than Jack. The game evolved so much over the years, and got so much more professional. If Jack would have been around in this era he would benefit from all that as well and be a better golfer than he was (and probably top those guys I just mentioned). But who was the greatest. How do you measure that (can you)? Tiger was dominant in a stronger field, winning more titles than you can count. Jack was the first of a kind, winning the biggest titles (majors) over an enourmous span and having the most of them. Isn't it mostly a matter of personal who you find 'greater'? For me Johan Cruyff is the greatest Dutch football player of time, but I have no doubt that Dennis Bergkamp and Arjen Robben were/are better because the game evolved. 
    • Making a Murderer Discussion Thread (Spoilers Likely)
      Obvisously... she took his case about a month ago. On one hand I hope Avery is guilty as hell, on the other hand it would be an amazing story and twist if turns out to be set up and she can prove that. I think that chance is less than 1%, but still..... Possibly, good point. Should be quite some blood though since they found 'drops', meaning it was dripping from (in this theory) his glove. Exactly my point. I don't think the blood was freely flowing, because than there should be a lot more blood in the car. They found blood consisting with bloody hair. Seems to me, and I know I'm not an expert, that she was already dead when she was in the car, because that would explain the little amount of blood found (no pumping of the heart, no flow of blood) and the place it was found (in the back). One can easily argue that he killed in the garage, moved her to the car, and only then got the plan to burn her instead and moved her again; to the pit. But the 'problem' is that that's not what the DA said what happenend. In my opinion that blood in the car contradicts the story (or truth) he wants us and the jury to believe, and contradicts also with the story of Dassey which is the only thing that links Dassey to the case: his own words. That doesn't mean Avery is innocent, but it might raise some doubt. The DA should stick with the facts, not filling in the blanks with guessing. If he can't prove exact chronologically he shouldn't state it as 'fact'.   Absolutely. I'm not convinced in anything, not in my opinion, not in yours, not at all in the people who made the documentary. Also not a fan of conspiracy theory's. I don't think the murder was planted on him, but I do think some mistakes were made by the justice system. Mistakes that possibly should have lead to his and maybe even more Dassey's release, even though there's a big chance he did it. That's for me perhaps the most interesting part in this case and in the discussion. If we want a justice system where the chance is close to 0% that we convict someone innocent, and the prosecution and police need to follow the rules, it means sometimes the guilty walk free. I think everything they found on the compount while Manitowoc detectives were present should have been excluded. I think the DNA on the blood of the bullet should have been excluded. I think the 'confession' of Dassey should have been excluded. I think Dassey should have given at least a new trial, but that was denied by the same judge which handled his initial case (?!).
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      A long time ago, by Tiger's own admission,  said a golfer's career is measured by "majors won" . So if Woody does not break Jack's major record, then according to Woody, his career will be second to Jack's. Now Jack has said that he expects (expected) Woody to break his major record. So Jack is saying he expects Woody will have the better career.  These are the only two guys who would know who had the best career.   Neither one is going to be the GOAT. They will just be a GOTE. 
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      Nope, you blindly worship Jack.  It is obvious that you have not read much, if any, of the thread.  But hey, you saw Jack.  In person, yet.  So what.  I did too.  I saw him win his last USGA championship at Cherry Hills.  I saw Tiger play as well - although in person I only saw practice rounds.  So what.  That does not make my assessment of their respective careers more or less credible.  Geee, I never saw Hogan play so I guess we cannot count him in the discussion.   You think Jack was better.  That is fine.  You are entitled to your opinion.  Just don't spoil it with specious reasons or arguments.  Because those we will slice apart like one of Klinger's salamis.  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries