Partner’s ball moved during search?

[Augster]

Playing fourball stroke play. Both of our opponents hit the ball to a similar area in the left rough. One opponent is walking (Dave), another riding (Ken). 
 

The walking opponent, Dave walks up with me and we find his ball and Ken’s ball is about 7 feet away. After Dave has found both balls, Ken drives up later and accidentally runs over Dave’s ball as he hadn’t seen either ball yet. 
 

Is there a penalty and what is the penalty?

 

All I could figure out was there was a 1-stroke penalty to Ken for moving Dave’s ball in play. He tried to insist it was moved “during search”. Dave had already found both balls, but Ken didn’t know that. Ken was lobbying for no penalty due to searching. 
 

What is correct?

 

Also, what if this was fourball match play? My partner kept insisting that if we had been playing match play it would have been a loss of hole for Ken and Dave. I don’t see that. I think it’d be the same, 1 stroke penalty to Ken and play out the hole. 
 

Thanks for the help. 

[Newby]

Did Ken know that the ball had been found?

[antip]

That's an interesting question, can the search time protections continue for one partner who continues innocently searching after the ball has been found by the other partner. My expectation would be no, search was over so Ken gets the one stroke penalty, but my confidence is less than complete and I suggest it is an RB-worthy question.

On your match play variation, one stroke penalty in stroke play remains one stroke penalty in match play.

 

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, Newby said:

Did Ken know that the ball had been found?

 

I believe that is the key question.

[Halebopp]

For some reason I have a feeling this issue was discussed earlier this year.

 

Looking at the issue from another perspective. A player finds his/her ball after 2 minutes and 40 seconds of searching, goes back to get his/her bag and chooses a club, it takes 20 seconds. All the while the player's partner is searching for the same ball across the fairway in case of a ricochet off a tree. The partner doesn't realise the ball had been found until he sees the player picking a club from the bag. After choosing the club, it takes the player another 10 seconds to find the ball again.

 

If the search doesn't stop the moment the ball is found, that player's ball would now be lost. I'd feel quite uncomfortable with such a decision, now as for the reckless driver... ?

[Colin L]

When you say it took the player another 10 seconds to find the ball again do you mean that he couldn't immediately find it when he returned with his club and had to search again, or that he simply took 10 seconds to walk back from his bag to the ball?

[Halebopp]

11 minutes ago, Colin L said:

When you say it took the player another 10 seconds to find the ball again do you mean that he couldn't immediately find it when he returned with his club and had to search again, or that he simply took 10 seconds to walk back from his bag to the ball?

 

To find it again after failing to memorise its exact location.

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, Halebopp said:

For some reason I have a feeling this issue was discussed earlier this year.

 

Looking at the issue from another perspective. A player finds his/her ball after 2 minutes and 40 seconds of searching, goes back to get his/her bag and chooses a club, it takes 20 seconds. All the while the player's partner is searching for the same ball across the fairway in case of a ricochet off a tree. The partner doesn't realise the ball had been found until he sees the player picking a club from the bag. After choosing the club, it takes the player another 10 seconds to find the ball again.

 

If the search doesn't stop the moment the ball is found, that player's ball would now be lost. I'd feel quite uncomfortable with such a decision, now as for the reckless driver... ?

 

Good point, but let me add a twist. If the ball player A found is not his and his partner player B continues to search while A takes his time to identify the ball found, does the search continue or was it stopped?

 

This is certainly something RBs need to clarify, just as antip wrote. Technically search was over when A found his ball but if partner B did not know it and continued to search for A's ball is he protected by Rule 7 or not?

Edited August 20, 2020 by Mr. Bean

[Augster]

20 hours ago, Newby said:

Did Ken know that the ball had been found?

Thanks for the replies!

 

No. Ken didn’t know Dave had found the ball. Both balls for that matter. Ken had to use the restroom after the tee balls so the 3 of us went up to where the balls should be. And two were an easy find. 
 

When Ken rolled up 30 seconds later, he certainly couldn’t have seen either ball, they were both in thick rough, which is the reason he ran Dave’s ball over. He also didn’t know the balls had been found as nobody had pulled a club yet etc. The three of us (not Ken) were still searching the area for my partners ball, which we never found.
 

So, in his defense, Ken couldn’t have known, driving up, which, if any balls had been found as we were still wandering about in the rough looking for balls. 

 

I hope that helps clarify a bit. 

[Newby]

Was Ken actually searching or was he simply driving along to see how you were all getting on?

[clinkinfo]

11 hours ago, Augster said:

Thanks for the replies!

 

No. Ken didn’t know Dave had found the ball. Both balls for that matter. Ken had to use the restroom after the tee balls so the 3 of us went up to where the balls should be. And two were an easy find. 
 

When Ken rolled up 30 seconds later, he certainly couldn’t have seen either ball, they were both in thick rough, which is the reason he ran Dave’s ball over. He also didn’t know the balls had been found as nobody had pulled a club yet etc. The three of us (not Ken) were still searching the area for my partners ball, which we never found.
 

So, in his defense, Ken couldn’t have known, driving up, which, if any balls had been found as we were still wandering about in the rough looking for balls. 

 

I hope that helps clarify a bit. 

