Line of sight ruling

[kekoa]

 I was playing with a buddy last week.  We are on a par 5.  On his second shot, he pushed the ball right into the trees.  I walked up there to help him find his ball and I see him moving the ball about 5 feet.  He's about 60 yards from the green and a electricity box is about 30 yards between him and the green.  Note the electricity box is only about 3 feet tall.   He states that he gets a line of sight ruling because he wanted to hit a low runner and was afraid of hitting the electricity box.   Is this correct??

[rogolf]

The electrical box is an immovable obstruction.  There is no line of sight or play free relief for immovable obstructions (except when the ball is on the putting green).  See Rule 16.1a(1), meaning of Interference

[nsxguy]

1 minute ago, kekoa said:

 I was playing with a buddy last week.  We are on a par 5.  On his second shot, he pushed the ball right into the trees.  I walked up there to help him find his ball and I see him moving the ball about 5 feet.  He's about 60 yards from the green and a electricity box is about 30 yards between him and the green.  Note the electricity box is only about 3 feet tall.   He states that he gets a line of sight ruling because he wanted to hit a low runner and was afraid of hitting the electricity box.   Is this correct??

 

Unless there are some restrictions/conditions/whatever in place by the course, no relief. This situation sounds pretty routine.

 

Free relief for an immovable obstruction is ONLY when one's stance and/or swing path is interfered with in taking a stance for a play in a "reasonable" direction.

 

Line of sight is irrelevant. Same goes for if the box was much taller.

 

 

Note: PGA Tour etc. DOES give line of sight for "temporary immovable obstructions" like spectator stands, TV towers, etc.

[kekoa]

7 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Unless there are some restrictions/conditions/whatever in place by the course, no relief. This situation sounds pretty routine.

 

Free relief for an immovable obstruction is ONLY when one's stance and/or swing path is interfered with in taking a stance for a play in a "reasonable" direction.

 

Line of sight is irrelevant. Same goes for if the box was much taller.

 

 

Note: PGA Tour etc. DOES give line of sight for "temporary immovable obstructions" like spectator stands, TV towers, etc.

That's what I was thinking.  Now this guy owes me another $100 for moving his ball 🙂

[bcjim]

A course I grew up on had a local (?) rule in place for an electric wire that was in play off a tee. If you hit it you just replayed, no penalty.  

 

Could the same be designated for this box? Or any similar thing?

[rogolf]

9 minutes ago, bcjim said:

A course I grew up on had a local (?) rule in place for an electric wire that was in play off a tee. If you hit it you just replayed, no penalty.  

 

Could the same be designated for this box? Or any similar thing?

No. There is an authorized Local Rule for overhead wires- it is not applicable to anything else.  

[Augster]

If you weren’t playing on TV, a TIO for a sprinkler box is inappropriate. Also, I doubt there is anything “temporary” about that box being there. 
 

Your friend played from a wrong place, did not correct the error, and it sounds, to me, like it was a serious breach. 
 

DQ for the player. Lose all bets in stroke play. 
 

If it was match play, it gets a LOT trickier and, I bet, the match will stand as played and you won’t be able to collect that extra $100. 

[Newby]

The USGA/R&A may give permission for a 'Line of Play' obstruction if Health & Safety is the criterion.

We have a public footpath crossing one of the fairways. At each side there is a large protective fence that walkers can stand behind to 'take cover'. We have been given permission by the R&A to have a Local Rule giving free relief in a Dropping Zone if the player's ball is within a specified distance from the fence and there is line of play interference.

[Colin L]

MLR E-6 does the business for protective fences but I’d be dubious about there being any risk to players from a ball hitting the electricity box. 

[Schulzmc]

We have a pretty complicated, delicate, and expensive weather station at one point between two holes on our course. I always thought we should grant line of play relief for that. But come to think of it the only danger to anyone would be to their wallets as if it was damaged we would be assessed the cost of having it repaired.

[Newby]

27 minutes ago, Colin L said:

MLR E-6 does the business for protective fences but I’d be dubious about there being any risk to players from a ball hitting the electricity box. 

I'm pretty sure E-6 (or an old decision) didn't exist when I applied to the R&A many years ago. I had a bit of a tussle to get them to agree.

[Colin L]

2 hours ago, Newby said:

I'm pretty sure E-6 (or an old decision) didn't exist when I applied to the R&A many years ago. I had a bit of a tussle to get them to agree.

I'm sure you're right since I was in the same position.  It wasn't a tussle to get agreement (maybe you had done the groundwork!) but a lot of work to get the wording right for the particular situation which included heavy rough and trees to one side which we didn't want to grant relief from.

[2bGood]

On 10/2/2023 at 5:19 PM, Augster said:

If you weren’t playing on TV, a TIO for a sprinkler box is inappropriate. Also, I doubt there is anything “temporary” about that box being there. 
 

Your friend played from a wrong place, did not correct the error, and it sounds, to me, like it was a serious breach. 
 

DQ for the player. Lose all bets in stroke play. 
 

If it was match play, it gets a LOT trickier and, I bet, the match will stand as played and you won’t be able to collect that extra $100. 

 

I can't say moving a ball 6 ft in the instance is going to reach serious breach status to me. I would go with general penalty. I always interested in when/where officials invoke the serous breach, I am not too fast to jump to it. I have to say what has occurred way too often, is players bring up these concerns AFTER they have signed and submitted their score.😕 So the net effect is a DQ anyway. 

