• Announcements

    • iacas

      Introducing TST "Clubs!"   08/28/2017

      No, we're not getting into the equipment business, but we do have "clubs" here on TST now. Groups. Check them out here:
Sign in to follow this  
kgcrawford

Ball marker moved

Recommended Posts

I have seen the rules on a ball marker moving, relating to directly marking the ball.  The question I have is what if an opponent moves or believe they moved your marker.  If you did not see it happen, if the say it definately moved what do you do, since you do not know the original spot?  What if they say they think it moved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

There is a decision on when an opponent's caddie accidently moves one's marker.  I think the same approach would fit when another player accidently moves your marker.  He gets a 1 stroke penalty and you replace the ball as near as possible to the spot (or estimated spot).

20-1/7

Ball-Marker Moved by Opponent's Caddie Accidentally

Q. A player's caddie accidentally kicked his opponent's ball-marker closer to the hole. What is the ruling?

A. In equity (Rule 1-4 ), the ball-marker should have been replaced as near as possible to the spot where it lay and the player should incur a penalty of one stroke .

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by kgcrawford

I have seen the rules on a ball marker moving, relating to directly marking the ball.  The question I have is what if an opponent moves or believe they moved your marker.  If you did not see it happen, if the say it definately moved what do you do, since you do not know the original spot?  What if they say they think it moved?

First, are we talking an opponent or a fellow competitor - that is, match play or stroke play?  I never assume anything since the term "opponent" is one of the most misused terms in golf.  If it is stroke play there is no penalty and the marker must be replaced as nearly as possible to where it originally lay.

Share this post


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

To clarify it was stroke play so the correct term would be competitor.  I am asking because this happen to my daughter.  She did not see the marker move and her competitor, stated something to the effect "I think you ball marker moved", "it move a little".  Her comptetitor never showed her the direction the marker moved.  So she could not know the original spot.  Now to understand we are talking maybe no more then a 1/8 of an inch.  At the scorers table it was brought up and my daughter was given a two stroke penalty, she states she could not tell that the marker moved.  I am not sure about if there should be a penalty or not since the player had no visual klnowledge of the move and was not shown where the original spot was from her competitor.  Also, I believe rule 1-4 in reference to equity of play the player that moved the marker should also have been given a one stroke penalty under decision 20-1/7, which addresses a caddie moving an apponents ball marker..  I am trying to make this a learning lesson for her so she learns how to deal with these situations as they happen on the course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by kgcrawford

To clarify it was stroke play so the correct term would be competitor.  I am asking because this happen to my daughter.  She did not see the marker move and her competitor, stated something to the effect "I think you ball marker moved", "it move a little".  Her comptetitor never showed her the direction the marker moved.  So she could not know the original spot.  Now to understand we are talking maybe no more then a 1/8 of an inch.  At the scorers table it was brought up and my daughter was given a two stroke penalty, she states she could not tell that the marker moved.  I am not sure about if there should be a penalty or not since the player had no visual klnowledge of the move and was not shown where the original spot was from her competitor.  Also, I believe rule 1-4 in reference to equity of play the player that moved the marker should also have been given a one stroke penalty under decision 20-1/7, which addresses a caddie moving an apponents ball marker..  I am trying to make this a learning lesson for her so she learns how to deal with these situations as they happen on the course.

Once her fellow competitor informed her that her marker moved, she was obligated to replace it in the correct position. It appears that the only person who saw the marker move was the fellow competitor and thus your daughter needed to find out where the girl thought her marker had moved from and replace it.

The responsibility to resolve the situation fell on your daughter. Once she was aware that something was amiss she needed to deal with it. If she wasn't sure on how to proceed she needed to call for a ruling, or else proceed under rule 3-3.

If your daughter questioned the fellow competitor who wasn't willing to help her determine where her marker had moved from then it would certainly need more questioning of both players but I'd say the outcomes would then either be that there wasn't enough evidence that the marker moved and no penalty or that the fellow competitor was acting contrary the spirit of the game and would be DQed.

In decision 20-1/7, it was determined that the most equitable way to resolve the situation was to use the rule of what happens if your opponent's caddie moves your ball, as the marker is effectively standing in for the ball. However the rule if a fellow competitor (or their caddie) moves your ball is different and the ball is replaced without penalty. Thus in equity there would be no penalty for a fellow competitor moving your ball marker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by kgcrawford

Thank you for that advice, sounds like sound advice to never leave an area until an issue is resolved.

