2019 Rules of Golf

[Mr. Bean]

The equitable solution for all of this is to allow the use of any acceptable part of a relief area. If this yellow staked problem is to be fixed, I think it would be fixed by some other mechanism than disallowing an entire relief area when part of it is unacceptable -- that would be way too inconsistent with other relief areas, and have mind-boggling implications.

 

I have spent a great deal of my working day (...) studying this problem and I agree with You, Sawgrass. There are just too many different situations where it would be unfair to require the entire relief area to be eg. in the general area. Thus I continue to believe that RB's have just forgotten to add the exclusion of location of the reference point into Rule 17.1d(2) where it IMO belongs. It should read that the reference point may not be in the same penalty area the player is taking the relief from.

[Imp]

[*]Rule 13.2c

If a player’s ball comes to rest against the flagstick left in the hole:

• If any part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green, the ball is treated as holed even if the entire ball is not below the surface.
  
• If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green:
  
  • The ball is not holed and must be played as it lies.
    
  • If the flagstick is removed and the ball moves (whether it falls into the hole or moves away from the hole), there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced on the lip of the hole (see Rule 14.2).
    

[*]That Rule suggests that one needs to establish whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without doing that moving the flagstick results in replacing the ball outside the hole.

The last sentence above ("Without doing that.....") is WRONG. Whether the ball is in or not is a matter of fact. That last arrow point from the rule ("If the flagstick is removed..." only applies "If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green". So what do you need to do if the flagstick is moved and you haven't yet decided if part of the ball is below the surface of the green? You have to resolve the question of fact by assembling any/all available evidence and making the factual call, for example, recreate the ball against flagstick situation and check properly if ball is "holed". You replace ball outside the hole only after you conclude ball was not holed.

 

I believe the problem was establishing whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without having established that one cannot assume the ball was in the hole thus my answer was as it was.

 

And determining that AFTER having moved the ball would be ever so more difficult, don't you think..?

 

But as already said, this will not be an issue in our lifetime.

I suggest you get out on the course and experiment. You will discover it is easy to verify whether ball is below the level of the green. It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with a ball lodged against the flag. That is my experience with a number of different flagstick types in my neck of the woods.

 

The rule requires you to make a judgement one way or another. Your suggestion that if you forget to do it before moving the flag then you must replace on the lip is incorrect. And this is not a rare situation, I had one in my game on Monday. Pre-January, you need to move the flagstick gently to get the ball to drop and if it doesn't you place on lip. January, you just pick up unless you have really big flagsticks that keep the ball above the green. It's a fun experiment anyway.

I'm thinking of some pretty simply geometry. As soon as more than 1/2 of the ball is over the cup, it starts to drop down below the edge of the cup, so it is by definition "holed". The cup is 4.25 inches, the recommendation for a flagstick diameter (at the green surface level) is 0.75 or less. I'm certain I've never seen a flagstick greater than this. That leaves 3.5 inches, or about 1.75 inches on all sides if the flag is perfectly centered. For a ball to be leaning against the flagstick, and still not be at least halfway over the hole, the stick has to be off-center by almost a full inch. That simply doesn't happen unless someone has completely missed getting the stick back into its hole at the bottom of the cup. If a ball is leaning against the flagstick, it will almost certainly be within the definition of "holed".

I agree in concept. Once >1/2 the ball is over the hole, it *should" be holed as you're exceeded the difference between the void between flag and edge of hole, and ball.

 

A ball diameter is 1.68. The vioid between the stick and supposed edge of hole is 1.75. We're talking .07" difference (~1/16") between the void and the balls diameter (at which the entire ball should be be in the cup). If the pin is leaning .07 towards the ball, it has the capabiltiy to stop it from falling, but the the ball would still be between the pin and the edge and below the surface. Double that to .14" (just over 1/8") and I can see there being a question of the ball being holed or not.

 

Say the lip of the hole was damaged, the cup isn't perfectly centered, or my favortite (as mentioned in my OP about it), there's debris at the bottom of the pin holder and the flag is leaning a bit (sand/dirt/leaves in the fall jammed under the pin) suboptimal conditions) >1/8" at the lip towards the ball. Add in wind, and sticks with entirely different materials/rigidity, and I think the conditions could be ripe to have this happen - especially with sticks that don't have the integrated laser reflectors (which are usually more rigid).

