Making use of "lift, clean, place"

[B-Con]

There was an interesting ruling regarding a ball moving after "address" on the first day of the Byron Nelson this week, but [url=http://www.weiunderpar.com/post/clarifying-why-andres-gonzales-wasnt-under-penalty]this article[/url] on it mentions a ruling I found more interesting. FTA: [quote]Brendle offered another interesting ruling anecdote. Right after he dealt with Andres, he was called over by Charles Warren, who had a question. Under the “lift, clean and place” rule, the players are given a club length to place the ball from the original position, no closer to the hole. Warren’s ball was within a club length of a sprinkler head. He asked Brendle if he could place the ball on the sprinkler and then take relief from there. The answer was yes. What’s more, after the drop, Warren’s ball was once again in a new position and he was allowed to lift, clean and place it another club length. “He ended up moving it three club lengths and changing the shot completely under the rules,” said Brendle.[/quote] To me, that seems to be taking unfair advantage of the rules. He got to move almost three club-lengths for free? That changed his shot (according to the article), and any free relief that changes your shot seems to violate the spirit of the rules. I know that "lift, clean, place" doesn't perfectly preserve the "play it as it lies" spirit, but three club lengths could be a total of 9 or 10 feet. That's nowhere close to "as it once lay". Thoughts?

[zeg]

I think it's lame, but no lamer than "Lift, Clean, and Place" to begin with.  If the official was correct and this is legal, then I wouldn't hold it against the golfer for taking full advantage of the rules.  If something isn't intended to be done, then the rules shouldn't allow it.

Note that this is different than using the rules shadily, such as using a questionable direction of play to qualify from relief.  That's not ok, but if you're honest about your intentions and the rules permit it, go for it.

[iacas]

zeg said what I'd say before I could say it.

He had an idea and asked. Good on him.

Lift, clean, and cheat is used way too frequently on the PGA Tour.

[B-Con]

I think it's lame, but no lamer than "Lift, Clean, and Place" to begin with.  If the official was correct and this is legal, then I wouldn't hold it against the golfer for taking full advantage of the rules.  If something isn't intended to be done, then the rules shouldn't allow it.

Note that this is different than using the rules shadily, such as using a questionable direction of play to qualify from relief.  That's not ok, but if you're honest about your intentions and the rules permit it, go for it.

I don't blame him for taking advantage of the rule since -- I agree -- he did so fairly. I just think it's an odd loophole that could be frequently exploited and make a (somewhat bizarre) rule much worse. I find it odd that the rule exists.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by zeg

I think it's lame, but no lamer than "Lift, Clean, and Place" to begin with.  If the official was correct and this is legal, then I wouldn't hold it against the golfer for taking full advantage of the rules.  If something isn't intended to be done, then the rules shouldn't allow it.

Note that this is different than using the rules shadily, such as using a questionable direction of play to qualify from relief.  That's not ok, but if you're honest about your intentions and the rules permit it, go for it.

My club is a bit more strict when playing under the preferred lies local rule.  We only allow a scorecard length for relief, and we only invoke the rule when absolutely necessary.  I think that the Tour is a bit remiss in allowing a full clublength.

[sean_miller]

My golf league isn't televised so there's nobody watching players mic'd and referring to the course as a "mudbog", or a "poorly maintained goat trail". I suspect the courses themselves encourage lift, clean, and place.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

My club is a bit more strict when playing under the preferred lies local rule.  We only allow a scorecard length for relief, and we only invoke the rule when absolutely necessary.  I think that the Tour is a bit remiss in allowing a full clublength.

That makes a lot more sense.  That should be enough to get out of a mud hole your ball made when it landed.  Things where you'd need a club length seem to me they ought to be covered by GUR or casual water rules already.

[WUTiger]

All sports have systematic discussion on the rules which govern them. Golf is no different. If a rule is repeatedly interpreted in ways contrary to the intent of the rule, the rule needs to be changed. But, you don't want to go tinkering with rules because of an occasional oddball event. As the attorneys say, isolated, unusual events "make for bad case law." And, let's look at overall conditions of the Warren question. If "L-C-P" is in effect, likely the course turf is soggy and footing is poor. I would guess the player would score better overall playing the ball down on a dry course than playing "L-C-P" on a soggy course.