Your Most Recent Rules Encounter

[Spyder]

Thank god that a 'leaf rule' doesn't exist. My buddies would use this on every shot with the exception of putting, even in July.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by zeg

I don't think that applies directly if the committee (or the starter) assigns a foursome to the tee which is what happened here (as I understand it).  In decision 2/1, player A apparently invited C to the match against the wishes of B.  If a disinterested party assigns the tee time and refuses to accommodate B's request not to have outside golfers in the group, it would not be equitable to award the match to him just because he complained.  The error was the committee's for not granting his request.

Well well, it seems that modern urge of making money overrides tradition...

The idea of a singles match is that two people play against each other. Should they be accompanied by someone it would be their caddies and perhaps a referee, and that's it. Nobody else.

As far as I understand the OP in this case it was club championship we're talking about. I sincerely question the attitude of a committee of such a club that values the match play club championship so low that they force other people to join the flight. This IMO is outrageous! Personally I would have refused to start the match, and by the Rules, I would have won.

[k14]

I had never even considered that it was contrary to the rules. Which actual decision of the rule 2/1 decisions are you referring to? If you look at the rules on the R and A website there are 6 separate decisions for rule 2/1.

Yes I did ask if it was ok to stand behind the player, he didn't mind. So whilst it is a breach of etiquette by the letter of the rules, I don't know if it is an actual breach of etiquette?? If someone says don't worry about being quiet while I swing you guys talk away, then is that still a breach of etiquette?

As I said in my earlier post, in future I will most likely never do it again. It creates a lot less confusion if you stand 2-3m off the side behind his putt and then walk in after he hits it. I am pretty sure I have seen pro's do that before.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Well well, it seems that modern urge of making money overrides tradition...

The idea of a singles match is that two people play against each other. Should they be accompanied by someone it would be their caddies and perhaps a referee, and that's it. Nobody else.

As far as I understand the OP in this case it was club championship we're talking about. I sincerely question the attitude of a committee of such a club that values the match play club championship so low that they force other people to join the flight. This IMO is outrageous! Personally I would have refused to start the match, and by the Rules, I would have won.

[emphasis mine]

Sorry, I don't buy it---Decision 2/1 does not strictly apply, and claiming a victory based on that Decision in this situation is simply absurd.

While I don't see the actual harm of having an unrelated player or players on the course simultaneously as being nearly as extreme as you seem to find it, Decision 2/1 does tell us that players should be permitted to restrict the players to those involved in the match.  So I would certainly support your right to play the match under protest.  However, when the other player is not responsible for the extra parties playing along with you, I see no justification for penalizing them for not joining your protest.  Permitting a re-play of the match without the outside parties would be justified, but simply awarding it to you because your opponent doesn't care one way or the other is unreasonable unless he had the option to restrict the players at the tee time.

[luu5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k14

I had never even considered that it was contrary to the rules. Which actual decision of the rule 2/1 decisions are you referring to? If you look at the rules on the R and A website there are 6 separate decisions for rule 2/1.

Only one decision 2/1:

Quote:

Q: Prior to a singles match between A and B, A stated to B that a third player, C, would be playing with them. B played the match under protest and lost. What ruling should the Committee give?

A: A single is a match in which one plays against another. Since B made a timely claim, the Committee should have awarded the match to B. If B had not protested, i.e. had agreed that C accompany the match, the result of the match would stand as played.

So if you did not protest additional players in your group then the results stand. You could have protested and hopefully have them removed from your group. As it should have been. I do not see difference in answer regarding if the other players were invited or not.

[Davis Noble]

the USGA has a very nice app for your phone.

[rustyredcab]

Originally Posted by Davis Noble

the USGA has a very nice app for your phone.

I thought I couldn't use my phone because it could be used for bad things like weather and the compass? Is the USGA app considered an exception?

[k14]

Originally Posted by luu5

Only one decision 2/1:

If you look on the R and A website and go to rule 2/1 you will see there is 6 different decisions for that rule (decisions are on the right hand margin). What decisions are you referring to? Here is link to the R and A rules explorer

Quote:

I thought I couldn't use my phone because it could be used for bad things like weather and the compass? Is the USGA app considered an exception?

You can use your smartphone for it's normal purposes when on the course (apart from accessing outside information e.g. weather etc) but you can't use it as a distance measuring device if it has a non conforming feature (most likely a compass). Hence the reason I just purchased a rangefinder. Even though I removed the compass app from my iphone by jailbreaking it I decided it was too much of a grey area so will remove all doubt by using a rangefinder.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by k14

If you look on the R and A website and go to rule 2/1 you will see there is 6 different decisions for that rule (decisions are on the right hand margin). What decisions are you referring to? Here is link to the R and A rules explorer

Should you look very carefully you would notice that Rules are always referred as X-Y, whilst there are numerous Decisions referred as X/Y. Thus we are continuously referring to Decision 2/1, which you should be able to find easily from the R&A; Rules Explorer or any other relevant source.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by k14

If you look at the rules on the R and A website there are 6 separate decisions for rule 2/1.