 

You've maybe never seen/experienced it before, because the opporunity for observation was greatly reduced: we pulled the flag. I've witnessed it twice. Once on a windy day chip just off the green, once putting in the off season and didn't pull the flag. Most of the other off season putting where I didn't pull the flag, the ball does drop a little.

 

I think this may need to be addressed by the end of the year. Because the ball is moving with much less speed/force, meaning a greater opporunity to just 'rest' at/near the edge and against a suboptimal pin.

 

--kC

[Sawgrass]

The equitable solution for all of this is to allow the use of any acceptable part of a relief area. If this yellow staked problem is to be fixed, I think it would be fixed by some other mechanism than disallowing an entire relief area when part of it is unacceptable -- that would be way too inconsistent with other relief areas, and have mind-boggling implications.

 

I have spent a great deal of my working day (...) studying this problem and I agree with You, Sawgrass. There are just too many different situations where it would be unfair to require the entire relief area to be eg. in the general area. Thus I continue to believe that RB's have just forgotten to add the exclusion of location of the reference point into Rule 17.1d(2) where it IMO belongs. It should read that the reference point may not be in the same penalty area the player is taking the relief from.

That's an easy to apply, easy to understand fix. And perhaps the genuine intention all along.

[fairways4life]

The equitable solution for all of this is to allow the use of any acceptable part of a relief area. If this yellow staked problem is to be fixed, I think it would be fixed by some other mechanism than disallowing an entire relief area when part of it is unacceptable -- that would be way too inconsistent with other relief areas, and have mind-boggling implications.

 

I have spent a great deal of my working day (...) studying this problem and I agree with You, Sawgrass. There are just too many different situations where it would be unfair to require the entire relief area to be eg. in the general area. Thus I continue to believe that RB's have just forgotten to add the exclusion of location of the reference point into Rule 17.1d(2) where it IMO belongs. It should read that the reference point may not be in the same penalty area the player is taking the relief from.

 

This is where I'm at as well. There's a reason you are not allowed lateral relief from yellow stakes. It is an option for red, but not for yellow. And it is written that way to further punish you in a yellow situation while providing a little more advantage in a red situation. This loophole (when it can be applied) negates that difference between yellow and red and essentially allows for lateral relief from yellow stakes.

 

As you said, it's an easy fix ---- just need one bullet point that states that the reference point can not be located inside the same penalty area.

 

I'll be interested to see what happens. If someone were to expose this loophole down the stretch at the Players Championship or something while in contention, that would be pretty neat to see unfold. Or perhaps word will just more gradually spread around and it will become commonplace to do it. Who knows. I guess we won't really know much of anything until we all start playing a lot of golf under the 2019 rules and we get an idea of how often it might come into play. It may turn out that it so rarely ever becomes a possibility that it sort of disappears on its own. I guess we'll see.

[ruca]

An alternative interpretation is that the entirety of the relief area must not be in the same penalty area wrt yellow PA relief.

 

Where does that interpretation come from?

Sometimes the English language is such that the same words can be interpreted in more than one way, I would argue that's the case here.

Look at diagrams 1&2 17.1d p105/106.

Both relief areas marked with a 2 are semicircles. They could have chosen a reference point for one of those two spots such that one was restricted and not a semicircle. That would have immediately clarified whether when taking back on the line relief the relief area can be restricted to less than a semicircle. I could argue that option 3 and the other situations quoted by sawgrass above are subtly different.

 

I hope it's clear by my use of the word "alternative" that I fully accept the other point of view also.

 

My interpretation is not only consistent with the diagrams, but also with the perspective that the drop point should be behind he penalty area.

 

That's why i think further clarification is requred,

Or as above, accept the wording error wrt reference point not being in penalty area and change it.

[nsxguy]

[*]Rule 13.2c

If a player’s ball comes to rest against the flagstick left in the hole:

• If any part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green, the ball is treated as holed even if the entire ball is not below the surface.
  
• If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green:
  
  • The ball is not holed and must be played as it lies.
    
  • If the flagstick is removed and the ball moves (whether it falls into the hole or moves away from the hole), there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced on the lip of the hole (see Rule 14.2).
    

[*]That Rule suggests that one needs to establish whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without doing that moving the flagstick results in replacing the ball outside the hole.