 

 

 

[kekoa]

Just for a bit of reference.  Here is the electrical or sprinkler box.  My buddies ball was in the trees in the background and the green is behind me from where I took the pic.  He still argues that the box was in his way since he wanted to hit a low shot under the tree branches.  

 

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

6 minutes ago, kekoa said:

He still argues that the box was in his way since he wanted to hit a low shot under the tree branches.  

 

 

He can argue all he wants. Nobody is disputing that the box was in his line of play. There's still no rule that grants him relief. 

 

[2bGood]

19 hours ago, kekoa said:

Just for a bit of reference.  Here is the electrical or sprinkler box.  My buddies ball was in the trees in the background and the green is behind me from where I took the pic.  He still argues that the box was in his way since he wanted to hit a low shot under the tree branches.  

 

 

Ask for the rule that he thinks provides him relief in this situation. (you will be waiting a long time, as there is none).

 

Then ask him if he believes this to be an Immovable Obstruction:

Immovable Obstruction

 

Any obstruction that:

• Cannot be moved without unreasonable effort or without damaging the obstruction or the course, and
• Otherwise does not meet the definition of a movable obstruction.

The Committee may define any obstruction to be an immovable obstruction, even if it meets the definition of movable obstruction.

 

Then point him to Rule 16 where lists where you can take relief from an immovable obstruction. Ask him where "line of site" is in that rule.

 

 

 

Edited October 5 by 2bGood

[Augster]

9 hours ago, 2bGood said:

 

I can't say moving a ball 6 ft in the instance is going to reach serious breach status to me. I would go with general penalty. I always interested in when/where officials invoke the serous breach, I am not too fast to jump to it. I have to say what has occurred way too often, is players bring up these concerns AFTER they have signed and submitted their score.😕 So the net effect is a DQ anyway. 

 

 

 

6 feet over to avoid an I/O?

 

I suppose one could say he’d get the same drop if he took an unplayable, and that would only cost him one stroke. I think I agree there shouldn’t be a serious breach. 
 

@kekoa, was this match play or stroke play? Completely different procedures and outcomes based on the form of play. 

[rogolf]

44 minutes ago, Augster said:

6 feet over to avoid an I/O?

 

I suppose one could say he’d get the same drop if he took an unplayable, and that would only cost him one stroke. I think I agree there shouldn’t be a serious breach. 
 

@kekoa, was this match play or stroke play? Completely different procedures and outcomes based on the form of play. 

Just to remind us, the referee or Committee cannot assign unplayable to a player's actions, the player is the only one who can decide on unplayable.

[st1800e]

Line of sight….. Equivalent danger to people hitting the irrigation box or hitting a tree.  At what point is the irrigation box not in the line of sight? 10’, 20’, 100yds?   No relief.  
He can always choose to play a fade or draw, or punch out, or an unplayable…. 

Edited October 5 by st1800e

[kekoa]

4 hours ago, Augster said:

6 feet over to avoid an I/O?

 

I suppose one could say he’d get the same drop if he took an unplayable, and that would only cost him one stroke. I think I agree there shouldn’t be a serious breach. 
 

@kekoa, was this match play or stroke play? Completely different procedures and outcomes based on the form of play. 

We were playing a nassau so essentially stroke play.  

[Augster]

17 hours ago, kekoa said:

We were playing a nassau so essentially stroke play.  

Now things getting weird. To me, Nassau has always meant match play. I had a friend just this weekend say we were playing a “Nassau” and when I said I was 1-up after the first hole, he insisted Nassau is stroke play. 
 

If I hear on the first tee, “We’re playing a $2 Nassau”, to me, it means $2 for F-B-Total match play. 
 

Wikipedia backs me up on this. 
 

When did the term “Nassau” become stroke play to some people? So weird to me that this is twice in a week. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau_(bet)

 

Sorry for the aside. 

[rogolf]

49 minutes ago, Augster said:

Now things getting weird. To me, Nassau has always meant match play. I had a friend just this weekend say we were playing a “Nassau” and when I said I was 1-up after the first hole, he insisted Nassau is stroke play. 
 

If I hear on the first tee, “We’re playing a $2 Nassau”, to me, it means $2 for F-B-Total match play. 
 

Wikipedia backs me up on this. 
 

When did the term “Nassau” become stroke play to some people? So weird to me that this is twice in a week. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau_(bet)

 

Sorry for the aside. 

I agree, a Nassau is match play, usually four-ball, always has been.

[Newby]

 

While Nassau is most commonly associated with match play, where players compete hole-by-hole, it can also be played using stroke play. In stroke play, the total strokes for the front nine, back nine, and entire round are tallied to determine the winners of each bet.

[2bGood]

22 hours ago, Augster said:

Now things getting weird. To me, Nassau has always meant match play. I had a friend just this weekend say we were playing a “Nassau” and when I said I was 1-up after the first hole, he insisted Nassau is stroke play. 
 

If I hear on the first tee, “We’re playing a $2 Nassau”, to me, it means $2 for F-B-Total match play. 
 

Wikipedia backs me up on this. 
 

When did the term “Nassau” become stroke play to some people? So weird to me that this is twice in a week. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau_(bet)

 

Sorry for the aside. 

It almost always match play in my world, but I see it used often more about the bet ($X for F-B-T).

 

Unless I am playing with the real regulars I am the guy that asks allot of questions on the first tee to clarify the bet, as I have seen it all.😉

[sui generis]

Surely, Nassau only refers to betting, not the form of play.