Jump to content
IGNORED

Putting a ball already in motion due to wind, is that a penalty?


SAGolfLuvr
Note: This thread is 4048 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

Dear rules gurus. My buddy says that he addressed his ball, started to putt, the wind blew his ball in motion before he could strike the ball with his putter. He continued his putting stroke, made contact with the ball, and "sent it" towards the hole. Is this a penalty? I've been looking for this situation described in writing from the USGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


IF the wind caused his ball to move after he addressed it, there is no penalty for moving a ball at rest.  If he started his back swing to make a stroke, and the ball started moving after that point, there is not penalty for hitting a moving ball.

Normally, although there is no penalty for striking a moving ball if it starts moving after you start  your swing, you would still be penalized for causing the ball to move if it had started to move after you had addressed the ball.  However, see the exception to 18-2b, if the ball moves because of wind, water.... you do not get penalized under 18-2.

b . Ball Moving After Address

If a player’s ball in play moves after he has addressed it (other than as a result of a stroke ), the player is deemed to have moved the ball and incurs a penalty of one stroke .

The ball must be replaced, unless the movement of the ball occurs after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of the club for the stroke and the stroke is made.

Exception: If it is known or virtually certain that the player did not cause his ball to move, Rule 18-2b does not apply.

14-5 . Playing Moving Ball

A player must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving.

Exceptions:

  • Ball falling off tee – Rule 11-3
  • Striking the ball more than once – Rule 14-4
  • Ball moving in water – Rule 14-6

When the ball begins to move only after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of his club for the stroke , he incurs no penalty under this Rule for playing a moving ball, but he is not exempt from any penalty under the following Rules:

Regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Also, see this decisions.

18-2b/11

Ball Moved by Another Agency After Address

Q. After a player has addressed his ball in play, some other agency (e.g., a ball played by another player) moves the player's ball. Is the player subject to penalty under Rule 18-2b ?

A. No. As it is known or virtually certain that the player did not cause the ball to move, Rule 18-2b does not apply - see Exception under Rule 18-2b . In such a case where an agency directly causes a ball to move, the Rule applicable to that agency (e.g., Rule 18-1 , 18-2a , 18-3 , 18-4 or 18-5 ) applies.

The same principle applies if it is known or virtually certain that a ball in play has been moved by wind, water or some other element after the player has addressed it; there is no penalty and the ball must be played from its new location. Gravity is not in itself an element that should be considered when applying the Exception to Rule 18-2b ; therefore, unless it is known or virtually certain that some agency other than gravity (e.g., outside agency or wind) caused the ball to move after address, the player is subject to a one stroke penalty under Rule 18-2b and must replace the ball. (Revised)

Regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

Also, see this decisions.

18-2b/11

Ball Moved by Another Agency After Address

Q.After a player has addressed his ball in play, some other agency (e.g., a ball played by another player) moves the player's ball. Is the player subject to penalty under Rule 18-2b?

A.No. As it is known or virtually certain that the player did not cause the ball to move, Rule 18-2b does not apply - see Exception under Rule 18-2b. In such a case where an agency directly causes a ball to move, the Rule applicable to that agency (e.g., Rule 18-1, 18-2a, 18-3, 18-4 or 18-5) applies.

The same principle applies if it is known or virtually certain that a ball in play has been moved by wind, water or some other element after the player has addressed it; there is no penalty and the ball must be played from its new location. Gravity is not in itself an element that should be considered when applying the Exception to Rule 18-2b; therefore, unless it is known or virtually certain that some agency other than gravity (e.g., outside agency or wind) caused the ball to move after address, the player is subject to a one stroke penalty under Rule 18-2b and must replace the ball. (Revised)

It's very key that it must be virtually certain that the wind was the cause of the movement.  This is a point of fact.  If there is any uncertainty, then it must be ruled against the player.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

OK. Based on Dormie1360's post, the exceptions are listed. But I consider water to be an element. So rule 14-2 confuses me.

14-2 . Assistance

a . Physical Assistance and Protection from Elements

A player must not make a stroke while accepting physical assistance or protection from the elements.

14-5 says there's no penalty when the player hits a ball that the player did not cause to move, but 14-2 says the player IS NOT to make a stroke at a moving ball?? What am I missing here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by SAGolfLuvr

OK. Based on Dormie1360's post, the exceptions are listed. But I consider water to be an element. So rule 14-2 confuses me.

14-2. Assistance

a. Physical Assistance and Protection from Elements

A player must not make a stroke while accepting physical assistance or protection from the elements.

14-5 says there's no penalty when the player hits a ball that the player did not cause to move, but 14-2 says the player IS NOT to make a stroke at a moving ball?? What am I missing here?

I'm not sure what you are asking.  What is the question?  Seems fairly straightforward - the player can't have help with protection from the weather while making a stroke.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by SAGolfLuvr

OK. Based on Dormie1360's post, the exceptions are listed. But I consider water to be an element. So rule 14-2 confuses me.