The last sentence above ("Without doing that.....") is WRONG. Whether the ball is in or not is a matter of fact. That last arrow point from the rule ("If the flagstick is removed..." only applies "If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green". So what do you need to do if the flagstick is moved and you haven't yet decided if part of the ball is below the surface of the green? You have to resolve the question of fact by assembling any/all available evidence and making the factual call, for example, recreate the ball against flagstick situation and check properly if ball is "holed". You replace ball outside the hole only after you conclude ball was not holed.

 

I believe the problem was establishing whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without having established that one cannot assume the ball was in the hole thus my answer was as it was.

 

And determining that AFTER having moved the ball would be ever so more difficult, don't you think..?

 

But as already said, this will not be an issue in our lifetime.

I suggest you get out on the course and experiment. You will discover it is easy to verify whether ball is below the level of the green. It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with a ball lodged against the flag. That is my experience with a number of different flagstick types in my neck of the woods.

 

The rule requires you to make a judgement one way or another. Your suggestion that if you forget to do it before moving the flag then you must replace on the lip is incorrect. And this is not a rare situation, I had one in my game on Monday. Pre-January, you need to move the flagstick gently to get the ball to drop and if it doesn't you place on lip. January, you just pick up unless you have really big flagsticks that keep the ball above the green. It's a fun experiment anyway.

 

Make up my mind, will ya ? LMAO

 

So much for all the Rules helping pace of play. Now we have to get down on all fours and check ? LOL

 

I've seen it often enough as well (i.e. NOT "rare"). Today, we hold the flagstick straight up and if the balls falls (which it always does) it is holed. (This IS correct today, right ?)

 

After Jan 1, if the player pulls the stick out/away without checking you're not going to assume the ball was holed, are you ? DQ ? Of course not. So you have to rule against the player and place it on the lip, no ?

[rogolf]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

[sui generis]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

[rogolf]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

 

Yes, actually quite harsh imo.

[davep043]

I agree in concept. Once >1/2 the ball is over the hole, it *should" be holed as you're exceeded the difference between the void between flag and edge of hole, and ball.

 

A ball diameter is 1.68. The vioid between the stick and supposed edge of hole is 1.75. We're talking .07" difference (~1/16") between the void and the balls diameter (at which the entire ball should be be in the cup). If the pin is leaning .07 towards the ball, it has the capabiltiy to stop it from falling, but the the ball would still be between the pin and the edge and below the surface. Double that to .14" (just over 1/8") and I can see there being a question of the ball being holed or not.

 

Say the lip of the hole was damaged, the cup isn't perfectly centered, or my favortite (as mentioned in my OP about it), there's debris at the bottom of the pin holder and the flag is leaning a bit (sand/dirt/leaves in the fall jammed under the pin) suboptimal conditions) >1/8" at the lip towards the ball. Add in wind, and sticks with entirely different materials/rigidity, and I think the conditions could be ripe to have this happen - especially with sticks that don't have the integrated laser reflectors (which are usually more rigid).

 

You've maybe never seen/experienced it before, because the opporunity for observation was greatly reduced: we pulled the flag. I've witnessed it twice. Once on a windy day chip just off the green, once putting in the off season and didn't pull the flag. Most of the other off season putting where I didn't pull the flag, the ball does drop a little.

 

I think this may need to be addressed by the end of the year. Because the ball is moving with much less speed/force, meaning a greater opporunity to just 'rest' at/near the edge and against a suboptimal pin.

 

--kC

I just can't agree. If the center of the ball is inside the circumference of the hole, the support point where the ball rests on the lip will be above the lowest point of the ball, which is directly below the center of the ball. To have the ball rest against the stick, and NOT have the center of the ball inside the circumference of the cup, the centerline of the flagstick has to be at least 0.91 inches off-center, even further for a thinner stick. It is extremely rare to see a flagstick that far out of alignment. If a ball is resting against the flagstick, it will be "holed", per the definition in 13.2.c, in way over 99% of the times when it occurs.

[sui generis]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

 

Yes, actually quite harsh imo.

 

In line, I suppose, with some of those free relief denied due to clearly impracticable stroke situations.

 

Still, don't you think the ball embedded half way up a steep bunker face gets dropped twice right behind the pitch mark, then inched along until we find a place where it'll remain at rest?