I'd encourage your daughter to learn rule 3-3. It's very helpful in situations where you're unsure of a rule and there isn't an official available. It allows you to play out the hole with two balls under different procedures and find out later which one was correct.

3-3 . Doubt As To Procedure

a . Procedure

In stroke play, if a competitor is doubtful of his rights or the correct procedure during the play of a hole, he may, without penalty, complete the hole with two balls.

After the doubtful situation has arisen and before taking further action, the competitor must announce to his marker or fellow-competitor that he intends to play two balls and which ball he wishes to count if the Rules permit.

The competitor must report the facts of the situation to the Committee before returning his score card. If he fails to do so, he is disqualified .

Note: If the competitor takes further action before dealing with the doubtful situation, Rule 3-3 is not applicable. The score with the original ball counts or, if the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the score with the first ball put into play counts, even if the Rules do not allow the procedure adopted for that ball. However, the competitor incurs no penalty for having played a second ball, and any penalty strokes incurred solely by playing that ball do not count in his score.

b . Determination of Score for Hole

(i) If the ball that the competitor selected in advance to count has been played in accordance with the Rules , the score with that ball is the competitor’s score for the hole. Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

(ii) If the competitor fails to announce in advance his decision to complete the hole with two balls, or which ball he wishes to count, the score with the original ball counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules . If the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the first ball put into play counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules . Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

Note 1: If a competitor plays a second ball under Rule 3-3 , the strokes made after this Rule has been invoked with the ball ruled not to count and penalty strokes incurred solely by playing that ball are disregarded.

Note 2: A second ball played under Rule 3-3 is not a provisional ball under Rule 27-2 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Mordan

I'd encourage your daughter to learn rule 3-3. It's very helpful in situations where you're unsure of a rule and there isn't an official available. It allows you to play out the hole with two balls under different procedures and find out later which one was correct.

3-3. Doubt As To Procedure

a. Procedure

In stroke play, if a competitor is doubtful of his rights or the correct procedure during the play of a hole, he may, without penalty, complete the hole with two balls.

After the doubtful situation has arisen and before taking further action, thecompetitor must announce to his marker or fellow-competitor that he intends to play two balls and which ball he wishes to count if the Rules permit.

The competitor must report the facts of the situation to the Committee before returning his score card. If he fails to do so, he is disqualified.

Note: If the competitor takes further action before dealing with the doubtful situation, Rule 3-3 is not applicable. The score with the original ball counts or, if the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the score with the first ball put into play counts, even if the Rules do not allow the procedure adopted for that ball. However, the competitor incurs no penalty for having played a second ball, and any penalty strokes incurred solely by playing that ball do not count in his score.

b. Determination of Score for Hole

(i) If the ball that the competitor selected in advance to count has been played in accordance with the Rules, the score with that ball is the competitor’s score for the hole. Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

(ii) If the competitor fails to announce in advance his decision to complete the hole with two balls, or which ball he wishes to count, the score with the original ball counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules. If the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the first ball put into play counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules. Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

Note 1: If a competitor plays a second ball under Rule 3-3, the strokes made after this Rule has been invoked with the ball ruled not to count andpenaltystrokes incurred solely by playing that ball are disregarded.

Note 2: A second ball played under Rule 3-3 is not a provisional ball under Rule 27-2.

Well I guess because she is not a he the rules don't apply. I am just joking but I can't believe that in the golf decisions where they are so technical that they failed to make the ruling so it applies to both genders is pretty bad.  It might contribute to the stereotype that golf is for rich old white guys.  I am not a rabid ERA guy but this pretty is bad.  For the record I am a white guy but not rich nor do I consider myself old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by mad max

Well I guess because she is not a he the rules don't apply.  I am just joking but I can't believe that in the golf decisions where they are so technical that they failed to make the ruling so it applies to both genders is pretty bad.  It might contribute to the stereotype that golf is for rich old white guys.  I am not a rabid ERA guy but this pretty is bad.  For the record I am a white guy but not rich nor do I consider myself old.

Why the word meaning third person in many languges does require a gender? Why it could not be genderless like "it"? In Finnish we do not have third person gender, so if you require to express the gender then you say "boy/girl/man/woman/male/female".

But to be true, the rules refer many times player as "he".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by luu5

Quote:

Originally Posted by mad max

Well I guess because she is not a he the rules don't apply.  I am just joking but I can't believe that in the golf decisions where they are so technical that they failed to make the ruling so it applies to both genders is pretty bad.  It might contribute to the stereotype that golf is for rich old white guys.  I am not a rabid ERA guy but this pretty is bad.  For the record I am a white guy but not rich nor do I consider myself old.

