Embedded Ball? - nice job by the RO

[Martyn W]

Sorry, couldn't figure out how to post the video. Maybe someone can help me out - Villegas asking for relief for an embedded ball -denied!

Edited April 14, 2016 by Martyn W

[No Mulligans]

Here it is:

 

[Martyn W]

1 minute ago, No Mulligans said:

Here it is:

 

Thanks #no mulligans!

 

[Asheville]

As we know, there's more to it than a badge and a radio. He "sold" it well and did so again a few minutes later on an obstruction near the green.

[Mop Bucket]

Why such a fuss when he would have to punch out in either situation?

[No Mulligans]

I think Villegas was grasping at straws on this one.

[Martyn W]

11 hours ago, Mop Bucket said:

Why such a fuss when he would have to punch out in either situation?

If he got the relief, he may very well have had a clear shot to the green. A judicious drop could easily put the ball six feet away and properly in play.

[Asheville]

Oops, Martyn. Embedded ball relief is as near as possible.  

[bkuehn1952]

25 minutes ago, Asheville said:

Oops, Martyn. Embedded ball relief is as near as possible.  

After dropping as near as possible, would the ball be allowed to roll up to 2 club lengths?  That is likely the 6 feet @Martyn W referred to.

[Martyn W]

38 minutes ago, Asheville said:

Oops, Martyn. Embedded ball relief is as near as possible.  

The ball must first strike a part of the course as near as possible but it can come to rest within 2cl and still be good.

[Gunther]

I think even Camillo realized it wasn't embedded once he cleared the pine needles away.  But I understood his argument when it was sitting in that little cave, sure looked like it could have been but I couldn't figure out how it could have happened because the ball obviously came to that spot while rolling so I thought the RO made the right call from the start (as did B. Grace).

[Asheville]

8 hours ago, Martyn W said:

The ball must first strike a part of the course as near as possible but it can come to rest within 2cl and still be good.

Fair enough, Martyn. It looked to me that the ball wouldn't have rolled two inches let alone two club-lengths. 

[natureboy]

21 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

I think Villegas was grasping at straws on this one.

Well that part of the course is probably defined as waste area / sand. But does the golf definition of 'ground' automatically define sand as 'not ground' or exclude all sand (even 'waste areas' as through the green, or does it depend on local rule / condition of competition? With all that pine straw decaying into organic matter on top of a substrate, he could have had a possible (though weak) argument that it was soil and no longer 'sand'.

Quote

Soil is a mixture of minerals, organic matter, gases, liquids, and organisms.

Quote

Sand is a naturally occurring granular material composed of finely divided rock and mineral particles. It is defined by size, being finer than gravel and coarser than silt. Sand can also refer to a textural class of soil or soil type; i.e. a soil containing more than 85% sand-sized particles (by mass).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedogenesis

Edited April 15, 2016 by natureboy

[Golfingdad]

51 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Well that part of the course is probably defined as waste area / sand. But does the golf definition of 'ground' automatically define sand as 'not ground' or exclude all sand (even 'waste areas' as through the green, or does it depend on local rule / condition of competition? With all that pine straw decaying into organic matter on top of a substrate, he could have had a possible (though weak) argument that it was soil and no longer 'sand'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedogenesis

I don't know, but regardless, I agree with @Mop Bucket that in this situation, it doesn't matter because the result would have been the same.  At the beginning of the discussion, Camilo probably thought he was screwed, but as he was making his case, he realize how much of the pine needles he could remove without his ball moving, thus creating a manageable shot for his pitch out.

[newtogolf]

28 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I don't know, but regardless, I agree with @Mop Bucket that in this situation, it doesn't matter because the result would have been the same.  At the beginning of the discussion, Camilo probably thought he was screwed, but as he was making his case, he realize how much of the pine needles he could remove without his ball moving, thus creating a manageable shot for his pitch out.

Right, keep it on the fairway if you don't want to hit out of the pine needles.  

[natureboy]

2 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

I don't know, but regardless, I agree with @Mop Bucket that in this situation, it doesn't matter because the result would have been the same.  At the beginning of the discussion, Camilo probably thought he was screwed, but as he was making his case, he realize how much of the pine needles he could remove without his ball moving, thus creating a manageable shot for his pitch out.

That makes sense.

[Martyn W]

12 hours ago, Asheville said:

It looked to me that the ball wouldn't have rolled two inches let alone two club-lengths.

He could have removed all the pinestraw down to the bare dirt prior to the drop and got a firmer bounce, or even dropped the ball on the base of the tree (it appeared to be within six inches or so of the ball)

[Martyn W]

12 hours ago, natureboy said:

Well that part of the course is probably defined as waste area / sand. But does the golf definition of 'ground' automatically define sand as 'not ground' or exclude all sand (even 'waste areas' as through the green, or does it depend on local rule / condition of competition? With all that pine straw decaying into organic matter on top of a substrate, he could have had a possible (though weak) argument that it was soil and no longer 'sand'.

There is no definition for 'waste area', it was simply TTG (through the green). The Rule is 25-2 and the note allows for a LR affording relief TTG. Without the LR relief is in the fairway only (this is the only reference to 'fairway' in the book)

This Decision was added in January to clarify when a ball is embedded: the third illustration is clearly what Villegas had. Notice also that any doubt is resolved against the player

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.