He's talking about Decision 2/1, not one of the Decisions 2-1/x.

[edit: which Ignorant just pointed out as well. Click on the overall rule 2 heading to find that decision in the R&A; rules app.]

[k14]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Should you look very carefully you would notice that Rules are always referred as X-Y, whilst there are numerous Decisions referred as X/Y. Thus we are continuously referring to Decision 2/1, which you should be able to find easily from the R&A; Rules Explorer or any other relevant source.

Yeah got it now. It is a decision on rule 2, I was looking at decisions for rule 2-1.

[mdl]

I don't run into the fall leaf problem so much at the courses I play in SoCal, but I gotta admit that if I lived somewhere where in the fall my regular courses had pretty much everywhere but the fairway covered in leaves (ie, mature tree lined course), so any missed fairway was like 2:1 that you'd lose your ball, I'd be breaking the rules a lot more often and calling an illegal "local" rule with my buddies where if you hit a shot that would have given you an open look to the green but from the rough (ie, not a fairway but a decent shot you definitely wouldn't have lost without all the leaves) then you can just drop a ball where your tee shot landed and play from there.  I just wouldn't want to play a round where I hit 10/14 fairways with the four misses all decent tee shots not far in the rough but I took +8 penalty strokes for losing balls in the leaves.

I realize of course that the fact I would even consider something like that makes me not a "real" golfer and my (self-kept) HC a joke ;)

[Kobey]

I was really surprised yesterday when someone, can't remember who, in the President's Cup was on the green but had an arm of a sand trap between his ball and the hole.  I never knew it was legal to chip or pitch a ball that was already on the green.  I thought only putting strokes were allowed.  The announcers even said something about how it was a good thing he didn't try and get under it or he would have done some major damage to the green.  You would think the USGA would have a rule about that just to protect the greens.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Kobey

I was really surprised yesterday when someone, can't remember who, in the President's Cup was on the green but had an arm of a sand trap between his ball and the hole.  I never knew it was legal to chip or pitch a ball that was already on the green.  I thought only putting strokes were allowed.  The announcers even said something about how it was a good thing he didn't try and get under it or he would have done some major damage to the green.  You would think the USGA would have a rule about that just to protect the greens.

They don't need a rule like that because putting is easier, so everyone putts.

[JetFan1983]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kobey

I was really surprised yesterday when someone, can't remember who, in the President's Cup was on the green but had an arm of a sand trap between his ball and the hole.  I never knew it was legal to chip or pitch a ball that was already on the green.  I thought only putting strokes were allowed.  The announcers even said something about how it was a good thing he didn't try and get under it or he would have done some major damage to the green.  You would think the USGA would have a rule about that just to protect the greens.

They don't need a rule like that because putting is easier, so everyone putts.

Based on your response, Kobey, you likely already know this rule, but I'll add it anyway just in case.

Rule 25-3: Ball on the Wrong Putting Green

a) Interference -- Interference by a wrong putting green occurs when a ball is on the wrong putting green. Interference to a player's stance or the area of his intended swing is not, of itself, interference under this rule.

b) Relief -- If a players ball lies on a wrong putting green, he must not play the ball as it lies. He must take relief, without penalty, as follows: The player must lift the ball and drop it within one club-length of and not nearer the hole than the nearest point of relief. The nearest point of relief must not be in a hazard or on a putting green. When dropping the ball within one club-length of the nearest point of relief, the ball must first strike a part of the course at a spot that avoids interference by the wrong putting green and is not in a hazard and not on a putting green. The ball may be cleaned when lifted under this rule.

Penalty for breach of rule: Match play -- Loss of hole; Stroke play -- two strokes

So in this case, you aren't allowed to hit off the wrong putting green. It's probably anal of me to post this rule here, but oh well, it can't hurt .

The sixth hole at Riviera for example has a green where you'll see pros pitching shots off it. That darn sand trap right in the middle sort of brings that into play somewhat frequently.

[Kobey]

There just seems to be so much potential for course abuse on a hole like that.  Instead of repairing ball marks, people might be repairing divots.

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

The sixth hole at Riviera for example has a green where you'll see pros pitching shots off it. That darn sand trap right in the middle sort of brings that into play somewhat frequently.

That is absolutely insane! What on earth is that bunker there for???

[JetFan1983]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

The sixth hole at Riviera for example has a green where you'll see pros pitching shots off it. That darn sand trap right in the middle sort of brings that into play somewhat frequently.

That is absolutely insane! What on earth is that bunker there for???

Yea, it's awkward. I think the players have some options though on that green, should they hit their approach on the wrong side. Based on the undulations, I think you can conceivably putt around the trap and still have a chance to hole it if the pin is in the right spot. For the Northern Trust Open however, I think they tend to tuck the pins in locations that really penalizes poor approach shots, so you'll see more pros pitching shots off the putting surface.

I think though on normal member days, they'll put the pin somewhere you can still have a putt at it from the wrong side.