Embedded Ball Questions

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman

I don't know where you got those words from but this is what the rules say

What do you do when you are pulling one guy's leg and another guy's leg comes off in your hand?

Why not at least give him a proper answer before trying to remove his limb?

[Rulesman]

What do you do when you are pulling one guy's leg and another guy's leg comes off in your hand?

Too subtle for me. But I wonder how many believed that is the rule.

[14ledo81]

[QUOTE name="Rulesman" url="/t/76267/embedded-ball-questions#post_1032014"]   I don't know where you got those words from but this is what the rules say  [/QUOTE] What do you do when you are pulling one guy's leg and another guy's leg comes off in your hand?

Hey... If you have a different rules question, maybe you should start a new thread? Not sure where the rules say what to do with missing body parts though?? :)

[ColinL]

If the body part is still lying on the course, it is a loose impediment whilst the other bit that is still hopping around is an outside agency..... unless it is your legless opponent in match play.

I did once start a game against a friend when we were both legless, but it didn't last more than 2 erratic holes when we decided the honourable thing was to call it a half and return to the pub.

[turtleback]

Too subtle for me. But I wonder how many believed that is the rule.

Sorry.  I thought the references to trial, judge,subpoena, and discovery would have made it clear but maybe these things are called by different names in the UK.

[Ernest Jones]

Are human body parts considered to be man made?

[iacas]

Are human body parts considered to be man made?

That depends.

Do you believe in God?

[Ernest Jones]

That depends. Do you believe in God?

I am not touching that one.

[ColinL]

Are human body parts considered to be man made?

If it's a real body part, it is not man made and is, as I said, a loose impediment.  If, however, the unfortunate golfer has been detached from a prosthetic limb, the artificial limb is an obstruction.

It is essential to know the difference lest you come across a detached limb in a hazard.

[bkuehn1952]

@Rulesman , thanks for the post regarding embedded balls.

I had a situation recently happen that falls into this Rule.  It was a wet day and the ground was pretty soft.  I saw my ball hit and roll/bounce a bit forward.  When I got to the ball is was sitting in a pitch mark on the green's collar/fringe.  It seemed to me to be pretty questionable as to whether I deserved relief as the visual evidence suggested that was not my pitch mark.  Also, the ball was not all the way in or stuck in the depression.  Since I was not sure the ball was embedded in my pitch mark, I played it without relief.

If it is not clear that the ball is embedded, I believe it is acceptable to advise one's fellow competitors or opponents that you are going to mark and lift to determine if the ball is embedded.  In my case, even if the ball was technically embedded, there was no point in checking since I was fairly certain it was not my pitch mark.

[ColinL]

A serious reply.

You do not have any justification in the Rules for lifting your ball to find out if it is embedded. Nor do you need to - you can determine whether it is or not visually using the explanation in Decision 25-2/0.5 as quoted above.

In the situation you describe, your ball is not embedded in its own pitch mark if you saw it strike the ground and then bounce forwards and come to rest.  If it bounces forward and then spins back into its mark, it is embedded, but not if it stays in a different place from where it struck the ground.

[Phil McGleno]

Who is to say the ball couldn't make a pitch mark the second time it hit the ground?-If my ball is in a pitch mark in closely mown area and nobody can definitively say my ball didnt just roll into it Im taking it out.

[Rulesman]

You do not have any justification in the Rules for lifting your ball to find out if it is embedded.

He does. See http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-20/#d20-1-0.7

[ColinL]

Oops, forgot that one.

Thanks.

[MEfree]

The answer to the question is simple.  If you have reason to believe that the ball is NOT lying in its own pitch mark, then it isn't.  Lacking such belief then it is.  Once again, you agonize over what is basically an irrelevancy.  I have seen a ball hit, hop then still end up in its own pitch mark.  In this case, that is what I would assume had happened, and you could never prove that I was wrong without high def video from 15 different angles.

I was working under a similar assumption, but when I lifted the ball, the pitch mark it was sitting in didn't seem fresh (aka it looked like it might be someone's old pitch mark rather than my new one)

I don't know where you got those words from but this is what the rules say

25-2/0.5

When Ball Embedded in Ground

A ball is deemed to be embedded in the ground only if:

the impact of the ball landing has created a pitch-mark in the ground,

the ball is in its own pitch-mark, and

part of the ball is below the level of the ground.

Provided that these three requirements are met, a ball does not necessarily have to touch the soil to be considered embedded (e.g., grass, loose impediments or the like may intervene between the ball and the soil).

Any doubt as to whether a ball is embedded should be resolved against the player. (Revised)

My ball looked like pic 1

@Rulesman, thanks for the post regarding embedded balls.

I had a situation recently happen that falls into this Rule.  It was a wet day and the ground was pretty soft.  I saw my ball hit and roll/bounce a bit forward.  When I got to the ball is was sitting in a pitch mark on the green's collar/fringe.  It seemed to me to be pretty questionable as to whether I deserved relief as the visual evidence suggested that was not my pitch mark.  Also, the ball was not all the way in or stuck in the depression.  Since I was not sure the ball was embedded in my pitch mark, I played it without relief.

If it is not clear that the ball is embedded, I believe it is acceptable to advise one's fellow competitors or opponents that you are going to mark and lift to determine if the ball is embedded.  In my case, even if the ball was technically embedded, there was no point in checking since I was fairly certain it was not my pitch mark.

This was very similar to my case.

He does. See http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-20/#d20-1-0.7

Thanks for providing this.  I looked at the 25-2 decisions but didn't think to look at the rule 20 decisions.  It seems as if I acted correctly by picking up and then replacing my ball when the subsequent  evidence didn't support that it was in its OWN pitch mark.

So back to my original question- What level of proof or certainty do you need that a ball is embedded IN ITS OWN PITCH MARK to take relief under rule 25-2? In my situation, an HD video replay would have clarified the answer, but without it, I couldn't be certain one way or another whether the pitch mark I was embedded in was my own or not.  Using Fourputt's logic of it spinning back into its own mark, I could make an argument that there is "enough" evidence that it was embedded in its own mark.  However, Fourputt's standard wouldn't have been met once some evidence appeared that the mark MAY have been older.

The ROG say you must have "virtual certainty" before assuming your ball is lost in a water hazard and taking relief.  Is there a similar or corresponding phrase for rule 25-2?

[David in FL]

Who is to say the ball couldn't make a pitch mark the second time it hit the ground?.

Is it a pitch mark if the originating shot was a chip?

[MEfree]

Is it a pitch mark if the originating shot was a chip?

It is NOT considered a pitch mark IF you drive the ball straight down into the turf without it getting airborne, but I see nothing in the rules that say it can't be embedded from a chip shot.  However, the rules do say that if you take relief from an embedded ball and then play a shot that rolls back into the same pitch mark, you DON'T get relief a second time.

[jamo]

Is it a pitch mark if the originating shot was a chip?

How much bounce was used?