Clean and lift rule on embedded ball and aligning using alignment on the ball

[deukee]

Was playing with a friend and his ball was embedded near the green on the fairway.

He had lifted, cleaned, and replaced the ball.

Before he replaced the ball, he had aligned the ball using alignment line just as he would do on the green.

Told him he can't align as he was on the green, he can only replace it.

He claimed he can do it with the new rule change from 2019.

Does anyone have a clear answer to this?

Can we align using alignment on the ball off the green as we would do on green?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

 

 

[Sawgrass]

You must drop an embedded ball in a relief area, not place it.  If you can drop it in such a way that the alignment line works, good on you.

[sui generis]

Saw is quick.

Edited September 6, 2020 by sui generis

[antip]

Adding a different angle: if you have lifted your ball under a rule that requires it to be replaced (eg someone asks you to mark your ball because it is interfering with their stroke), you can align your ball anyway you wish providing your ball is replaced in the correct place.

Edit - further addition - to be clear, you cannot touch your ball in play deliberately without authority under a rule, so you cannot 'align' your ball in play except under the limited permitted lift/replace type rules.

Edited September 6, 2020 by antip

[deukee]

Thanks for your input.

[sui generis]

1 hour ago, antip said:

Adding a different angle: if you have lifted your ball under a rule that requires it to be replaced (eg someone asks you to mark your ball because it is interfering with their stroke), you can align your ball anyway you wish providing your ball is replaced in the correct place.

Edit - further addition - to be clear, you cannot touch your ball in play deliberately without authority under a rule, so you cannot 'align' your ball in play except under the limited permitted lift/replace type rules.

 

I find this unnecessarily fussy, ball didn't move (by the Definition of Moved):

 

9.4b/1 – Ball Deliberately Touched but Not Moved Results in Penalty to Player
 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball on the putting green to line up the trademark with the hole, even if the ball remains on the same spot. If the player had marked the ball before touching or rotating it, there would have been no penalty.

 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball anywhere on the course to identify it and the ball is the player’s ball.

[Sawgrass]

22 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

I find this unnecessarily fussy, ball didn't move (by the Definition of Moved):

 

9.4b/1 – Ball Deliberately Touched but Not Moved Results in Penalty to Player
 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball on the putting green to line up the trademark with the hole, even if the ball remains on the same spot. If the player had marked the ball before touching or rotating it, there would have been no penalty.

 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball anywhere on the course to identify it and the ball is the player’s ball.

Since 14.1 says that rotating a ball IS lifting it, I don’t think there’s anything better to be done.

 

I don’t know, but it feels right to me . . .

 

 

14.1 Marking, Lifting and Cleaning Ball

This Rule applies to the deliberate “lifting” of a player’s ball at rest, which includes picking up the ball by hand, rotating it or otherwise deliberately causing it to move from its spot.

 

 

 

[antip]

3 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

I find this unnecessarily fussy, ball didn't move (by the Definition of Moved):

 

9.4b/1 – Ball Deliberately Touched but Not Moved Results in Penalty to Player
 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball on the putting green to line up the trademark with the hole, even if the ball remains on the same spot. If the player had marked the ball before touching or rotating it, there would have been no penalty.

 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball anywhere on the course to identify it and the ball is the player’s ball.

Understand what you are saying. But a non-trivial number of rotations somehow also seem to get the ball out of a little depression, so I think an issue is avoiding licensing that (away from legit marking situations).

[sui generis]

It wears on me having to resort to, "Because that's what the Rule says." (Everyone remembers, "It's this way because I say it is." from a parent.)

 

The player reasons that you (the Rules) tell me that I cannot move the ball without good reason. They get that. Then you say you also cannot move the ball by not moving it because though it didn't move you moved it. 2019 is near genius for the most part, but I contend it didn't go far enough. CM

[antip]

38 minutes ago, sui generis said:

It wears on me having to resort to, "Because that's what the Rule says." (Everyone remembers, "It's this way because I say it is." from a parent.)