[rogolf]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

 

Yes, actually quite harsh imo.

 

In line, I suppose, with some of those free relief denied due to clearly impracticable stroke situations.

 

Still, don't you think the ball embedded half way up a steep bunker face gets dropped twice right behind the pitch mark, then inched along until we find a place where it'll remain at rest?

That seems to be what will happen given that they've clarified it for a ball embedded at the base of the bunker face (and not in the bunker) where there is no reference point available.

[Shilgy]

I agree in concept. Once >1/2 the ball is over the hole, it *should" be holed as you're exceeded the difference between the void between flag and edge of hole, and ball.

 

A ball diameter is 1.68. The vioid between the stick and supposed edge of hole is 1.75. We're talking .07" difference (~1/16") between the void and the balls diameter (at which the entire ball should be be in the cup). If the pin is leaning .07 towards the ball, it has the capabiltiy to stop it from falling, but the the ball would still be between the pin and the edge and below the surface. Double that to .14" (just over 1/8") and I can see there being a question of the ball being holed or not.

 

Say the lip of the hole was damaged, the cup isn't perfectly centered, or my favortite (as mentioned in my OP about it), there's debris at the bottom of the pin holder and the flag is leaning a bit (sand/dirt/leaves in the fall jammed under the pin) suboptimal conditions) >1/8" at the lip towards the ball. Add in wind, and sticks with entirely different materials/rigidity, and I think the conditions could be ripe to have this happen - especially with sticks that don't have the integrated laser reflectors (which are usually more rigid).

 

You've maybe never seen/experienced it before, because the opporunity for observation was greatly reduced: we pulled the flag. I've witnessed it twice. Once on a windy day chip just off the green, once putting in the off season and didn't pull the flag. Most of the other off season putting where I didn't pull the flag, the ball does drop a little.

 

I think this may need to be addressed by the end of the year. Because the ball is moving with much less speed/force, meaning a greater opporunity to just 'rest' at/near the edge and against a suboptimal pin.

 

--kC

I just can't agree. If the center of the ball is inside the circumference of the hole, the support point where the ball rests on the lip will be above the lowest point of the ball, which is directly below the center of the ball. To have the ball rest against the stick, and NOT have the center of the ball inside the circumference of the cup, the centerline of the flagstick has to be at least 0.91 inches off-center, even further for a thinner stick. It is extremely rare to see a flagstick that far out of alignment. If a ball is resting against the flagstick, it will be "holed", per the definition in 13.2.c, in way over 99% of the times when it occurs.

Why all this talk about the center of the ball? You have the right idea that if the ball is resting against the pin a portion of the ball is below the edge of the cup. That is the standard. We do not need to worry if half the ball is below the edge do we?

[Mr. Bean]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

 

Yes, actually quite harsh imo.

 

Which video..? I watched the long one but did not see a bunker face issue...

 

And what is the difference between long and short? Long is 17+ minutes and short is 16+ minutes... Did not bother to watch the short one.

[rogolf]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

Thanks, rogolf. Something of an answer to the embedded ball in the bunker face . . . perhaps not the one we hoped for. ;)

 

Yes, actually quite harsh imo.

 

Which video..? I watched the long one but did not see and bunker face issue...

 

And what is the difference between long and short? Long is 17+ minutes and short is 16+ minutes... Did not bother to watch the short one.

Who's talking about videos? We're discussing the "clarification" document.

[Matt J]

The equitable solution for all of this is to allow the use of any acceptable part of a relief area. If this yellow staked problem is to be fixed, I think it would be fixed by some other mechanism than disallowing an entire relief area when part of it is unacceptable -- that would be way too inconsistent with other relief areas, and have mind-boggling implications.

 

I have spent a great deal of my working day (...) studying this problem and I agree with You, Sawgrass. There are just too many different situations where it would be unfair to require the entire relief area to be eg. in the general area. Thus I continue to believe that RB's have just forgotten to add the exclusion of location of the reference point into Rule 17.1d(2) where it IMO belongs. It should read that the reference point may not be in the same penalty area the player is taking the relief from.

 

This is where I'm at as well. There's a reason you are not allowed lateral relief from yellow stakes. It is an option for red, but not for yellow. And it is written that way to further punish you in a yellow situation while providing a little more advantage in a red situation. This loophole (when it can be applied) negates that difference between yellow and red and essentially allows for lateral relief from yellow stakes.

