Ball against a wooden tee box

[QB57]

While playing yesterday I hit the ball to the side of the green and it landed against an elevated tee box (similar construction to the photo attached). I couldn’t hit it because it was wedged against the side of this. Am I entitled to a free drop on the side of it? Do I have to hit it as it lies? Or should I take a penalty drop?

i took a penalty drop but still unsure about man made structure rules.

 

thanks!

[Rulesman]

The retaining wall is an Immovable Obstruction and as such you are entitled to free relief.

See Rule 24-2 

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-24

and the definitions of Immovable Obstruction and Nearest Point of Relief

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-14253

and have a look at this to show how to take relief

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!decision-25,d25-1b-2

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2018 by Rulesman

[iacas]

Unless it’s deemed an integral part of the course.

Which would be unusual.

[QB57]

Thanks for the clarification. Just out of curiosity, do I have to be right up against the immovable obstruction in order to take the drop or can it be close enough that you can’t play a proper shot because of a restricted swing?

[Rulesman]

16 minutes ago, QB57 said:

Thanks for the clarification. Just out of curiosity, do I have to be right up against the immovable obstruction in order to take the drop or can it be close enough that you can’t play a proper shot because of a restricted swing?

Did you read the first part of Rule 24-2?

Interference by an immovable obstruction occurs when a ball lies in or on the obstruction, or when the obstruction interferes with the player's stance or the area of his intended swing.

 

[QB57]

Whoops. Sorry. I just read that again.

thanks.

[Papa Steve 55]

On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:28 PM, iacas said:

Unless it’s deemed an integral part of the course.

Which would be unusual.

I'm curious about this. The wall in the photo is holding the t box in place, vs being decorative. I seem to remember guys at 17 Sawgrass having to play shots with the supports holding the green together in the way. When does 'integral' kick in?
 

[Rulesman]

7 hours ago, Papa Steve 55 said:

I'm curious about this. The wall in the photo is holding the t box in place, vs being decorative. I seem to remember guys at 17 Sawgrass having to play shots with the supports holding the green together in the way. When does 'integral' kick in?
 

When the Committee deem any construction to be an Integral Part of the Course. See the definition of Obstruction.

[rehmwa]

6 hours ago, Rulesman said:

When the Committee deem any construction to be an Integral Part of the Course. See the definition of Obstruction.

that's an honest answer, but it doesn't really help the guy standing there - unless the "Committed" just happens to be standing there to consult

How, "typically" would the player know the decision in non-tournament play?  would it typically be a note on the score card?  a sign on the obstruction?  (I know these answers are specific to each course, but I'd hope there was some expectation or standardization of how courses "implement and inform" on subjective decisions.  I mean, there's a 'committee' likely at high end courses, the 'committee' at your local goat track might be some guy named 'Joe')

Edited November 26, 2018 by rehmwa

[Rulesman]

2 hours ago, rehmwa said:

that's an honest answer, but it doesn't really help the guy standing there - unless the "Committed" just happens to be standing there to consult

How, "typically" would the player know the decision in non-tournament play?  would it typically be a note on the score card?  a sign on the obstruction?  (I know these answers are specific to each course, but I'd hope there was some expectation or standardization of how courses "implement and inform" on subjective decisions.  I mean, there's a 'committee' likely at high end courses, the 'committee' at your local goat track might be some guy named 'Joe')

It should be on the score card at least. As it is a fairly unusual situation, IMO it should be on a notice at the clubhouse and possibly at the location.

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Rulesman said:

It should be on the score card at least.

And when it is, it's usually just a sentence or something, like "150-yard markers, tee signs, and water system control boxes are immovable obstructions. All bulkheads and retaining walls are integral parts of the course."

Or something like that.

For example here's North Berwick's scorecard, which is actually a bit wordy (they define things that don't need to be defined, like "water hazards marked with yellow stakes are ordinary water hazards." Unnecessary.), says "All… stone walls are integral parts of the course."

That way when you play this hole…

…you know you don't get relief from the stone wall.

[Rulesman]

Just to make it clear, on that hole (the 13th), the fairway runs parallel to the wall on its right hand side behind the camera

Edited November 26, 2018 by Rulesman

[Missouri Swede]

18 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

Just to make it clear, on that hole (the 13th), the fairway runs parallel to the wall on its right hand side behind the camera

On a not-too-far off tangent, why is Grannie Clark's Wynd at St. Andrews (running across 1st and 18 fairways) considered integral?

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

On a not-too-far off tangent, why is Grannie Clark's Wynd at St. Andrews (running across 1st and 18 fairways) considered integral?

Because they've deemed it to be.

[DaveP043]

3 hours ago, Rulesman said:

Just to make it clear, on that hole (the 13th), the fairway runs parallel to the wall on its right hand side behind the camera

True, but there are a few other holes where walls run pretty much perpendicular to the line of play, and all of them are integral to the course.  In this case, from what I've read, the walls are all in areas that were added to the original course, so they were probably in place before golf was established on this ground.  Similarly, Granny Clark's Wynd may have been in place (certainly not paved) prior to the period when the concept of relief from man-made structures came to being.  It makes sense to me that when golf clubs moved onto new ground, they accepted its condition of that ground as it was, no relief necessary for things like walls or paths.

Spoiler

I've thought of this before, and its a pretty wide tangent, but divot holes were certainly in existence before the idea of relief of any kind came into being, before even the first rules were established.  Of course most players didn't dig really deep divots with wooden-shafted clubs, but still, divots were taken.  Perhaps the existence of divots well before the existence of rules of golf is one reason that the rules have never (so far) looked at a divot hole as a reason for relief.

 

[Rulesman]

10 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

On a not-too-far off tangent, why is Grannie Clark's Wynd at St. Andrews (running across 1st and 18 fairways) considered integral?

Although I said earlier that it is 'a fairly unusual situation', I was really referring to the specific case raised and other constructions introduced after the land became a golf course. Preexisting, ancient walls, crofters cottages (often ruins), paved and unpaved tracks which are scattered all over the UK are virtually always deemed to be integral.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Rulesman