 

The player reasons that you (the Rules) tell me that I cannot move the ball without good reason. They get that. Then you say you also cannot move the ball by not moving it because though it didn't move you moved it. 2019 is near genius for the most part, but I contend it didn't go far enough. CM

For me too, a great achievement. But..... I don't think the objectives of simplicity and clarity were elevated sufficiently - more could have been achieved. The job is not finished.

[rogolf]

2 hours ago, sui generis said:

It wears on me having to resort to, "Because that's what the Rule says." (Everyone remembers, "It's this way because I say it is." from a parent.)

 

The player reasons that you (the Rules) tell me that I cannot move the ball without good reason. They get that. Then you say you also cannot move the ball by not moving it because though it didn't move you moved it. 2019 is near genius for the most part, but I contend it didn't go far enough. CM

I'm very comfortable with Rule 9 - it's about a ball being moved, touched or lifted.  Rotating a ball in position may not be moving it, but it is touching and lifting (by the definition in the Rule).

It is simple - keep your hands off the ball and play it as it lies unless the Rules authorize otherwise.

[sui generis]

18 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I'm very comfortable with Rule 9 - it's about a ball being moved, touched or lifted.  Rotating a ball in position may not be moving it, but it is touching and lifting (by the definition in the Rule).

It is simple - keep your hands off the ball and play it as it lies unless the Rules authorize otherwise.

 

What's the point of prohibiting touching of the ball? Players generally accept not being allowed to move or pick up the ball without a good reason, but touching, what harm is done?

 

I'd be happy to allow players to rotate a ball for identification anywhere or for alignment on the putting green so long as they don't lift it or move it. "Wobbling" is condoned in the Definitions. Rotating and wobbling are merely brothers from a different mother. ?

 

When we're out there with a badge and a radio a big part of the job is "selling" our rulings and I find it slightly distasteful to have to "sell" something I cannot rationalize. (This is one of about three which I feel could have been simplified with no loss to the game.)

[rogolf]

10 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

What's the point of prohibiting touching of the ball? Players generally accept not being allowed to move or pick up the ball without a good reason, but touching, what harm is done?

 

I'd be happy to allow players to rotate a ball for identification anywhere or for alignment on the putting green so long as they don't lift it or move it. "Wobbling" is condoned in the Definitions. Rotating and wobbling are merely brothers from a different mother. ?

 

When we're out there with a badge and a radio a big part of the job is "selling" our rulings and I find it slightly distasteful to have to "sell" something I cannot rationalize. (This is one of about three which I feel could have been simplified with no loss to the game.)

You're welcome to your opinion, mine happens to be different.  Imo, a referee's job is to help the competition be played within the Rules (as written by the ruling bodies).  My job is to get it right, not "sell" that ruling to anyone.

[sui generis]

12 minutes ago, rogolf said:

You're welcome to your opinion, mine happens to be different.  Imo, a referee's job is to help the competition be played within the Rules (as written by the ruling bodies).  My job is to get it right, not "sell" that ruling to anyone.

 

Our clients are not the same crowd; mine are more like customers, not subjects.  At my level (except when working for the USGA) selling is a part of the job. My goal is compliance not submission.

[rogolf]

2 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

Our clients are not the same crowd; mine are more like customers, not subjects.  At my level (except when working for the USGA) selling is a part of the job. My goal is compliance not submission.

I don't think we're doing anything different in the field, it's just how we personally feel about fulfilling our role.  Our personal opinions on outcomes can be pursued in other ways.  In the meantime, compliance.

[Kossuvissy]

16 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

I find this unnecessarily fussy, ball didn't move (by the Definition of Moved):

 

9.4b/1 – Ball Deliberately Touched but Not Moved Results in Penalty to Player
 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball on the putting green to line up the trademark with the hole, even if the ball remains on the same spot. If the player had marked the ball before touching or rotating it, there would have been no penalty.

 

Without first marking the ball’s spot, rotates the ball anywhere on the course to identify it and the ball is the player’s ball.

