Wrong ball in hand

[phan52]

Here's the scenario. Friendly match with a few bucks on the line. Somebody hits his approach 18" from the pin. His opponent walks up and, before he can give the putt, his partner chips from off the green and hits the ball. Both balls carom to the apron about 12 feet away. The guy who hit it close says that he is going to replace his ball and his opponent (whose partner hit the ball) says he was giving it to him anyway and it wasn't necessary. The guy goes to pick up the ball and, while cleaning it, realizes that he picked up his opponents ball. Friendly match, so they replace it as best they could and carried on. The discussion at the 19th centered around what would have been the ruling if it was a real match play competition.

We asked a guy who is a rules official for the GAP, and he was stumped and said he had to think about it. My call is that he conceded his opponent's putt by picking the ball up.

[David in FL]

The player caused touched the ball purposely and caused it to move.  As such, he incurs a penalty of one stroke and the ball is replaced.

The original concession remains.

Rule 18

Ball at Rest Moved

18-3 . By Opponent, Caddie or Equipment in Match Play

b . Other Than During Search

If, other than during search for a player’s ball, an opponent , his caddie or his equipment, moves the ball, touches it purposely or causes it to move , except as otherwise provided in the Rules , the opponent incurs a penalty of one stroke. If the ball is moved , it must be replaced.

[wadesworld]

Although it is common to see a picked up ball count as a concession, it apparently formerly is not:

2-4/4

Whether Picking Up Opponent's Ball Is Concession of Next Stroke

Q. In match play, A holes a putt and, thinking he has won the match, picks up B's ball. B then advises A that he (B) had a putt to win the hole. Did A concede B's next stroke when he picked up B's ball?

A. No. A incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 18-3b ; B must replace his ball and now has two putts to win the hole.

Additionally, @DavidInFL, I do question would the concession stand?  The opponent said "it was not necessary to replace the ball because he was going to give it to him anyway."  I think you're likely right especially since the statement was made that it was not necessary to replace the ball.  That's the same as saying "that was good."  But would a rules official take issue with "I was going to" vs "I did"?  Just wondering out loud….

[aaronwright21]

Here's the scenario. Friendly match with a few bucks on the line. Somebody hits his approach 18" from the pin. His opponent walks up and, before he can give the putt, his partner chips from off the green and hits the ball. Both balls carom to the apron about 12 feet away. The guy who hit it close says that he is going to replace his ball and his opponent (whose partner hit the ball) says he was giving it to him anyway and it wasn't necessary. The guy goes to pick up the ball and, while cleaning it, realizes that he picked up his opponents ball. Friendly match, so they replace it as best they could and carried on. The discussion at the 19th centered around what would have been the ruling if it was a real match play competition.

We asked a guy who is a rules official for the GAP, and he was stumped and said he had to think about it. My call is that he conceded his opponent's putt by picking the ball up.

Who did you ask from GAP?! Kirby Martin?

[David in FL]

Although it is common to see a picked up ball count as a concession, it apparently formerly is not:

2-4/4

Whether Picking Up Opponent's Ball Is Concession of Next Stroke

Q.In match play, A holes a putt and, thinking he has won the match, picks up B's ball. B then advises A that he (B) had a putt to win the hole. Did A concede B's next stroke when he picked up B's ball?

A.No. A incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 18-3b; B must replace his ball and now has two putts to win the hole.

Additionally, @DavidInFL, I do question would the concession stand?  The opponent said "it was not necessary to replace the ball because he was going to give it to him anyway."  I think you're likely right especially since the statement was made that it was not necessary to replace the ball.  That's the same as saying "that was good."  But would a rules official take issue with "I was going to" vs "I did"?  Just wondering out loud….

I see no problem with the concession.  It sounds like that was never called into dispute by the opponent.

Just to clarify, @phan52 , the player who picked up the wrong ball, was the same player who had his putt conceded, correct?  The penalty should have been assessed to him even though he had "completed" the hole by virtue of the concession and added to his score for the hole.

Having said that, in match play, once two opponents (or teams) agree on a ruling, that ruling stands, whether it's actually correct or not.  So by agreeing to replace the ball, and play on with no penalty, there would be no recourse to make a claim later.

[Wansteadimp]

I see no problem with the concession.  It sounds like that was never called into dispute by the opponent.

Just to clarify, @phan52, the player who picked up the wrong ball, was the same player who had his putt conceded, correct?  The penalty should have been assessed to him even though he had "completed" the hole by virtue of the concession and added to his score for the hole.

Having said that, in match play, once two opponents (or teams) agree on a ruling, that ruling stands, whether it's actually correct or not.  So by agreeing to replace the ball, and play on with no penalty, there would be no recourse to make a claim later.

In matchplay that time period to make a claim later is only until the first ball has been hit off the next tee (unless wrong information has been given).

[phan52]

Who did you ask from GAP?! Kirby Martin?

Higgins.

And thanks for the input guys. The fellow who picked up the ball felt that he should have been penalized for that action and 18-3 appears to cover it.

[ColinL]

In matchplay that time period to make a claim later is only until the first ball has been hit off the next tee (unless wrong information has been given).

David is pointing out that if players agree on how to proceed,  a claim cannot be made after that point. The time limit for a claim specified in Rule 2-5  is not relevant.  The Rule  is about making a claim when there is a doubt or a dispute.  There is no doubt or dispute after an agreement.  Carrying on without raising any doubts or claiming there should have been a penalty,  is an implicit agreement in my view.

See Decision 2-5/8.5

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-02/#d2-5-8.5

Player

[Wansteadimp]

David is pointing out that if players agree on how to proceed,  a claim cannot be made after that point. The time limit for a claim specified in Rule 2-5  is not relevant.  The Rule  is about making a claim when there is a doubt or a dispute.  There is no doubt or dispute after an agreement.  Carrying on without raising any doubts or claiming there should have been a penalty,  is an implicit agreement in my view.

See Decision 2-5/8.5

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-02/#d2-5-8.5

Player

Agreed, I was just highlighting that in matchplay if you think you need to make a claim it needs to happen before you tee off the next hole, and that "later" is actually a short period of time in matchplay.