Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3648 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

Hypothetical Scenario that I noticed in a game once.

If you're ball is in play, but a large fence, net or boundary is out of bounds, and isn't a boundary for the course ( the white posts are ) can a free drop be giving?

So pretty much can you stand out of bounds, and hit a shot with the ball laying in bounds?  What is the ruling on a large net, pole that is outwith the course.  I mean you'd just have to hit the shot assuming it wasn't there, however how can you take an unplayable lie anyway, when this object is actually out of bounds.

Probably an easy answer to that.  


Posted
2 minutes ago, Gary Page said:

So pretty much can you stand out of bounds, and hit a shot with the ball laying in bounds?

Yes. 

Quote

A ball is out of bounds when all of it lies out of bounds. A player may stand out of bounds to play a ball lying within bounds.

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!definitions

 

6 minutes ago, Gary Page said:

If you're ball is in play, but a large fence, net or boundary is out of bounds, and isn't a boundary for the course ( the white posts are ) can a free drop be giving?

No, if the immovable obstruction is out of bounds then it is not considered a movable obstruction for the golfer. 

Quote

24-2b/21

 

Interference by Immovable Artificial Object Situated Out of Bounds

Q.An immovable artificial object situated out of bounds interferes with a player's swing. May the player obtain relief as provided in Rule 24-2b?

A.No. Immovable artificial objects off the course are not obstructions (see Definition of "Obstructions"); therefore, the Rules provide no relief without penalty

If the object is a movable obstruction you may move it.

Quote

24-1/3

 

Movable Artificial Object Lying Out of Bounds

Q.A movable artificial object lying out of bounds interferes with a player's stance. May the player remove it?

A.Yes. Rule 24-1 applies.

 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
13 minutes ago, Gary Page said:

I mean you'd just have to hit the shot assuming it wasn't there, however how can you take an unplayable lie anyway, when this object is actually out of bounds.

As long as your ball is on the course and not in a water hazard, you may deem your ball to be unplayable (rule 28). So if the out-of-bounds object is in your way, you may take an unplayable lie (with the 1-stroke penalty).

Craig
What's in the :ogio: Silencer bag (on the :clicgear: cart)
Driver: :callaway: Razr Fit 10.5°  
5 Wood: :tmade: Burner  
Hybrid: :cobra: Baffler DWS 20°
Irons: :ping: G400 
Wedge: :ping: Glide 2.0 54° ES grind 
Putter: :heavyputter:  midweight CX2
:aimpoint:,  :bushnell: Tour V4

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Interesting discussion.  What happens if a white marker post is clearly removed from the ground, and the ball would be in play if this post was present?  visible square hole where it should be.

This was years ago, went back to tee as the post being missing would have it out of bounds.  Just had to assume the greenekeepers had moved this purposely.


Posted
Just now, Gary Page said:

Interesting discussion.  What happens if a white marker post is clearly removed from the ground, and the ball would be in play if this post was present?  visible square hole where it should be.

By Definition Out of Bounds does not need to be marked. 

Quote

"Out of bounds" is beyond the boundaries of the course or any part of the course so marked by the Committee.

 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
4 hours ago, saevel25 said:

No, if the immovable obstruction is out of bounds then it is not considered a movable obstruction for the golfer. 

If the object is a movable obstruction you may move it.

Pedant alert.

They are not obstructions as defined. They are simply objects. Using the word obstructions leads to confusion.


Posted

Pedant alert II.

The rules calls these immovable and movable artificial objects when they are not on the course.

Regards,

John

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3648 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

    • 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...  
    • The chatter in my brain is when the distance is between clubs since I am pretty weak at shortened backswings, etc. I try to simply decide if being long or short is the better outcome and choose my club based on that and simply not even try for the “real” distance.  For me a full normal swing is what I strive for.
    • I saw this comment made in a golf article... "Most golfers stand over a 4- or 5-iron still negotiating with themselves. They think about how hard to swing, whether they have the right club, if they have the aim correct and more. It’s a lot to deal with and long irons punish the “half-in” golf swing." I am not sure the "most golfers" is correct regarding the bolded part. I can understand if there is a bunker, water, and/or OB that a lot of golfers would be fixated on that. I am not sure that leads to ending up more times there. Pending your level in golf, the variance is so large in outcomes, it could be just with in the expected outcomes. I can understand if have a big lake on the right side of the hole being one of the most terrifying shots for right-handed amateur golfers.  I am not sure many golfers are standing over the ball talking to themselves, "Ok, maybe I should step back and pull the 4-iron. Am I lined up right? Oh, the wind came up, should I swing harder? What am I going to have for dinner tonight, maybe steak. (Joking, somewhat 😛)" A question is that how much chatter do you get while standing over the ball. Are you questioning the everything about your golf shot?   
    • Wordle 1,816 5/6 🟨🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.