I. Embedded Ball Review

F was delighted to hear directly from a few Readers re his embedded ball Ruling. Even the experts were in some disagreement. Following are some of the comments:

1) If the ball was in the Red Penalty Area, R17 rather than R7 would apply. Applicable language:

R7.3 to identify, must first mark, and cleaning allowed only to the extent needed to identify

R14.3 dropping a ball and taking relief (I.e., under R 17 from RPA), may use original or another ball, so cleaning not limited by R7.3 if same ball used

2) most argued the full bath cleaning was not excessive under R7.3 (that F had a right to give it a bath to see the Duke Realty logo and identify), and further that it was not prohibited under R16.4 (embedded ball) when it is clear relief is allowed:

R16.4 “If relief is allowed and the player takes relief, there is no penalty even if the player did not mark the spot of the ball before lifting or cleaned the lifted ball.”

3) F deserved the one stroke penalty as his original intent in lifting was not to take embedded ball relief …this is true. F had misidentified his ball, and simply lifted because he thought he’d found a ball. His embedded ball drop was an afterthought. F gets a one stroke penalty for deliberately (not accidentally) lifting his ball when the lifting was not done under a specific rule.

F hopes the comments offer some clarification!

II. Facts – Overhanging Ball

In match play competition Reader SM watched his putt seem to stop on the edge of the cup. Before he reached the hole, to begin the ten-second count to see if the ball might drop, his opponent slaps it back and says “the rest of that is good”. SM didn’t doubt the sincerity of his opponent in making the concession, but it cost him the hole, and he would have liked the opportunity to see the ball’s position and possibly begin the drop countdown.

Ruling

In match play, if an opponent deliberately moves a ball overhanging a hole before the waiting time has ended, the ball is deemed holed with the previous shot, and there is no penalty to the opponent. (R13.3b). F believes SM had a case here!

III. Facts :Boulder Relief When Feet on Cartpath

F pushed his drive into the cliff side on the tight 18th Hole at OEI. The ball tumbled down the cliff toward the fairway. Unfortunately, F found it just beyond the cart path perched squarely against a large rock (ok, maybe a boulder) which he couldn’t quite move or roll over without assistance, which when requested was met with a stony silence… even from his own ungrateful SIL!

Had the rock not been there, F could have made the shot, although both feet would have been planted squarely on the cartpath. The shot was clearly impossible with the ball situated behind the rock.

Ruling

While F might have been entitled to free stance relief from an Immovable Obstruction (the cartpath), no such relief is available “when playing the ball as it lies is clearly unreasonable because of something from which the player is not allowed to take free relief … such as a ball in a bush” (R16.1a(3). Or maybe a boulder.

F took penalty relief. Despite his immense talents, he had to concede that a shot from behind the rock was “clearly unreasonable”.

As usual, all comments or corrections are welcome!

Respectfully submitted,
F