 

So for you it would be ok to rotate a ball on the fairway in order to expose a clean face to be hit upon? I am no expert on this field but sounds a bit strange to me.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Kossuvissy

[sui generis]

24 minutes ago, Kossuvissy said:

 

So for you it would be ok to rotate a ball on the fairway in order to expose a clean face to be hit upon? I am no expert on this field but sounds a bit strange to me.

 

As I managed to derail this thread, a few posts ago rogolf and I were digging in and I opined "I'd be happy to allow players to rotate a ball for identification anywhere or for alignment on the putting green so long as they don't lift it or move it."

 

Both of these are common behaviors for many recreational players and, to me, do no harm.

 

 

[Kossuvissy]

2 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

As I managed to derail this thread, a few posts ago rogolf and I were digging in and I opined "I'd be happy to allow players to rotate a ball for identification anywhere or for alignment on the putting green so long as they don't lift it or move it."

 

Both of these are common behaviors for many recreational players and, to me, do no harm.

 

 

 

But would that not be sort of using a winter rule when it is not in force? No harm done when playing for  fun but I guess this is where the rules are supposed to be followed, right?

Edited September 6, 2020 by Kossuvissy

[sui generis]

4 minutes ago, Kossuvissy said:

 

But would that not be sort of using a winter rule when it is not in force?

 

Preferred lies is a product of the Model Local Rule E-3 in Committee Procedures.

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=cp&section=rule&rulenum=8&subrulenum=5

 

My proposition stems from three sources, the Definition of "moved", an Interpretation of 9.4, and the intro to 14.1.

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=41

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=interp&section=rule&rulenum=9&subrulenum=4

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=14&subrulenum=1

 

[PoolPond]

Big difference between a lift, clean and place rule for the day and an embedded ball.  Embedded ball = drop and it lands how it lands.  If life clean and place is in effect, then place it how you wish. 

[limegreengent]

Easy way to settle this disagreement in part.

Prohibit the practice of putting lines on the ball.

Apart from slowing  up play  on the greens -- lining one self up correctly to the ball and  line of play should be one of the skills of the game.

Excellent point made by Kossuvissy (8.36). Don't you agree Sui generis.?

Edited September 9, 2020 by greenman

[BlackDiamondPar5]

On 9/5/2020 at 9:25 PM, deukee said:

Was playing with a friend and his ball was embedded near the green on the fairway.

He had lifted, cleaned, and replaced the ball.

Before he replaced the ball, he had aligned the ball using alignment line just as he would do on the green.

Told him he can't align as he was on the green, he can only replace it.

He claimed he can do it with the new rule change from 2019.

Does anyone have a clear answer to this?

Can we align using alignment on the ball off the green as we would do on green?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

 

 

I'm going to guess this might give your OCD friend chest pains ?

 

[sui generis]

6 hours ago, greenman said:

Easy way to settle this disagreement in part.

Prohibit the practice of putting lines on the ball.

Apart from slowing  up play  on the greens -- lining one self up correctly to the ball and  line of play should be one of the skills of the game.

Excellent point made by Kossuvissy (8.36). Don't you agree Sui generis.?

 

It wouldn't surprise me if the ruling bodies aren't truly happy with lines on balls. However, there's no remedy. Demand that all balls have no printing on them? The OEMs wouldn't have it. Prohibiting personal identification Sharpie markings would go against the requirement that a player identify their ball. I see the occasional rant as a rant directed towards a non-problem.

[oikos1]

5 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

It wouldn't surprise me if the ruling bodies aren't truly happy with lines on balls. However, there's no remedy. Demand that all balls have no printing on them? The OEMs wouldn't have it. Prohibiting personal identification Sharpie markings would go against the requirement that a player identify their ball. I see the occasional rant as a rant directed towards a non-problem.

Completely agree.  If the ball was a communal ball, used by all (e.g. football, baseball, basketball, soccer), I could see where marking the ball could be a problem.  In golf, it's your ball.  Pretty it up anyway you want.  Still have to read the putt and get the line and speed right.  Or is it speed and line right?

 

Edit:  And if you need a line on your ball to line your ball up on "lift, clean and place", you've got plenty of other things to work on.

Edited September 10, 2020 by oikos1