Rules question: Wrong Ball declared OB

[GolfLug]

In match play between Players A and B:

1. Player A hits drive. Ball clips a tree branch hanging well over the fairway about 150 yards out and nobody sees where the ball lands after that. Most possibly landing straight down below the tree or OB way to the right of the fairway beyond the tree line in to a yard.

2. Upon arrival near the tree search is conducted for a few minutes but ball nowhere to be found. Finally opponent locates 'a' ball in the yard (same brand) and it is presumed that it is player A's ball (OB).

3. Player A proceeds to head back to the tee convinced that ball in the yard is his. But while he is en route to the tee to put a 2nd ball in play, his opponent finds the original ball 30 yards further (identifies it from player A's mark on the ball) from the tree area in the middle of the fairway, but does not let Player A know that the original is found BEFORE the 2nd ball is hit from the tee, later citing that the original ball is not in play anymore since it had been DECLARED OB and hence not in play anymore, regardless of the fact that it was found in the fairway.  

Was the original ball still in play? Does 27.2b apply?

 

 

 

[Jeremie Boop]

I think, as long as the 5 minutes had not expired in the search for the original ball that it is still considered the ball in play. I could be wrong though, so I'll be interested to see the answer.

[Fourputt]

10 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

In match play between Players A and B:

1. Player A hits drive. Ball clips a tree branch hanging well over the fairway about 150 yards out and nobody sees where the ball lands after that. Most possibly landing straight down below the tree or OB way to the right of the fairway beyond the tree line in to a yard.

2. Upon arrival near the tree search is conducted for a few minutes but ball nowhere to be found. Finally opponent locates 'a' ball in the yard (same brand) and it is presumed that it is player A's ball (OB).

3. Player A proceeds to head back to the tee convinced that ball in the yard is his. But while he is en route to the tee to put a 2nd ball in play, his opponent finds the original ball 30 yards further (identifies it from player A's mark on the ball) from the tree area in the middle of the fairway, but does not let Player A know that the original is found BEFORE the 2nd ball is hit from the tee, later citing that the original ball is not in play anymore since it had been DECLARED OB and hence not in play anymore, regardless of the fact that it was found in the fairway.  

Was the original ball still in play? Does 27.2b apply?

 

 

 

As long as the 5 minute search period had not expired, the original ball was still in play until Player A put the second ball in play from the tee.  If I was Player A, I'd have made a claim on the hole and taken it up with the committee (see Rule 2-5 for procedure) to see if what the opponent did was in violation of a rule.  Decision 27-5/5 should have applied if the opponent had called out and if they were still within the 5 minutes:

Quote

27/5.5

 

Original Ball Found Within Five-Minute Search Period Not Identified Until After Period Has Elapsed

Q.A player plays a second shot, searches for his ball for just over four minutes and then starts to walk back down the fairway to play another ball under Rule 27-1. A ball is then found within the five-minute search period, but as the player is now a considerable distance away, he is unable to identify the ball as his before the search period has elapsed. What is the ruling?

A.As a ball was found within five minutes of beginning search, the player is allowed enough time to reach the area in order to identify it. If the player identifies the ball as his, it is not a "lost ball" even though the identification takes place after the five-minute search period has elapsed.

 

[GolfLug]

11 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

As long as the 5 minute search period had not expired, the original ball was still in play until Player A put the second ball in play from the tee.  If I was Player A, I'd have made a claim on the hole and taken it up with the committee (see Rule 2-5 for procedure) to see if what the opponent did was in violation of a rule.  Decision 27-5/5 should have applied if the opponent had called out and if they were still within the 5 minutes:

 

Thank you! Exactly what I suspected. This has bugged me for a almost a year now. Never brought it to rules committee, but in hind sight I should have. I (Player A..:-)) lost the hole since I pumped my 2nd hole OB and just conceded the hole. Incidentally I also lost the entire match by 1 hole. Sucks to be me for being weak on ROG.

