Mis-hearing a concession

[Big C]

Happy Friday all!

During a recent golf outing, an incident popped up in a friendly match play, where there was some confusion over whether a concession was granted. I looked in the USGA "decisions" regarding match play and couldn't find an answer, hopefully the board can help.

Player A and Player B were both on the putting green. Player A was about 40 feet from the hole with two putts for the win. He hits his putt to about 2 feet, hears his opponent say "that's good" and picks up the ball.

Player B protests, saying he hadn't conceded. His exact words were "really good" (referring to the good) lag putt, but his intent was that Player A still had to mark and hole his 2 footer.

What happens in this scenario? Is the onus on Player A to confirm the concession? Or if he acted in good faith, does Player B have to concede for saying something that could be misconstrued as a concession? For what its' worth, the other members of the group also heard "really good," supporting Player B's assertion.

In this case, it was a match between buddies, so no feathers were seriously ruffled, but I thought the issue could be a bit dicier in a more serious match.

[wadesworld]

2-4/3

Player Lifts Ball in Mistaken Belief That Next Stroke Conceded

Q. In a match between A and B, B made a statement which A interpreted to mean that his (A's) next stroke was conceded. Accordingly, A lifted his ball. B then said that he had not conceded A's next stroke. What is the ruling?

A. If B's statement could reasonably have led A to think his next stroke had been conceded, in equity (Rule 1-4 ), A should replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay, without penalty.

Otherwise, A would incur a penalty stroke for lifting his ball without marking its position – Rule 20-1 – and he must replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay.

[iacas]

2-4/3

Player Lifts Ball in Mistaken Belief That Next Stroke Conceded

Q.In a match between A and B, B made a statement which A interpreted to mean that his (A's) next stroke was conceded. Accordingly, A lifted his ball. B then said that he had not conceded A's next stroke. What is the ruling?

A.If B's statement could reasonably have led A to think his next stroke had been conceded, in equity (Rule 1-4), A should replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay, without penalty.

Otherwise, A would incur a penalty stroke for lifting his ball without marking its position – Rule 20-1 – and he must replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay.

This happened in the Ryder Cup, too. An American player hit a shot to two or three feet and the European team said "good shot" or something and they picked it up. I think it was an older player, DLIII or Toms or something, and they had to put the ball back.

Memory's fuzzy but it rings a bell.

[Big C]

Thanks for the quick reply. As expected, there is a decision that covers that scenario - I just missed it!

In the situation described, A should have replaced his ball and putted out. In the actual match, B let him "keep" the concession, but gave him a hard time about it the rest of the round!

[turtleback]

Thanks for the quick reply. As expected, there is a decision that covers that scenario - I just missed it!

In the situation described, A should have replaced his ball and putted out. In the actual match, B let him "keep" the concession, but gave him a hard time about it the rest of the round!

Also a reasonable outcome.

[Golfingdad]

In the actual match, B let him "keep" the concession, but gave him a hard time about it the rest of the round!

Exactly what I would have done!