Split a Ball in Two... I Get to Take a Mulligan?

[DrvFrShow]

That's what happened. He played his 110 yd PW shot, the ball split in half, the furthest half went 50 yds, he counted the stroke, dropped a new ball where the furthest half landed, and played on.

He was apparently unaware of the way 5-3 read as was I until I read it in the forum, here. Under 5-3 he was supposed to drop a new ball where he hit the 110 yd PW and rehit without a penalty, but because he didn't he incurred "advantages" which I don't understand. 

[Fourputt]

7 minutes ago, DrvFrShow said:

That's what happened. He played his 110 yd PW shot, the ball split in half, the furthest half went 50 yds, he counted the stroke, dropped a new ball where the furthest half landed, and played on.

He was apparently unaware of the way 5-3 read as was I until I read it in the forum, here. Under 5-3 he was supposed to drop a new ball where he hit the 110 yd PW and rehit without a penalty, but because he didn't he incurred "advantages" which I don't understand. 

It can't be denied that he gave himself a significant distance advantage from where he was supposed to be playing.  If he applied the penalty for that under rule 20-7, the stroke that he used to get there would not count, because that stroke was recalled under rule 5-3.  He still has to take the 2 stroke penalty for playing from a wrong place.  Because of the 50 yard advantage, he should have gone back and corrected his mistake, playing from the correct spot, but still with the 2 stroke penalty.

[Dormie1360]

15 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

My impression was that he dropped a ball where the furthest piece of his original ball landed, not continue with the broken ball.  That would almost definitely be a serious breach under Rule 20-7 if he had advanced it 50 yards.

By continuing with the broken ball I meant continuing from where the broken ball ended up. (He dropped a new ball where the furthest piece went). So you are saying the player obtained a significant advantage (definition of SB) continuing with his broken ball that went 50 yards, instead of playing a "mulligan" which he should have under the rules?  I'm still having trouble seeing the advantage.  He did count the stroke.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Dormie1360

[ColinL]

You have to take the stroke that split the ball out of consideration.  It was cancelled the moment the ball fell apart and thus did not happen in terms of counting strokes.  If the player mistakenly puts his new ball into play where on of the parts of ball came to rest, he is playing from a wrong place.  You just can’t say let’s count the stroke that no longer exists and that will make it a correct place. He must substitute a ball at the place he played the original.

Whether there is a serious breach or not will depend on individual circumstances.  50 yards down the road is likely to be a significant advantage simply because of the distance.

[Dormie1360]

6 minutes ago, ColinL said:

You have to take the stroke that split the ball out of consideration.  It was cancelled the moment the ball fell apart and thus did not happen in terms of counting strokes.  If the player mistakenly puts his new ball into play where on of the parts of ball came to rest, he is playing from a wrong place.  You just can’t say let’s count the stroke that no longer exists and that will make it a correct place. He must substitute a ball at the place he played the original.

Whether there is a serious breach or not will depend on individual circumstances.  50 yards down the road is likely to be a significant advantage simply because of the distance.

 

Hi Colin,

Ok, that being the case I can see why the ruling.  Because of this it would seem that almost all situations where a player failed to cancel and replay would be a SB, given that distance to the hole is usually an important fact.

I'm looking at a list of the 9 rules that require a stroke to be cancelled and replayed under a rule.  Some require a penalty as part of the replay, some do not.   I need to review this.  I remember discussions involving strokes hitting power lines and strokes on the putting green (19-1b) that should have been cancelled and weren't.  I don't remember all the details, but I remember the threads were rather long.  

Thanks.

 

[Fourputt]

2 hours ago, Dormie1360 said:

By continuing with the broken ball I meant continuing from where the broken ball ended up. (He dropped a new ball where the furthest piece went). So you are saying the player obtained a significant advantage (definition of SB) continuing with his broken ball that went 50 yards, instead of playing a "mulligan" which he should have under the rules?  I'm still having trouble seeing the advantage.  He did count the stroke.