[Martyn W]

48 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Never brought it to rules committee, but in hind sight I should have. I (Player A..:-)) lost the hole since I pumped my 2nd hole OB and just conceded the hole. Incidentally I also lost the entire match by 1 hole. Sucks to be me for being weak on ROG.

If it's any consolation, the committee would have/should have denied your claim that your opponent had breached a Rule. If it was his understanding (as you indicated) that he thought your original ball was no longer in play, he did nothing wrong. If he did know and delayed telling you then a 33-7 DQ would be in order. From a Decision: " However, A's conscious failure to correct B's misunderstanding of the state of the match is so contrary to the spirit of the game that the Committee should disqualify A under Rule 33-7... "

[GolfLug]

26 minutes ago, Martyn W said:

If it's any consolation, the committee would have/should have denied your claim that your opponent had breached a Rule. If it was his understanding (as you indicated) that he thought your original ball was no longer in play, he did nothing wrong. If he did know and delayed telling you then a 33-7 DQ would be in order. From a Decision: " However, A's conscious failure to correct B's misunderstanding of the state of the match is so contrary to the spirit of the game that the Committee should disqualify A under Rule 33-7... "

Yes, he purposefully delayed. He waited till I got back, actually even admitted that he even considered calling me back for a moment since I had not even reached the tee box but said player C (who had a concurrent match going on with player D) 'told him' it was too late to call me back since the declaration of OB was made.

Again water under the bridge, but needed to know if I was justified in being a a bit pissed about it since thought it was not in the spirit of the game.

 

Thanks!

[DrvFrShow]

3 hours ago, GolfLug said:

Yes, he purposefully delayed. He waited till I got back, actually even admitted that he even considered calling me back for a moment since I had not even reached the tee box but said player C (who had a concurrent match going on with player D) 'told him' it was too late to call me back since the declaration of OB was made.

Again water under the bridge, but needed to know if I was justified in being a a bit pissed about it since thought it was not in the spirit of the game.

 

Thanks!

* You were walking back to the tee.

* Your opponent (B) found and identified your original ball in bounds before the 5 minutes were up. 

* C said it was too late to inform you, so B did not inform you. 

* You found out about this when you met up with B and C near your original ball.

* C has nothing to do with your match.

* So under 27/5.5 the ball was not lost or OB. Again C has nothing to do with your match. B should have informed you. 

* But B decided not to shout and inform you of such. This gave B an unfair advantage. But B will claim he listened to C. Again C has nothing to do with your match.

* Under 2-5 you needed to inform your opponent. Something to the effect that: I should have been informed that you found my ball before the 5 minutes were up. By not informing me it gave you an unfair advantage. that's a serious breach. At the earliest immediately. At the latest before you or your opponent teed off at the next tee. 

8. For B: At best this was a loss of hole; at worst a DQ under 33-7.

Your club should have had you playing in twosomes unless you were playing four ball match play.

[natureboy]

My ruling is that Player B is a competitive d#$k who doesn't rate with much honor.

[Fourputt]

1 hour ago, DrvFrShow said:

 

8. For B: At best this was a loss of hole; at worst a DQ under 33-7.

Your club should have had you playing in twosomes unless you were playing four ball match play.

8.  No, there is nothing that requires this.  Our match play rounds are arranged and played by the players during a set time window, usually 2 or 3 weeks.  Since most of the club members work, those matches are usually played on weekends and on weekends at my home course, you don't have the option to play as a twosome.  We often don't have that option on weekdays during the summer.  I don't think I ever played a match as just a twosome, not in the more than 20 years in the club.  Sometimes the other 2 players were also playing a separate match, but usually they were just public players that we got paired with, or other men's club members just playing a long to fill the foursome.

I'm not even going to try and sort out some of the other curious comments that you made.

[Phil McGleno]

So are you saying a certain member with a new low handicap and entry into a qualifier here on TST is a dirty rules rat?