Out of Bounds ?

[medicoreMAgolfer]

Any update from USGA?

[Dpavs]

Any update from USGA?

 

Not yet. According to the auto-reply I received they can take up to 10 business days to answer questions so hopefully by next week I will receive a reply.

[Dpavs]

So here it is, well sort of.

 

Firstly, I Apparently I cannot post the reply as I would like to have done as the response I received from the USGA indicated that the response provided was a response for my personal information only and could not be disclosed by email or on the internet.

 

That said while I think maybe the lawyer side of me simply would not believe that the rules might allow for such potential liability exposure, my interpretation of the reply as given to me is pretty straightforward.

 

What I can say is that my opinion has changed as to how, if it were up to me, I would rule under the OP's original scenario. Essentially I now believe as Saw indicated in his post #39 that the course has no boundaries unless so marked period.

 

Gentlemen and Ladies I stand corrected! :drinks:

[Shilgy]

D, thanks for that. Perhaps one of the rules guys on here could explain why the usga does not desire the answers posted. I had written them about the proposed rule about music and was also told not to pass on their answer.

Seemed odd.

[rogolf]

Probably because it cannot be considered an official ruling - a concern for a ruling body. The answers may not have been reviewed/approved by the USGA Rules Committee. They are probably 99% correct, but review by the Committee has not been done. It's an opinion of a very qualified responder.

[Dpavs]

I'd presume it is very much what rogolf indicates. As they very likely are not going to publish a decision in regards to my question, they do not want it used as precedent. Quite common in the law so it is not surprising to me I guess that other ruling bodies would adopt a similar position.

[Chief Illiniwek]

Probably because it cannot be considered an official ruling - a concern for a ruling body. The answers may not have been reviewed/approved by the USGA Rules Committee. They are probably 99% correct, but review by the Committee has not been done. It's an opinion of a very qualified responder.

 

Little do you guys know that Sawgrass was the official responding to his inquiry lol

[Sawgrass]

Probably because it cannot be considered an official ruling - a concern for a ruling body. The answers may not have been reviewed/approved by the USGA Rules Committee. They are probably 99% correct, but review by the Committee has not been done. It's an opinion of a very qualified responder.

 

Little do you guys know that Sawgrass was the official responding to his inquiry lol

 

That's quite a clever joke!

 

Props to Dpavs, I like to think of this place as one where we can get to the truth, and he did his part.

[Newby]

D, thanks for that. Perhaps one of the rules guys on here could explain why the usga does not desire the answers posted. I had written them about the proposed rule about music and was also told not to pass on their answer.

Seemed odd.

The R&A adopt the same stance. I am told that it is a standard clause added automatically to all responses. Primarily because many questions are unique to a particular incident, the RBs don't want a specific condition being used as a precedent for similar(ish) but not exactly the same situations.

 

If I discuss a query with the R&A where I think it might have general or universal application, I ask permission to publish. The have never refused.

[medicoreMAgolfer]

Props to Dpavs, I like to think of this place as one where we can get to the truth, and he did his part.

 

Agree here. Love the "finality" of the answer and the fact that the doubter has become a convert. Props to Dpavs

[Dpavs]

Props to Dpavs, I like to think of this place as one where we can get to the truth, and he did his part.

 

Agree here. Love the "finality" of the answer and the fact that the doubter has become a convert. Props to Dpavs

Probably because it cannot be considered an official ruling - a concern for a ruling body. The answers may not have been reviewed/approved by the USGA Rules Committee. They are probably 99% correct, but review by the Committee has not been done. It's an opinion of a very qualified responder.

 

Little do you guys know that Sawgrass was the official responding to his inquiry lol

 

That's quite a clever joke!

 

Props to Dpavs, I like to think of this place as one where we can get to the truth, and he did his part.

 

Thanks for the nods. Great thing about being wrong is you get to learn something new!

[briansagolfer]

GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sekrah]

Everyone who has pointed out that while the rules state the ball is in bounds and playable if it is in private yard not marked as OB (or defined in another way such as on the card), but the yard is clearly marked as private and no trespassing, how would you advise a golfer to procede if you're refereeing a competition?

 

Just halfway through this thread, so maybe this has been discussed. But could this fall under Rule 28 as an unplayable lie?

[QEight]

Everyone who has pointed out that while the rules state the ball is in bounds and playable if it is in private yard not marked as OB (or defined in another way such as on the card), but the yard is clearly marked as private and no trespassing, how would you advise a golfer to procede if you're refereeing a competition?

 

Just halfway through this thread, so maybe this has been discussed. But could this fall under Rule 28 as an unplayable lie?

 

If the ball is not in hazard or OB, you can take an unplayable. But finding other than previous spot, may be difficult.

[HackinNut]

If it's not stated either (1) on the scorecard or (2) by the committee & it's not marked by stakes or line, it's in play.

 

Just don't get shot by the homeowner for leaving a hair piece divot in his lawn. :swoon: