Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
FooFader

Ball plugged in the rough

69 posts in this topic

I'm posting to check if my understanding of the rules is correct because my playing partner today disagreed. The situation was as such:

The player tops a drive off the tee and finds his ball in shaggy foot rough. The conditions are wet. Player makes a swing at his ball and tops it again to such a degree that he pushes the ball downwards into the ground about 4 inches. The ball is clearly unplayable. His opinion was that he is entitled to free relief because the ball is in it's own pitch mark. Firstly, i would argue it's not a pitch mark as the ball didn't leave the ground but thats irrelevant. I told him that under rule 25-2 he was not entitled to free relief and his ball was not in "closely mown grass" and such would have to declare his ball unplayable and produce under rule 28.

Was i correct with my understanding of the rules? Thanks in advacne

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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

25-2 is only available on "closely mown area", unless there is a local rule which expands it to "through the green".

As you say the conditions were wet, if after digging up the ball there is water in the pitch mark, then he could use 25-1 to get a free relief from casual water.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And just to confirm the other issue.

25-2/6

Ball on Steep Bank Driven Straight into Ground

Q. A player's ball lies on a steep bank in the fairway. He plays a stroke and drives the ball straight into the bank, i.e., the ball is never airborne. Is the player entitled to relief without penalty under Rule 25-2 ?

A .No. Under Rule 25-2 , relief is provided if a ball is embedded in its own pitch-mark. The word "pitch-mark" implies that the ball has become airborne.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Thanks for the replies and follow up to my secondary question.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

......and the player in question should take up tennis. :-D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Haha yes, just half the top spin he had in those two shots and he s have a pretty mean forehand!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

25-2 is only available on "closely mown area", unless there is a local rule which expands it to "through the green".

As you say the conditions were wet, if after digging up the ball there is water in the pitch mark, then he could use 25-1 to get a free relief from casual water.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Perhaps you could explain your comment further, even include a Rule or Decision reference?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Ignorant

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.

Perhaps you could explain your comment further, even include a Rule or Decision reference?

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) interference
by anything other than an abnormal ground condition makes the stroke clearly
impracticable...

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).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogolf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignorant

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.

Perhaps you could explain your comment further, even include a Rule or Decision reference?

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) interference

by anything other than an abnormal ground condition makes the stroke clearly

impracticable...

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).

Do you suggest that an embedded ball in an area of casual water is ineligible for relief under Rule 25?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you are right. However, since the conditions were very wet, the club MAY have had a local rule saying that there is free relief for an embedded ball ANYWHERE through the green.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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) interference

by anything other than an abnormal ground condition makes the stroke clearly

impracticable...

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).

So, if your ball goes into casual water - quite possibly deeply embedded - and is not found, you can take relief but if it is visibly embedded, you can't?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if your ball goes into casual water - quite possibly deeply embedded - and is not found, you can take relief but if it is visibly embedded, you can't?

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Exception is about interference by anything that would make a stroke impracticable.  I don't see the ground as something which is causing interference.  A couple of rocks with the ball between them could be interfering with a stroke.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Exception is about interference by anything that would make a stroke impracticable.  I don't see the ground as something which is causing interference.  A couple of rocks with the ball between them could be interfering with a stroke.

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Why do you think the ball in question plugged in the first place...?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Why do you think the ball in question plugged in the first place...?

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).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Perhaps you should take a look at Decision 25/3

Q. A player's ball plugged deeply in short rough. No casual water was visible on the surface, but the pitch-mark in which the ball came to rest was filled with water. Was the player's ball in casual water?