14-2. Assistance

a. Physical Assistance and Protection from Elements

A player must not make a stroke while accepting physical assistance or protection from the elements.

14-5 says there's no penalty when the player hits a ball that the player did not cause to move, but 14-2 says the player IS NOT to make a stroke at a moving ball?? What am I missing here?

14-2 does not say anyrthing about a moving ball.

The original post says he "started to putt" suggesting he had started either his backswing or forward stroke.

The bit you are missing is in Dormie's post

14-5 . Playing Moving Ball

A player must not make a stroke at his ball while it is moving.

Exceptions:

When the ball begins to move only after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of his club for the stroke , he incurs no penalty under this Rule for playing a moving ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by SAGolfLuvr

OK. Based on Dormie1360's post, the exceptions are listed. But I consider water to be an element. So rule 14-2 confuses me.

14-2. Assistance

a. Physical Assistance and Protection from Elements

A player must not make a stroke while accepting physical assistance or protection from the elements.

14-5 says there's no penalty when the player hits a ball that the player did not cause to move, but 14-2 says the player IS NOT to make a stroke at a moving ball?? What am I missing here?

Not sure what you are asking, either.

Yes, you can not strike a moving ball, but there are some exceptions.

No penalty for striking a moving ball if the ball starts moving after you start the backward movement of your club and you continue to make the stroke.

The exception regarding water is rather rare.  Your ball would have to be sitting in an area of flowing water.  Most likely a hazard.  You can try and hit your ball if it's moving in the moving water.

Double hitting the ball is covered in a different rule, R14-4.

However, if the player causes his ball to move , he can not avoid a penalty for playing a moving ball.  The exceptions do not apply.

Rule 14-2 Assistance is talking about something totally different.  You can not, for example, have protection (umbrella) from water falling on your head, (rain) while making a stroke.

Regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Let me fix the above.  Otherwise Rulesman will have to correct me.

I should have said: However, if the player causes his ball to move , he can not avoid a penalty.

If the player caused his ball to move after the backward movement of the club,  no penalty for playing a moving ball, however the player is still subject to penalty under R18 for causing his ball to move.

Regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

OK. So there is no penalty. He had two choices. He could go ahead and putt his ball that he did not cause to start moving, or he could have halted his putting action, waited for the ball to stop, replaced the ball at the original resting place, then proceed. Both with no penalty. No further questions from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by SAGolfLuvr

OK. So there is no penalty. He had two choices. He could go ahead and putt his ball that he did not cause to start moving, or he could have halted his putting action, waited for the ball to stop, replaced the ball at the original resting place, then proceed. Both with no penalty. No further questions from me.

This is wrong.  If the wind did cause the ball to move, then it must be played from where it came to rest without penalty.  If the player caused the ball to move, then he must replace the ball an take a 1 stroke penalty.  If he doesn't replace the ball, 2 strokes for playing from a wrong place, but no penalty for causing it to move.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Wait a minute.  Can't play a stroke while accepting protection from the elements.  You mean while some other person is offering the player protection, right? Certainly we all accept the protection the pants, shirts, hats and sunglasses provide us against the 'elements' of weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Quote:
Originally Posted by joekelly View Post

Wait a minute.  Can't play a stroke while accepting protection from the elements.  You mean while some other person is offering the player protection, right? Certainly we all accept the protection the pants, shirts, hats and sunglasses provide us against the 'elements' of weather.

That isn't waht the rule says.  It says:

Quote:
A player must not make a stroke while accepting physical assistance or protection from the elements.

The term "physical" is key.  Assistance means that someone is actively providing that protection.  It is necessary to read and understand all of the terminology to get a correct application of a rule.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 4048 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