 

As you said, it's an easy fix ---- just need one bullet point that states that the reference point can not be located inside the same penalty area.

 

I'll be interested to see what happens. If someone were to expose this loophole down the stretch at the Players Championship or something while in contention, that would be pretty neat to see unfold. Or perhaps word will just more gradually spread around and it will become commonplace to do it. Who knows. I guess we won't really know much of anything until we all start playing a lot of golf under the 2019 rules and we get an idea of how often it might come into play. It may turn out that it so rarely ever becomes a possibility that it sort of disappears on its own. I guess we'll see.

 

It would be neat to see one of the most prestigious tournaments in the world decided by a rules dilemma? Sure. I really like it when international conflicts turn into military campaigns, too!

[Halebopp]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

The e-mail R&A sent out had a "Contact Us" link and I used it to ask about the reference point in a penalty area. their automatic reply said I should hear back in ten business days. With the holidays coming, that's only about a month away. :)

 

Unless I'm mistaken, the R&A previously wanted people to contact their national association but it looks like the times are changing.

[antip]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

 

The e-mail R&A sent out had a "Contact Us" link and I used it to ask about the reference point in a penalty area. their automatic reply said I should hear back in ten business days. With the holidays coming, that's only about a month away. :)

 

Unless I'm mistaken, the R&A previously wanted people to contact their national association but it looks like the times are changing.

Absolutely no harm in asking the question, and please keep us posted if it proves fruitful.

 

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

[antip]

[*]Rule 13.2c

If a player’s ball comes to rest against the flagstick left in the hole:

• If any part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green, the ball is treated as holed even if the entire ball is not below the surface.
  
• If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green:
  
  • The ball is not holed and must be played as it lies.
    
  • If the flagstick is removed and the ball moves (whether it falls into the hole or moves away from the hole), there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced on the lip of the hole (see Rule 14.2).
    

[*]That Rule suggests that one needs to establish whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without doing that moving the flagstick results in replacing the ball outside the hole.

The last sentence above ("Without doing that.....") is WRONG. Whether the ball is in or not is a matter of fact. That last arrow point from the rule ("If the flagstick is removed..." only applies "If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green". So what do you need to do if the flagstick is moved and you haven't yet decided if part of the ball is below the surface of the green? You have to resolve the question of fact by assembling any/all available evidence and making the factual call, for example, recreate the ball against flagstick situation and check properly if ball is "holed". You replace ball outside the hole only after you conclude ball was not holed.

 

I believe the problem was establishing whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without having established that one cannot assume the ball was in the hole thus my answer was as it was.

 

And determining that AFTER having moved the ball would be ever so more difficult, don't you think..?

 

But as already said, this will not be an issue in our lifetime.

I suggest you get out on the course and experiment. You will discover it is easy to verify whether ball is below the level of the green. It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with a ball lodged against the flag. That is my experience with a number of different flagstick types in my neck of the woods.

 

The rule requires you to make a judgement one way or another. Your suggestion that if you forget to do it before moving the flag then you must replace on the lip is incorrect. And this is not a rare situation, I had one in my game on Monday. Pre-January, you need to move the flagstick gently to get the ball to drop and if it doesn't you place on lip. January, you just pick up unless you have really big flagsticks that keep the ball above the green. It's a fun experiment anyway.

I've been diverted and just returned to this blog, There is an error in my first para above that is misleading and not what I intended so apologies for any confusion caused. It should read "It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with the ball lodged against the flag AND NOT HAVE PART OF THE BALL BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE GREEN." That is the result of my experimentation. So if someone moves a ball from such a situation and doesn't finish the hole, I will not be penalising them, I will be saying well done.

Any sceptics out there, just try it on the golf course.

[davep043]

[*]Rule 13.2c

If a player’s ball comes to rest against the flagstick left in the hole:

• If any part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green, the ball is treated as holed even if the entire ball is not below the surface.
  
• If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green:
  
  • The ball is not holed and must be played as it lies.
    
  • If the flagstick is removed and the ball moves (whether it falls into the hole or moves away from the hole), there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced on the lip of the hole (see Rule 14.2).
    

[*]That Rule suggests that one needs to establish whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without doing that moving the flagstick results in replacing the ball outside the hole.

