immovable obstruction?

[atlanta golfer]

I'm playing in a tournament on Saturday and my second shot on a par 5 hole ends up sitting right in the middle of a large piece of flat granite rock, measuring maybe 2 ft by 3 ft, in the rough just about 5 feet off the fairway. Just as big and almost as wide as a cart path, but this is no cart path.

 

We determined it was an immovable obstruction so I figured out my point of nearest relief, marked a spot one club length from there, and dropped into the rough within that spot.

 

Did we do this correctly? Surely, I would not be expected to try and hit the ball off a piece of flat rock of that size? The rock was flush with the grass, not sticking up. And we are not talking about something way off in the trees, this is just barely off the fairway.

 

The ruling?

[hoganfan924]

I'm playing in a tournament on Saturday and my second shot on a par 5 hole ends up sitting right in the middle of a large piece of flat granite rock, measuring maybe 2 ft by 3 ft, in the rough just about 5 feet off the fairway. Just as big and almost as wide as a cart path, but this is no cart path.

 

We determined it was an immovable obstruction so I figured out my point of nearest relief, marked a spot one club length from there, and dropped into the rough within that spot.

 

Did we do this correctly? Surely, I would not be expected to try and hit the ball off a piece of flat rock of that size? The rock was flush with the grass, not sticking up. And we are not talking about something way off in the trees, this is just barely off the fairway.

 

The ruling?

 

Sorry, but sounds to me like you broke the rules. From your description, it is not an immovable obstruction. You don't get a free drop. You could have taken an unplayable lie. And yes, you sure can hit it off of the rock. I hit one off of a gravel/dirt cartpath once when I determined that my nearest point of relief was a much worse option.

[Tupperwolf]

Sounds like you did the right thing for an immovable obstruction, unfortunately I am not sure that your ball sitting on a flat piece of rock level with the grass surface is an immovable obstruction. An obstruction is:

 

Obstructions

An "obstruction" is anything artificial, including the artificial surfaces and sides of roads and paths and manufactured

ice, except:

 

a. Objects defining out of bounds, such as walls, fences, stakes and railings;

 

b. Any part of an immovable artificial object that is out of bounds; and

 

c. Any construction declared by the Committee to be an integral part of the course.

 

An obstruction is a movable obstruction if it may be moved without unreasonable effort, without unduly delaying play and without causing damage. Otherwise, it is an immovable obstruction

 

 

Because the rock is not artificial it may be considered an integral part of the course and you have to play as it lies or take an unplayable lie with included penalty. If you took a drop with no penalty stroke you could have broken the rules. I believe that'd be a 2-stroke penalty and DQ from the tournament if you signed a wrong scorecard. That one stroke penalty for the unplayable sounds a lot better to me, and if you are gutsy you might have been able to chip the ball off the rock to a better lie (better than the rough you dropped in) without damaging your club.

[greengolfhippo]

You used the wrong rule. Your were not entitled to get releif and as such if your mistake was not correct before starting the new hole you should have been DQed.

[hoganfan924]

You used the wrong rule. Your were not entitled to get releif and as such if your mistake was not correct before starting the new hole you should have been DQed.

 

Actually, he could have proceeded with the drop and marked a conditional score then reviewed it with the scoring committee before signing his card. He then would have been assessed the penalty and signed his card. No DQ would have been necessary even if he proceeded incorrectly.

[greengolfhippo]

I agree he could have mark a conditinal score or play the first ball as it lays and then played a second ball and gotten a ruling after the round and before the score card was signed, but that is not what he said. If he signed his score card and used the ruling his grop told him to take it would be a DQ. Now if a rules official told him to proceed with the way he did then he would be ok even with the incorrect ruling.

[hoganfan924]

I agree he could have mark a conditinal score or play the first ball as it lays and then played a second ball and gotten a ruling after the round and before the score card was signed, but that is not what he said. If he signed his score card and used the ruling his grop told him to take it would be a DQ. Now if a rules official told him to proceed with the way he did then he would be ok even with the incorrect ruling.

 

Yes, but I was responding to the fact that you said he should have been DQ'd upon starting the next hole, which is incorrect. He could have been penalized at the conclusion of the round without playing a 2nd ball.

 

In other words, you don't get DQ'd for proceeding incorrectly, you get penalized for it. You get DQ'd for not correcting the scoring error before signing your card.

[greengolfhippo]

I way I read his post it sounds like he had a questonn in his mind if he did the correct thing therefore the proper way to proceed is as such.

 

If a competitor becomes aware that he has played from a wrong place and believes that he may have committed a serious breach, he must, before making a stroke on the next teeing ground, play out the hole with a second ball played in accordance with the Rules. If the hole being played is the last hole of the round, he must declare, before leaving the putting green, that he will play out the hole with a second ball played in accordance with the Rules.

 

If the competitor has played a second ball, he must report the facts to the Committee before returning his score card; if he fails to do so, he is disqualified. The Committee must determine whether the competitor has committed a serious breach of the applicable Rule. If he has, the score with the second ball counts and the competitor must add two penalty strokes to his score with that ball. If the competitor has committed a serious breach and has failed to correct it as outlined above, he is disqualified.