Counting the stroke was also a mistake.  In the same way that you cannot choose to play the ball as it lies if the local rule for overhead power lines is in effect (D. 33-8/13), you also have no choice here.  The rule says you must cancel the stroke and replay from that spot.  Failure to comply with that requirement does not change the actual number of strokes counted on the hole.  The stroke in which the ball came apart never happened as far as the rules are concerned.

7 minutes ago, Dormie1360 said:

 

Hi Colin,

Ok, that being the case I can see why the ruling.  Because of this it would seem that almost all situations where a player failed to cancel and replay would be a SB, given that distance to the hole is usually an important fact.

I'm looking at a list of the 9 rules that require a stroke to be cancelled and replayed under a rule.  Some require a penalty as part of the replay, some do not.   I need to review this.  I remember discussions involving strokes hitting power lines and strokes on the putting green (19-1b) that should have been cancelled and weren't.  I don't remember all the details, but I remember the threads were rather long.  

Thanks.

 

Whether or not it's a serious breach would be determined according to each specific case.  I can make arguments where 50 yards is not a significant advantage, and I can make some where it is.  It may depend on the total length of the hole, or on the location or spacing of hazards or other obstacles to advancing the ball.  On the shortest par 4 on my old home course a 50 yard advantage off the tee would not be a serious breach, because the necessity of laying up short of a pond from the tee means that 50 yards doesn't gain you anything that the 2 stroke penalty would not already account for - even the shorter distance would require a 270 yard carry with your FW wood).  

[Dormie1360]

Hi Rick,

Yes I understand all that.  All the cancel and replay rules are a must.  The question is what is the penalty if the player does not cancel and replay.  All the penalty statements are two strokes or loss of hole, including the local rule on power lines.  In those cases the stroke counts as well.  What I am interested in is the issue of the player who is required to correct before playing from the next tee due to a SB.  What you, Colin and Martyn are saying is because the player is continuing from a Wrong Place, one must also consider a SB and in those cases, you look at the location of the original stroke and the location where the ball ended up.  Based on those two points, one decides if a player received a significant advantage by not replaying his stroke.  Based on this, I can think of situation where I don't think this works as intended, but given all three of you are saying the same thing, I'm sure this is correct.

Thanks.

[No Mulligans]

1 hour ago, Dormie1360 said:

I'm looking at a list of the 9 rules that require a stroke to be cancelled and replayed under a rule.  Some require a penalty as part of the replay, some do not.  

 

There are 9 rules for a cancelled stroke... How am I going to ever remember all of this?

[Asheville]

What's your list, John?

------

Must replay:

1) Ball breaks into pieces. R5-3. 
2) Ball replaced on PG while another BiM. D16-1b/3.
3) Player attends FS without auth while a putt is being made from the PG and the ball hits the FS. R17-2.
4) BiM, opponent or fellow-competitor attending FS intentionally fails to remove it. D17-3/2.
5) BiM after a stroke from the PG deflected or stopped by an OA. R19-1b.
6) BiM after a stroke from the PG deflected or stopped by another BiM. R19-5b.
7) Ball played out of turn in foursomes. R29-3.
8) A Local Rule requires that a stroke must be replayed.
 
May replay or may be required to replay:

1) MP - playing out of turn. R10-1c.
2) MP - Playing from outside the teeing ground. R11-4a.
3) MP - Ball accidentally deflected or stopped by an opponent. R19-3 and D19-3/1.
4) A Local Rule requires that a stroke may be replayed.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Asheville

[Dormie1360]

Good List.  Here's what I have.

Rule 5-3.         Ball Unfit for Play  (ball breaks into pieces)
Rule 10-1c      Match Play; Playing Out of Turn
Rule 11-4a      Playing from outside the Teeing Ground; Match Play
Rule 17-2        Unauthorized Attendance (penalty statement)
Rule 19-1b      Ball in Motion Deflected or Stopped;  By Outside Agency
Rule 19-3        Ball in Motion Deflected or Stopped; By Opponent, Caddie
                        or Equipment in Match Play  (also Rule 30-2b)
Rule 19-5b      Ball in Motion Deflected or Stopped;  By Another Ball in Motion
Rule 29-3        Foursome Stroke Play (Incorrect Order)
Local Rule       Ball Striking Temporary Power Line or Cable

Your #2 and #4 could fall under 19-1 via Note 2 under R1-2..