Why the word meaning third person in many languges does require a gender? Why it could not be genderless like "it"? In Finnish we do not have third person gender, so if you require to express the gender then you say "boy/girl/man/woman/male/female".

But to be true, the rules refer many times player as "he".

Because "he" is a common, traditionally used generic term, and doesn't bother anyone who isn't a PC snob.

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because "he" is a common, traditionally used generic term, and doesn't bother anyone who isn't a PC snob.

I am so tired of the PC snobs!! they drive me nuts, you can't say anything anymore without someone going over it with a fine-toothed comb!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by mad max

Well I guess because she is not a he the rules don't apply.  I am just joking but I can't believe that in the golf decisions where they are so technical that they failed to make the ruling so it applies to both genders is pretty bad.  It might contribute to the stereotype that golf is for rich old white guys.  I am not a rabid ERA guy but this pretty is bad.  For the record I am a white guy but not rich nor do I consider myself old.

What's even harder to believe is that anybody would get their panties in a wad over something like that.

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by Mac62

What's even harder to believe is that anybody would get their panties in a wad over something like that.

Said persons have also not read the Rule book, where on page 4 it clearly states:

Gender

In the Rules of golf, the gender used in relation to any person is understood to include both genders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by 2ironfrenzy

I am so tired of the PC snobs!! they drive me nuts, you can't say anything anymore without someone going over it with a fine-toothed comb!


Bah, they're better than the Mac snobs....

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  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    Talamore Golf Resort
    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Mission Belt
    Snell Golf
    Frogger Golf
    PitchFix USA
  • Posts

    • I voted "no". Reason being there is/are sanctioned events and tours (e.g. Michigan Hickory Tour) and some are even shown on Sky Sports. They even have the Trilby Tour. This is a real amateur tour where the main stipulation is that you have to wear a trilby hat (i kid you not). Like many have said, the tech is soooooo different that it is more likely to be detrimental to their regular game that anything other than 9 holes or so for charity or exhibition wouldnt be worth it for them. That being said, some older pro's have switched largely to hickory golf with a lot of success. Sandy Lyle for instance won the hickory World Golf Open in 2014 and 2016. Still plays modern gear but in interviews says he enjoys the old stuff more. Difference is that Sandy isn't competing at the very top of the sport these days.
    • @Jack Watson, I think you know as well as I that the USA Today article is garbage in terms of saying pros want to play full tournaments with hickory. In fact, one of the first quotes in the video was, "Wouldn't want to play them from the tees we play nowadays". The the most praise they got was that the person "enjoyed the hit" or that it felt soft, but the soft wasn't necessarily good considering one of the pros likened it to "a bar of soap". In other words, the old equipment is garbage (crap) by comparison. It's the same as if you compared a Ford Pinto to a modern Ford Focus: the Pinto is crap by comparison (though there are a few who have a nostalgic infatuation with the older one).   My point is that what you think, "They should have enough pride to actually want to do this," has absolutely no bearing on reality. The pros have nothing to gain from playing this event, besides maybe to blow off some steam as a joke. It certainly wouldn't count towards the FedEx cup and they'd have to devote extra time to practice with equipment that, quite frankly, no longer is relevant or matters anywhere outside of a history museum.  I'd be willing to bet $100 that a survey of all pros on tour would show more against such an event than in favor of it. I understand that you very much want to see the event happen, but you should also be able to understand the reasons why such an event would never happen and why a majority of the golfers would be against it.  
    • I posted this for people who are intered in testing their core and balance, with these three progressive moves.  then leaving a comment on how they did.  If you are not interested in doing that please go somewhere else
    • @Vinsk  You have not shown a shred of evidence to support your view as I did.  Snedeker agrees with me and he shot 80 with vintage gear.  Where is your evidence?  I offered mine. Platitudes do not qualify as arguments.
    • It’s just more of the, “I just won’t admit this game is incredibly hard” nonsense to me. “Oh yeah? Well let’s see these pros who think they’re so good hit ‘real gear’.” It’s all nonsense. They’re that good. Period. @Jack Watson, you’re not. Whether it be hickory or space age titanium. Let it go. You’ll never ‘figure golf out.” Ok sorry. I’m done.
  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Get Great Gear with Amazon