The last sentence above ("Without doing that.....") is WRONG. Whether the ball is in or not is a matter of fact. That last arrow point from the rule ("If the flagstick is removed..." only applies "If no part of the ball is in the hole below the surface of the putting green". So what do you need to do if the flagstick is moved and you haven't yet decided if part of the ball is below the surface of the green? You have to resolve the question of fact by assembling any/all available evidence and making the factual call, for example, recreate the ball against flagstick situation and check properly if ball is "holed". You replace ball outside the hole only after you conclude ball was not holed.

 

I believe the problem was establishing whether the ball is in the hole or not. Without having established that one cannot assume the ball was in the hole thus my answer was as it was.

 

And determining that AFTER having moved the ball would be ever so more difficult, don't you think..?

 

But as already said, this will not be an issue in our lifetime.

I suggest you get out on the course and experiment. You will discover it is easy to verify whether ball is below the level of the green. It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with a ball lodged against the flag. That is my experience with a number of different flagstick types in my neck of the woods.

 

The rule requires you to make a judgement one way or another. Your suggestion that if you forget to do it before moving the flag then you must replace on the lip is incorrect. And this is not a rare situation, I had one in my game on Monday. Pre-January, you need to move the flagstick gently to get the ball to drop and if it doesn't you place on lip. January, you just pick up unless you have really big flagsticks that keep the ball above the green. It's a fun experiment anyway.

I've been diverted and just returned to this blog, There is an error in my first para above that is misleading and not what I intended so apologies for any confusion caused. It should read "It is practically impossible to have a flag still holding itself up in the hole with the ball lodged against the flag AND NOT HAVE PART OF THE BALL BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE GREEN." That is the result of my experimentation. So if someone moves a ball from such a situation and doesn't finish the hole, I will not be penalising them, I will be saying well done.

Any sceptics out there, just try it on the golf course.

This is exactly what my discussion of geometry was meant to demonstrate, that the flagstick has to be hugely off-center to be touching a golf ball that isn't at least partially below the the level of the green. So off-center that its really unlikely to be still standing up on its own. I don't think its impossible, but its awful close.

[Mr. Bean]

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

 

Comparing yellow and red penalty areas may not be very fruitful in this case as there are different Rules concerning them. One big difference is that in the red PA the estimated point and the reference point may be the same while in the case of a yellow PA this is never possible.

[davep043]

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

 

Comparing yellow and red penalty areas may not be very fruitful in this case as there are different Rules concerning them. One big difference is that in the red PA the estimated point and the reference point may be the same while in the case of a yellow PA this is never possible.

The other difference, with a red PA the reference point is determined by the ball entering the hazard, the player has no choice, while in a yellow PA the player has discretion to go back "on the line" as far as he chooses and then selects the reference point.

[Sawgrass]

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

 

Comparing yellow and red penalty areas may not be very fruitful in this case as there are different Rules concerning them. One big difference is that in the red PA the estimated point and the reference point may be the same while in the case of a yellow PA this is never possible.

 

"Reference point: The estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the red penalty area." Is that point in or outside the penalty area? I'm not so sure. It sounds to me like it's microscopically next to the line, almost both inside or outside of it.

[Sawgrass]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

I must say, prior to reading this I had not noticed that a tee is soon to be defined as "equipment" whether or not it is being used to mark the area of a drop. And accordingly, in 2019 if a dropped ball hits such a tee before it hits the ground, the drop is invalidated where in 2018 its hitting the tee (then excluded from the definition of "equipment") was irrelevant.

[fairways4life]

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

 

Comparing yellow and red penalty areas may not be very fruitful in this case as there are different Rules concerning them. One big difference is that in the red PA the estimated point and the reference point may be the same while in the case of a yellow PA this is never possible.

 

"Reference point: The estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the red penalty area." Is that point in or outside the penalty area? I'm not so sure. It sounds to me like it's microscopically next to the line, almost both inside or outside of it.

 

I would consider it to be inside the penalty area because it's the point at which your ball crossed into the area. Your ball is inside the penalty area as soon as it touches the line.

 

A ball that comes to rest just touching the line is considered to be in the hazard (penalty area). So the second it touches the line it is considered inside the penalty area, which would be the "point that it crossed."

