They still aren't. Bunkers are not more penal. Your first post was exactly the type of douchebag posts you routinely made before being restricted from all Rules threads until you'd read the Principles booklet.
Bunkers are not more penal than water hazards.
This isn't about that, but thanks for being glib. :P
I think we're trying to compare two situations that on the surface appear to be the same, but aren't. On one hand we're talking about taking relief from a water hazard and on the other about deeming a ball to be unplayable, which is specifically not allowed in a water hazard. They seem the same, but are not.
I'm not suggesting they're exactly the same.
I'm simply suggesting removing the paragraph that requires you to drop again IN the bunker. You're taking your medicine (a stroke), so why grant people the same opportunity for relief after they've taken their stroke?
If we take the water hazard out of the equation (and we should, because it's irrelevant in discussing unplayables) then it seems to make sense. Given the nature of where bunkers tend to be located, allowing the same options in deeming a ball unplayable from the bunker would tend to make doing so less penal than doing so in many instances through the green. Through the green, there are a lot of times when the only real option is to replay the shot. Seldom would that be the case from a bunker. Bunkers (defined as hazards) should be potentially more penal, not less than through the green.
I disagree that there are "lots of times" when stroke and distance is the only real option to play the shot. You have to hit it in some pretty bad shit for that to be the best option.
And if you hit it in a greenside bunker, and it plugs in the lip, well you're not that far offline. They don't put bunkers well off-line, so if you hit it in the desert in a cactus and want to call it unplayable, and your only option is to re-play it, well good… you hit it so far offline. Bunkers aren't really far off-line.
I realize you can't legislate for luck in the Rules, but this seems to further punish players who had the bad luck of their ball plugging in a bunker under the lip or something. They take their stroke, and eliminating the paragraph gives them some more options.
(I'd eliminate the stupid rule that says you have to drop in an inch of water if the entire bunker is flooded, too… but that's for another matter, and it probably almost never happens.)
I guess we could apply the relief options for a water hazard to bunkers.....but now we need to determine if the bunker is lateral or not, and the drop options would get extremely complicated in a hurry, especially as they relate to dropping on the opposite side of a lateral hazard. Can you imagine.......?!
No we don't. They can drop within two club lengths of where the ball lies, re-play the shot, or drop on a line back from where their ball lies to the hole. If that's still in the bunker, because it's a huge fairway bunker and they don't want to go back 50 yards, so be it.
There's no "boundary" like water hazards.
Seriously, you just eliminate the paragraph. This "lateral or not" stuff only applies to water hazards because they have lines where the ball last crossed. That's not a concern here.
Whether a ball can be played or not is irrelevant to the right of the player to deem any ball unplayable under rule 28. Again, though they sound similar, rules 26 and 28 address completely different situations.
What about the fairway bunker that stretches laterally down the entire length of the hole? Treating that as a yellow stake hazard would completely defeat any effort to treat all hazards similarly. Another reason that option would not work.
See above. It's irrelevant. Deleting the paragraph is all that's required. There's no need to worry about the line the ball last crossed the hazard. This is the Unplayable Ball rule, not the hazard rule.
Just delete the paragraph.