    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • New 3W is pretty good  I hit a good drive actually but straight into a headwind so it left me far enough back from the trees to attempt something stupid. So naturally, with a new 3W in the bag, I wanted to see what it could do. Hit a high draw directly over the trees and couldn't see where it ended up from the fairway, but I knew I hit it well. I doubt that's the optimal play for scoring well in the long run but it felt good to do.
    • I'm sure you've read this, but I just have to post it, here, again, for everyone who hasn't. It changed my thinking forever and irrevocably on this exact topic:  "We don't say "the golfers are more talented" today. We say "there are more talented golfers today." "More" meaning they are far more numerous, not more talented. Talent is random. Only a small percentage of people win the talent lottery --- for world class golf, way less than 1%. And there's no telling whether the most talented player of any period, including this one, was more talented than Jack, or Jones, or Vardon. It's absolutely unknowable. What IS knowable, though, is that the base population is larger, so whatever percentage of people are born with golf talent, there are a lot more of them today than there were 50 years ago. What is knowable is that training and coaching is vastly improved. Hogan had to, in his words, "dig his swing out of the dirt" by hitting millions of golf balls. Today, they have radar and laser and the Minolta super duper high speed swing cam, and they know exactly how every little swing tweak affects their spin rate and launch angle and apex height -- stuff nobody had any clue about in Jack's day. So 50 years ago, if you had 100 guys born with golf talent take up golf, maybe 30 of them would find their optimal swing. Today, it's probably over 90. What is knowable is that the huge purses, and the fact that Tiger was the world's richest and most famous athlete, and not just the world #1 golfer, is making golf the first choice of more young athletes, rather than just the guys who couldn't make the "real" sports teams in school. So if you had 100 guys born with multi-sport talent 50 years ago, most of them played golf for fun, if at all. Today, a lot more of them concentrate on golf as their main sport. And what is knowable is that travel is much faster and cheaper now, so almost every world class player shows up for almost every major and WGC, and for many of the regular PGA events. 50 years ago, the second or third best player in, say, Australia, often didn't even play in the British Open, let alone a PGA event. So all the PGA events, and three of the four majors, had only a handful of international players, and the fourth major had only a handful of Americans. None of that is speculation. It is a verifiable fact that there are over twice as many people in the world today than there were 50 years ago. It's a verifiable fact that the purses today are hundreds of times as high as they were 50 years ago --- Tony Lema got about $4200 for winning the 1964 Open; today, it's about $3.5 million. It's a verifiable fact that virtually all the world top 100 play every major they are eligible for, instead of only a handful playing any events that require overseas travel. It's not knowable exactly how all of that combines, but a good indication is the number of entries in the US Open. To enter the US Open requires both top 1% talent for the game, and a serious commitment to it. There were about 2400 entrants per year 50 years ago. This century, it's consistently over 9000, well over three times as many. It's true that, mostly because of the time and expense, the number of duffers recreational players has declined, but they never had any influence on field strength, anyway. High school kids on the golf team still play all they want, for free. What do you have to counter that? Nothing but your belief that there were half a dozen golf phenoms all at the same time in the 60's, and none today, now that Tiger's past his prime. You're entitled to that opinion, but what facts do you have to back it up? Only the number of majors they won. But how many majors would Phil have won if the fields were like they were 50 years ago? Mickelson finished second in the US Open to Goosen in 2004, to Ogilvy in 2006, and to Rose last year. 50 years ago, odds are that none of those guys would have even tried to qualify for the US Open, since it required shutting down their schedule for a minimum of three weeks to travel to the US for sectional qualifying, with no guarantee that they would make it into the actual tournament. Michael Campbell, who beat Tiger with some amazing putting down the stretch in 2005, said that he would not have entered that year if the USGA hadn't established overseas qualifying sites, so he didn't have to travel to enter. How would Phil look next to Arnie with those three US Opens? Eight majors, and a career Grand Slam. And how would Tiger look if Michael Campbell, Trevor Immelman, Angel Cabrera, and YE Yang had stayed home, like most international players did in the Jack era? I'll make it even simpler for you, since you follow women's golf. How much better would the US women look today, if there were no Asians on tour? Or even just no Koreans? Well, it looks like you're going to crow about the lack of current talent every time a guy backs into a win for the foreseeable future, but come on. The Valero was a 40-point tournament, which makes it one of the weakest regular PGA events, barely above the John Deere Classic. And the tournament committee knows that most top players don't like to play right before a major, so they try to attract the few who do by making it as close to major conditions as possible, to help them fine tune their games. A weak field facing a tough setup is not a recipe for low scores, but you still insist on taking one bad week and comparing it to the majors of your hazy memory, even though you seem to have forgotten epic collapses by the likes of Arnie, who managed to lose a seven shot lead over the last 9 holes of the 1966 US Open. And who knows how often something like that happened in a low-rent event? I don't know if Tiger was more talented than Jack, or even Trevino. All I know is that there are many solid reasons to believe that in order to win a tournament, he had to beat around three times as many talented golfers, even in most of the regular tour events he's won, as Jack did in a major --- especially the Open, where Jack only had to beat as few as 8 other Americans, at a time when probably 60-70 of the world top 100 were Americans.  I don't say it's true by definition, as you claimed, but I say it's the way to bet, based on facts and logic."  
    • Shot 50/41 today. I didn't hit the ball particularly well but not as poorly as the score would indicate. I just happened to hit it in some really punishing places that wound up taking one or two strokes just to hit back into play. The undergrowth and the fescue are really growing in at the course. Lipped out and burned a few edges on putts, too. I always say when I miss putts by that small a margin that they're eventually going to drop as long as I don't deviate from the process and that's exactly what started happening on the back 9. I ended up making a couple of mid-length putts. Five over on the back included a triple bogey on 17.
    • Birdied the par 5 #14 at Quail Brook GC. Hit a high draw 3W just short of the green on my second shot, chipped just right of the back right flag to about 12' and made the putt. It's starting to look like I'm going to get at least 20 rounds at Quail Brook for it to qualify as my home course but I've been adding the birdies there to my away composite for so long that I don't feel like separating it all now. So the away composite will simply be an aggregate of all my birdie holes for the year.
    • Wordle 1,065 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...