A. Yes.

There is no suggestion  here that the fact that the ball is deeply plugged would result in relief not being allowed.  Its just not an issue.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • My Swing (b101)
      It's just feeling a little bit more natural than it used to and I'm not stepping on the course with 5 or more swing thoughts, which is nice! I don't think it'll take much work getting back to making progress and I'm definitely seeing that some of the changes I've made have stuck - ball flight is really high compared to what I'm used to and the ball turns right to left about 50% of the time and stays straight for 30%. It's the 20% of rubbish, either duck hooks or generally wayward tee shots that I want to clear up, which is going to be this morning's target on the range. I didn't end up hitting the range yesterday - a mate texted to ask to play a round, so I went for that. What was obvious is that the little 9 hole course, where I don't need anything above a 4 iron, has been great for my iron play, but that the 3 wood, driver and course management need a bit of a refresher course. Shot an 86 with a ridiculous 7 penalty strokes (4 on one tough par 3), which says it all really as I don't normally take any! It is a tight track though and there is OB all over the place, but no excuse for the few 'head off' moments which prevented me scoring well. It was match play as well so I guess that's part of it... In short summary: Driving/3 wood - pretty poor and I'm just not comfortable over the ball with those clubs. On a longer course, I'd have struggled. Long irons - good, bar that atrocity of a par 3, where I think I'll just aim way left next time and take the safe miss. Both of those were actually really nice strikes, but went dead straight rather than drawing like I had expected. Still, my fault entirely for aiming towards the trouble  Mid-short irons - mostly pretty good actually. Put 6/14 approaches from outside 100 yards to (3/4 from within 100) inside 15 yards and bar two long bunker shots, the rest were manageable. Putting - really pleased again; I probably only made one that I wouldn't have expected (birdie on 13), but there's a lot of break on the greens and I thought it was pretty decent for a first time out in a while. http://www.gamegolf.com/player/benpage101/round/930037 Overall, pretty close to where I'd want it to be, but a better decision on 6, some better drives and a bit more luck on odd holes (like 16) and it'd have been a great round. I'd take that for the first time in ages. Should be able to post some video this afternoon.
    • What would a PGA Tour player shoot at your home course?
      And also, "speculation" is what the thread is all about! Sure, I'm placing the Tour guys on a pedestal but they DESERVE it. Yes "Golf is Hard", but those guys are GOOD. Low 60s are very much a possibility in any tournament they tee it up in, let alone on a public course that was designed with the average golfer in mind. Let's give credit where credit is due! If all the players from 75-125 on the money list decided to go out and play a new course (of "moderate difficulty" for amateurs) every week for the next 2 months, course records would be getting smashed all over the place. They might shoot the odd 70 or 72, but you darn well bet there would be a lot of 63's and 64's in there too. Regardless of poor course conditions, lack of course knowledge or anything like that, they are gonna make birdies in droves and they are going to go low!
    • The this math does not compute thread
      I was at a garage sale with my son who was like 10 years old at the time. The seller had a box full of cheap toys with a handwritten sign on the box that read "$1 each, or 2 for $3".  I nudged my son and pointed to the sign with my eyes (because the seller was standing right there). He glanced down at the sign and immediately grinned and shook his head in disbelief. And don't get me going on auctions. People will pay more for used crap than they know they would if purchased brand new, simply because they get caught up in a bidding war. The best part is listening to them try and justify it afterwards.
    • What would a PGA Tour player shoot at your home course?
      The odds of him shooting -32 would be slim, but not impossible. Those guys absolutely demolish a handful of the easier courses (ie. Kapalua, the old rotation for the Las Vegas Invitational, the old rotation for the Bob Hope, TPC Scottsdale before they toughened it up,  North Course at Torrey, etc.) and scores of ~ -30 haven't been terribly uncommon at some events. But I think the PGA Tour and the Web.Com Tour seem to be trying to get away from insanely low numbers and are moving tournaments away from some of the old venues that can't keep up with how far  they hit the ball now, and renovating other courses to beef them up. I recall the Tour players voted to eliminate the TPC Stadium course at PGA West in the late 80's from tournanent play because they thought it was "too hard" and this year when they used it again it seemed to be quite playable for them. In fact, they seemed to have no issues making their way around the course at all. That speaks to the quality and depth of the fields nowadays.  That being said - no, I wouldn't expect a -32 total. But it definitely wouldn't shock me either.  On a side note, I would be really interested to see this type of experiment revisited. This thread has fuelled some great speculation and debate, so thank you guys for playing along!
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Blog Entries