 

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2015 by Dormie1360

[Martyn W]

Couple of important things to add re. wrong place and serious breach.

Firstly we are dealing with one of the most basic principles here - the very first Rule in the book:

The Game of Golf consists of playing a ball with a club from the teeing ground into the hole by a stroke or successive strokes in accordance with the Rules.

If a player plays from a wrong place he has not complied with this basic tenet. The question now becomes what penalty is appropriate to deal with this? This brings up one of the most misunderstood concepts in the game: any penalty must be of sufficient severity to offset any POTENTIAL advantage gained. The argument always comes up (this thread is no exception) "but he didn't gain an advantage!". That is not the point. The point is could an advantage to gained. In the case at hand, who's to say that the player, having proceeded correctly wouldn't have whiffed his next shot and then hit it out of bounds?.  Certainly it must be taken on a case by case basis but the important thing to remember is not what happened but what could have happened. 

As an example: I pick up my ball in the fairway and walk 100 yards to the green, drop it and get ready to putt. My opponent asks what I'm doing and I say I'm playing from a wrong place, I'll take the 2 stroke penalty so I'm putting for a par.If there was no 'serious breach' caveat, I could do that all day!

 

[Rulesman]

As Tufts says:

The penalty must not be less than the advantage which the player could derive from the particular Rule violation. In other words, whether the violation be inadvertent or deliberate, or whether it occurs as a result of play or be due to the accidental or purposeful act of the player, or whether it be brought about by failure to proceed in accordance with the Rules regardless of the circumstances, the penalty must always be of sufficient magnitude to discourage the player from seeking or receiving advantage under the Rules.

The purpose of the Rules is to insure that as far as possible everyone plays the same game. The penalties serve to police the chance that by taking advantage of an inadequately protected Rule players will play a game wholly different from golf. The penalties must be adequate to provide this protection for if they are too light it is conceivable that
golf would become a game of negotiation, with the golfer deliberately accepting penalties in order to obtain some advantage. Thus the Rules themselves would provide the golfer with an inexpensive method of avoiding the results of a badly played shot. Under these conditions golf would lose all character and become a travesty.
In order to maintain this principle, it must be admitted that at times the penalties appear to be unduly severe. It is impossible to provide a completely graduated scale of penalties, though the Rules do permit modifying the penalty of disqualification [Rule 33-7], and the penalty applied to each particular rule must be specific and adequate at least to match the maximum advantage which the player is likely to receive. The penalties cannot be expected, nor are they intended to exactly offset the advantage gained from the violation.

..... penalties can be divided into three general gradations: one stroke, two strokes in stroke play and its equivalent of loss of hole in match play, and disqualification.

DISQUALIFICATION PENALTIES

Though the penalty of disqualification appears unduly severe, actually the rule-makers never like to eliminate a player from a competition without good reason. For example, it seems really brutal to disqualify a player in stroke play for having played from outside the teeing ground without correcting the error [Rule 11-4b]. However, if the general penalty for stroke play of two strokes were the penalty for this particular infraction, it would be possible for a golfer to make a score of three on every hole simply by teeing his ball next to the hole and
knocking it in.

[Dormie1360]

7 hours ago, Martyn W said:

As an example: I pick up my ball in the fairway and walk 100 yards to the green, drop it and get ready to putt. My opponent asks what I'm doing and I say I'm playing from a wrong place, I'll take the 2 stroke penalty so I'm putting for a par.If there was no 'serious breach' caveat, I could do that all day!

