Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 4766 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

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?


Posted

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 .

Brian Kuehn

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
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.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

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.


Posted
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.


Posted
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 .


Posted
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.

R9 with 757 Speeder
mp 57 3-pw project x 6.0 flighted
Vokey* 56* 60*
Monza Corsa Putter


Posted
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".


Posted
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.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
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!

Bag:

DriverG25 or  XCG5 11.5* 3++ fairway wood

3w:  XCG6 15*

*5w: XCG6 18* (out if I bag my 3-iron)

Irons: Rocketbladez tour  3-pw(47*) (I sometimes bag the 3 iron but usually the 5w) 

Wedges:   SM-4  52*, 56*, 60* 

Putter:  Versa #7 (white on black)


Posted
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.

  • Upvote 1

Mac

WITB:
Driver: Ping G30 (12*)
FW:  Ping K15 (3W, 5W)
Hybrids: Ping K15 (3H, 5H)
Irons: Ping K15 (6-UW)

Wedges: Cleveland 588 RTX CB (54*, 58*)

Putter: Ping Scottsdale w/ SS Slim 3.0

Ball: Bridgestone e6

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

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.


Posted
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....

  • Upvote 1

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"


Note: This thread is 4766 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • I mean there has to be some thought. For eg., something like 'soft knees and wrists' at set up and maybe a dynamic 'left arm to chin' as a trigger to start DS. I have these one or two anchor thoughts and have served me well. In fact, my wildest swings are the one where I have no thoughts or if I forget to walk thru my anchor thoughts. In contrast my best rounds are where I am consistent with the anchor thoughts.    OTOH, if I am running my entire half hour lesson (hypothetical) with some pro that I had last Saturday or whatever before every swing then I'm probably in trouble before I even get over the ball.      
    • Two bits. Bit 1 The NCAA's appeal of Brendan Sorsby being granted a temporary injunction will not be heard until February, so there will be nothing to prevent Sorsby from playing the full season and potential CFP.  Bit 2 The Big Ten Conference will hold a meeting and is expected to ban all of its athletic programs from playing Texas Tech in the regular season. Georgia has done the same. The SEC will meet to consider a similar ban. Fellow Big 12 members TCU and Kansas State are spearheading a similar ban, but the conference charter might not allow it. Meanwhile, Big 12 athletic directors are meeting this week to explore what options the conference might have.
    • No, but I'm also in disagreement that golfers have no thoughts over the golf ball, and/or don't ever think I've met someone I truly believe is thinking nothing but "target" or something on most shots.
    • StuM,  I have, in the past, added a left handed club. (Ususally a 7 iron) However, I usually take a stroke penalty and move the ball to where I want it.  I play for fun and in a pinch can use theback side if my club if I don't want the penalty stroke.    RetiredOldMan,  Terry 
    • So, Brendan Sorsby, Texas Tech transfer QB, was found guilty of sports betting by the NCAA. He admitted to it. He placed thousands of bets over multiple years while at Indiana and Cincinnati. This included betting on his own teams.  The NCAA rules ban athletes from betting on any sport (college or pro).  A retired visiting judge from Tarrant County, Texas has put an injunction on the NCAA ruling. He is a visiting judge because the first judge was a graduate and big fan of Texas Tech, and he recused himself. The judged ruled the following... "Under Curry's order, Sorsby is permitted to play for Texas Tech's 2026 season on the condition that he continues his treatment for a gambling and anxiety disorder and serves a two-game suspension (missing games against Abilene Christian and Oregon State)."  Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly care for the NCAA. That still doesn't mean that a college can choose when or where to say, "Yea we agree to these rules for all our sports, well except in this case." Here is a breakdown from S&W. The Hidden Weapon in Sorsby’s Injunction: How a Lubbock County Court Order Quietly Neutralized the NCAA’s Most Powerful Enforcement Tool - Law Offices of Snell & Wilmer By Ryan J. Regula On June 8, 2026, Lubbock County District Court Judge Ken Curry issued a temporary injunction in Brendan Sorsby v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Cause No. DC-2026-CV-0791 (99th Judicial District... The main judgement made sense. Sorsby, I am going to have all this harm done to me if I don't get to play. The Judge, I agree. The penalty for gambling is too harsh, so here are all these things you must do, and I will grant this injunction against the NCAA. Basically, an analogy would be when a person goes into court for a DUI and they agree to all these other things to not end up in jail.  What sucks for the NCAA is the NCAA has appealed to Texas’ Seventh Court of Appeals, based in Amarillo. All four justices that preside over the court are graduates of Texas Tech University School of Law. It would be hilarious if all four of them had to recuse themselves 🤣. For those who like to read legal rulings...  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.