 

I hadn't thought about it like this until you brought up this point ..... if, by definition, the reference point is defined as the "estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area," then that would leave me to believe that the reference point could certainly be located inside the penalty area because a ball is considered in the penalty area as soon as it touches the line. Not once it has completely crossed over.

[Mr. Bean]

But I think we do have an implicit answer to the question in the Clarification document in item no R16.3b embedded ball in face of bunker. This answer affirms that the reference point being in the bunker itself when ball is embedded in GA does not prevent relief being available if at least a sliver of relief area exists. That is, the reference point is only a tool to define a relief area. So come back to the yellow penalty area situation - again, the reference point is just a tool to define a relief area.

I also note that even in a red penalty area the reference point for relief is on the line therefore is inside the penalty area. So the debate about a yellow penalty area is a total furphy - EVERY penalty area has the reference point in the penalty area.

 

Comparing yellow and red penalty areas may not be very fruitful in this case as there are different Rules concerning them. One big difference is that in the red PA the estimated point and the reference point may be the same while in the case of a yellow PA this is never possible.

The other difference, with a red PA the reference point is determined by the ball entering the hazard, the player has no choice, while in a yellow PA the player has discretion to go back "on the line" as far as he chooses and then selects the reference point.

 

To be absolutely precise this is not correct. Also in red PA a player may have more than one choice, and back-on-the-line relief is one of them. That is what I tried to describe in my earlier post.

[Mr. Bean]

Several "clarifications" to the 2019 Rules were issued by the R&A and USGA today:

 

https://www.randa.or...centre?filters=[2019%20Rules%20Clarifications]&dm_i=49MT,G30Q,H86MS,1U4GZ,1

 

Doesn't include anything about reference points in penalty areas.

I must say, prior to reading this I had not noticed that a tee is soon to be defined as "equipment" whether or not it is being used to mark the area of a drop. And accordingly, in 2019 if a dropped ball hits such a tee before it hits the ground, the drop is invalidated where in 2018 its hitting the tee (then excluded from the definition of "equipment") was irrelevant.

 

IMO this is a good and valid change. From now on there will be no debate whether a dropped ball hit the relief area or not if it hits the tee marking the edge first. A re-drop is a must.

[Mr. Bean]

I hadn't thought about it like this until you brought up this point ..... if, by definition, the reference point is defined as the "estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area," then that would leave me to believe that the reference point would always be located inside the penalty area because a ball is considered in the penalty area as soon as it touches the line. Not once it has completely crossed over.

 

Be careful now as you seem to be combining red and yellow penalty areas' Rules!!

 

In red PA the reference point MAY be the 'estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area' but it does not necessarily have to be that. But in Yellow PA that is never true but the reference point is a point on the line BEHIND the estimated point, which is 'the estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area'.

 

Wow, this discussions implies that the current Water Hazard Rule is by far way more simple than this new one of Penalty Areas...

[fairways4life]

I hadn't thought about it like this until you brought up this point ..... if, by definition, the reference point is defined as the "estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area," then that would leave me to believe that the reference point would always be located inside the penalty area because a ball is considered in the penalty area as soon as it touches the line. Not once it has completely crossed over.

 

Be careful now as you seem to be combining red and yellow penalty areas' Rules!!

 

In red PA the reference point MAY be the 'estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area' but it does not necessarily have to be that. But in Yellow PA that is never true but the reference point is a point on the line BEHIND the estimated point, which is 'the estimated point where the original ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area'.

 

Wow, this discussions implies that the current Water Hazard Rule is by far way more simple than this new one of Penalty Areas...

 

You are right. After reading my post again, my rambling did not make much sense.

 

I think we've pretty much determined that this whole "using one club length to essentially take lateral relief from a yellow penalty" idea just remains up in the air. I went ahead and emailed the USGA rules inbox and got an automated reply about taking 3-5 business days or something to that effect. If and when I hear anything back I will post the reply here.

[Roadking2003]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

As long as you limit your search time to 3 minutes, don't take a drop, don't play a ball from its new position after it is moved by natural forces after having been marked on the putting green, don't replace a broken club from your original 14, you'll be just fine -- other than you may be scoring yourself higher than you'd be entitled to for things like hitting yourself with your ball.

 

Good luck with that!

 

Edit: bolded part above corrected!

 

And also don't take opposite side relief from a lateral water hazard (red penalty area)

 

unless your course adopts the local rule allowing it.