Justification per Principles of FC Hitting Your Ball and forcing you to play as lost?

[Fourputt]

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I'm going to agree with @Hardspoon, this decision is based largely on the principle of treating similar situations similarly, i.e. equity.  All balls not found within 5 minutes are lost unless its virtually certain that the ball fits into one of a couple of categories, including being moved by an outside agency.  The decision make it clear that it doesn't matter who moved the ball, if its not known or virtually certain that it was moved by an outside agency, it is lost. One thing that can provide that virtual certainty is finding Player B's ball within the time limit.

The situation we're talking about is one of the very rare circumstances in which the player is

essentially blameless (was essentially denied the opportunity to find and identify his ball),

the ball was moved by an outside agency,  

the movement by the outside agency is known before the play of the hole is complete (but after the search period has elapsed),

and the location of the original ball can be determined with reasonable accuracy.  

It makes sense to me that, in fairness, Player A "deserves" better treatment than the decisions allow.  However, "equity" doesn't necessarily means fairness, it means "consistency."  I'm guessing that the group that made this decision didn't want to start making additional "exceptions" to the lost ball rules, opening up a can of worms for future exceptions for balls located after the 5-minutes search period.  I'm sure the 5-minutes time limit isn't one of the core principles, but expanding the "standard" time limit in only specific circumstances does seem inconsistent with "equity", and equity is one of the core principles.

I think this is one of the more interesting Rules topics I've read, because it doesn't just focus on what the rules require, but on the basis behind the rules and decisions.  

This is what I was going to write, only it's a more complete thought.  It has to be nothing more than an equity issue, and since the rules don't seem to allow for very many exceptions based on the notion of "fairness", it just is what it is.  Such an exception would be too much of a divergence from the rule of allowing a 5 minute time for search and the overriding idea that taking stroke and distance trumps all other considerations.

[sjduffers]

I was the victim (i.e. player A) of a similar situation, in a tournament. It sure sucks, and while I understand the rule to be in equity, consistent with other lost balls with a time limit, I sure wouldn't mind an exception there.