 

‘so if Ken has no idea any ball has been found and is searching for the ball(s) in his mind, why do you think there’s a penalty ?  Doesn’t this just apply? 
 

if a player accidentally moves his or her ball while searching for it: The player gets no penalty for causing it to move

[Augster]

16 hours ago, clinkinfo said:

 

‘so if Ken has no idea any ball has been found and is searching for the ball(s) in his mind, why do you think there’s a penalty ?  Doesn’t this just apply? 
 

if a player accidentally moves his or her ball while searching for it: The player gets no penalty for causing it to move

Because it’s his partners ball and his partner had already found both balls. 
 

I guess the main question is, when does a “search” end? Is it when everyone in the group agrees that every ball has been found? Or has the side search ended when one player has found both his and his partners balls? 
 

23-5b is what I’m mainly looking at....

 

”b. Partner Is Responsible for Player’s Actions
Any action taken by the player concerning the partner’s ball or equipment is treated as having been taken by the partner.

 

If the player’s action would breach a Rule if taken by the partner:
    •    The partner is in breach of the Rule and gets the resulting penalty (see Rule 23.8a).
    •    Examples of this are when the player breaches the Rules by:
    »    Improving the conditions affecting the stroke to be made by the partner,
    »    Accidentally causing the partner’s ball to move, or
    »    Failing to mark the spot of the partner’s ball before lifting it.“

 

IF the flip of that is also true. “ANY action taken by the partner concerning the player’s ball is treated as having been taken by the player”. Then I think it’s easy enough to deduce that it’s a penalty on Ken for running over Dave’s ball. 
 

I read it as, “Examples of this are when the player (Ken) breaches the Rules by: Accidentally causing the partner’s ball (Dave’s ball) to move.”
 

That is exactly what happened. But it’s muddied because only one of them knew the balls were found. 

 

[clinkinfo]

18 hours ago, Augster said:

Because it’s his partners ball and his partner had already found both balls. 
 

I guess the main question is, when does a “search” end? Is it when everyone in the group agrees that every ball has been found? Or has the side search ended when one player has found both his and his partners balls? 
 

23-5b is what I’m mainly looking at....

 

”b. Partner Is Responsible for Player’s Actions
Any action taken by the player concerning the partner’s ball or equipment is treated as having been taken by the partner.

 

If the player’s action would breach a Rule if taken by the partner:
    •    The partner is in breach of the Rule and gets the resulting penalty (see Rule 23.8a).
    •    Examples of this are when the player breaches the Rules by:
    »    Improving the conditions affecting the stroke to be made by the partner,
    »    Accidentally causing the partner’s ball to move, or
    »    Failing to mark the spot of the partner’s ball before lifting it.“

 

IF the flip of that is also true. “ANY action taken by the partner concerning the player’s ball is treated as having been taken by the player”. Then I think it’s easy enough to deduce that it’s a penalty on Ken for running over Dave’s ball. 
 

I read it as, “Examples of this are when the player (Ken) breaches the Rules by: Accidentally causing the partner’s ball (Dave’s ball) to move.”
 

That is exactly what happened. But it’s muddied because only one of them knew the balls were found. 

 

 

but a search cannot be over if someone who’s searching isn’t informed that the ball was found!  Can it?  That seems highly illogical to me, there’s not bad-intent going on, they just don’t know yet.  I think the search is over when everyone is informed the ball is found.  There’s a practical aspect to it too, I may outside earshot of everyone and just can’t hear you say it’s found.  Until I’m informed as the searcher, I don’t know how I could know it’s over unless the time limit has elapsed.

Edited August 23, 2020 by clinkinfo

[Mr. Bean]

13 hours ago, clinkinfo said:

 

but a search cannot be over if someone who’s searching isn’t informed that the ball was found!  Can it? 

 

That is the key question to which there is no answer for the time being. Hopefully someone will get in touch with the RBs to get one.

[antip]

An official answer is in. 9.4b/2 applies, no penalty, the action "can reasonably be considered part of searching for the ball".

[Sawgrass]

55 minutes ago, antip said:

An official answer is in. 9.4b/2 applies, no penalty, the action "can reasonably be considered part of searching for the ball".

Ironic, but just today I got notified by my Allied Golf Association that the USGA gave them a parallel answer on a similar question.  I’m surmising your answer came from the R&A, perhaps a joint determination had just been made, and perhaps a new Clarification is on its way next quarter.

[antip]

14 minutes ago, Sawgrass said:

Ironic, but just today I got notified by my Allied Golf Association that the USGA gave them a parallel answer on a similar question.  I’m surmising your answer came from the R&A, perhaps a joint determination had just been made, and perhaps a new Clarification is on its way next quarter.

My answer advised the USGA and the R&A had jointly resolved the question.

[Sawgrass]

“The wheels of justice grind slow but exceedingly fine.”

[rogolf]

15 minutes ago, antip said:

My answer advised the USGA and the R&A had jointly resolved the question.

As I understand it, this is the standard procedure.  When new issues/questions arise, "new" being such that an answer had not already been drafted and accepted, but maybe not published, there would be joint discussion between R&A and USGA Rules Committees to arrive at "the" answer to be presented.  "Getting it right", in nearly all situations, is more important than speed.

 

 

 

[Augster]

3 hours ago, antip said:

An official answer is in. 9.4b/2 applies, no penalty, the action "can reasonably be considered part of searching for the ball".

Thanks!

 

So, because Kenny’s actions could “reasonably be considered” he was still searching for the ball, no penalty.