@Rulesman   @ColinL  @Fourputt

I understand and I agree on principle.  I'm just having trouble with the interpretation of what an advantage is and the application of the rule. (Granted, my ideas are apparently wrong.) Martyn, your example makes sense, but we are talking about situations where the player would drop closer and is adding 3 strokes, not 2. In the case of hitting a power line the player, in not replaying his stroke, the player would not even be touching or dropping his ball.  He would, in fact, be playing the ball as he finds it until he holes out. I'm not sure playing my 4th stroke from 100 yards off the tee vs. playing 1 from the tee again is something I would do all day.  Yet I would be DQ'd for a serious breach if I did not correct because I might have wiffed my replayed stroke, or shanked it OB.  Just imagine me DQ'ing Speith because of this.   

If I understand everyone's reasoning correctly, in the OP's scenario, you are taking the position that the player could have done worse than a 50 yard shot, and because the stroke played from the WP is an advantage over playing 50 yards back (we don't look at the outcome based on total strokes per Colin's comments) its' a SB.

Take the example of a player who has a 30 foot putt laying 1 on a Par 3..  He putts the ball, it lips the hole and and before it comes to a stop 2 feet away, it is deflected by a moving leaf just passed the hole.  The player then holes out from two feet and tees off on the next hole.  I would have mistakenly ruled the player scores a 5 on the hole.   2PS for a breach of R19-1b. If I understand everyone's reasoning you would DQ the player because clearly there is a significant advantage for being able to putt from 2 feet vs. 30 feet and the player could have stroked his replayed stroke 10 feet passed and missed the next......even though he now has the speed and read.   

With this understanding, it would seem the penalty statement of 2PS for failure to cancel and replay would rarely be used. 

Anyway, just some thoughts on why I'm still struggling with this.

 

[Rulesman]

1 hour ago, Dormie1360 said:

@Rulesman   @ColinL  @Fourputt

 

Take the example of a player who has a 30 foot putt laying 1 on a Par 3..  He putts the ball, it lips the hole and and before it comes to a stop 2 feet away, it is deflected by a moving leaf just passed the hole.  The player then holes out from two feet and tees off on the next hole.  I would have mistakenly ruled the player scores a 5 on the hole.   2PS for a breach of R19-1b. If I understand everyone's reasoning you would DQ the player because clearly there is a significant advantage for being able to putt from 2 feet vs. 30 feet 

With this understanding, it would seem the penalty statement of 2PS for failure to cancel and replay would rarely be used. 

 

The 2 stroke penalty will be applied regardless of any SB consideration. A breach is a breach and the penalty must be applied. The rule itself is not concerned with what may or may not be the result of the action or inaction.

If the putt was from 3' and the ball stopped at 2'6" or 3'6" on the far side is a different problem to your 30' and 2'. It is only that issue which should be considered re a SB. Is he significantly better off after the breach than before? In the former, no. In the latter, yes.

 

 

[onthehunt526]

HI agree it's a Rule 5-3 breach, but to answer your question @No Mulligans in theory you get a mulligan if your ball is destroyed in the process of making a stroke. You cancel the stroke, and drop as near as possible you hit the original shot.

[Martyn W]

1 hour ago, onthehunt526 said:

in theory you get a mulligan if your ball is destroyed in the process of making a stroke

Not sure what you mean by 'in theory', is this different to 'in practice' ?

[onthehunt526]

5 hours ago, Martyn W said:

Not sure what you mean by 'in theory', is this different to 'in practice' ?

In practice in probably closer to the proper terminology for this, but I write movie reviews not novels...

So in accordance with Rule 5-3, @No Mulligans does get a legal "mulligan"... 

IN my 20 years playing this lovely game, I personally have never encountered it... Maybe @Rulesman can give us a little history on Rule 5-3, I assume this part of the rules was added later.

[Rulesman]

In the 1850s the R&A rule was :
"If a ball split into two or more pieces, a fresh ball shall be put down in playing for a medal, without a penalty, and likewise in a match on the penalty of one stroke"

It didn't say where but later they specified from where the largest piece lay; then in the early 1900s, that if pieces were of equal size the player could choose. Later, where any piece lay.

For some reason a broken ball (as opposed to unfit) seems to disappear from the rules, eventually reappearing in 1976, requiring a ball to be played from where the original lay.

Edited December 20, 2015 by Rulesman