 

The key here is beleives that he may have commited a serious breach. His statement of did I do the right thing would lead me to think he had doubts about this therefore he must correct this before making a stroke on the next teeing ground. Since he did not he is DQ'ed.

 

Per the decision of golf.

[777twist]

I thought I saw a clip of Tiger Woods having a few people move a boulder one time?

 

BTW, a 2' x 3' slab... come on, grab it with straight legs and jerk it up with your back.

[hoganfan924]

I way I read his post it sounds like he had a questonn in his mind if he did the correct thing therefore the proper way to proceed is as such.

 

If a competitor becomes aware that he has played from a wrong place and believes that he may have committed a serious breach, he must, before making a stroke on the next teeing ground, play out the hole with a second ball played in accordance with the Rules. If the hole being played is the last hole of the round, he must declare, before leaving the putting green, that he will play out the hole with a second ball played in accordance with the Rules.

 

If the competitor has played a second ball, he must report the facts to the Committee before returning his score card; if he fails to do so, he is disqualified. The Committee must determine whether the competitor has committed a serious breach of the applicable Rule. If he has, the score with the second ball counts and the competitor must add two penalty strokes to his score with that ball. If the competitor has committed a serious breach and has failed to correct it as outlined above, he is disqualified.

 

The key here is beleives that he may have commited a serious breach. His statement of did I do the right thing would lead me to think he had doubts about this therefore he must correct this before making a stroke on the next teeing ground. Since he did not he is DQ'ed.

 

Per the decision of golf.

 

No, he did not believe he committed a serious breach at the time. He asked his player competitors for a ruling and got one. He proceeded in a manner that all agreed to be equitable. However, he was not 100% sure and should have asked the committee if the drop should have been a free one or an unplayable one at the conclusion of his round. This is not a situation that would call for playing a second ball because the O.P. said that he was not going to hit the ball off of the rock. The only question was whether his drop was free or not. He did not play from the wrong place. The committee most likely would have assessed him a 1 stroke penalty at the conclusion of the round.

 

Here you go:

 

34-3. Committee's Decision

In the absence of a referee, any dispute or doubtful point on the Rules must be referred to the Committee, whose decision is final.

 

 

Here's one of the closest situations in the rules I could find (although it's kind of the opposite case):

 

28/13 After Deeming Ball Unplayable and Lifting It, Player Discovers Ball Was in Ground Under Repair

 

Q. A player lifts his ball after deeming it unplayable and then discovers that the ball was lying in ground under repair. Does the declaration and the lifting of the ball commit the player to proceeding under Rule 28?

 

A. No. Provided the player has not put a ball into play under Rule 28, he is not precluded by that Rule from taking relief, without penalty, under the ground under repair Rule (Rule 25).

[hoganfan924]

I thought I saw a clip of Tiger Woods having a few people move a boulder one time?

 

BTW, a 2' x 3' slab... come on, grab it with straight legs and jerk it up with your back.

 

He didn't have that option, his ball was sitting on the rock

[atlanta golfer]

Relax, folks, I didn't finish very high up in the tournament and didn't win anything. I'm more interested in the rule than I am in what happens if you break the rule.

 

I've got to say, a flat sheet of rock right by the side of the fairway has got to be pretty unusual. I have a hard time believing that if it was the pga tour, they would be having a rules official in there and the player would be getting relief. Perhaps there is a local interpretation that is used at that course.

 

The comments about playing a second ball as an alternate would have been the right way to go, I agree. Asking my fellow competitors for agreement on my interpretation (which I did) did make me feel better about the situation, but really these folks are not substitutes for an official.

[777twist]

I thought I saw a clip of Tiger Woods having a few people move a boulder one time?

 

BTW, a 2' x 3' slab... come on, grab it with straight legs and jerk it up with your back.

 

He didn't have that option, his ball was sitting on the rock

 

 

 

 

If it can be defined as a movable obstruction (and I'm not making that determination, I'm just posing the why not) then...

 

<H5 class=gray>

<H5 class=gray>24-1. Movable Obstruction</H5>A player may take relief, without penalty, from a movable obstruction as follows:

 

a. If the ball does not lie in or on the

obstruction

, the

obstruction

may be removed. If the ball

moves

, it must be replaced, and there is no penalty, provided that the movement of the ball is directly attributable to the removal of the

obstruction

. Otherwise, Rule

18-2a

applies.

 

b. If the ball lies in or on the

obstruction

, the ball may be lifted and the

obstruction

removed. The ball must

through the green

or in a

hazard

be dropped, or on the

putting green

be placed, as near as possible to the spot directly under the place where the ball lay in or on the

obstruction

, but not nearer the

hole

.

 

 

 

24-1 b. is that I'm talking about. I'm not sure what defines a movable versus immovable obstruction. But Tiger's crew seemed to be moving something I would have thought to be immovable.</H5>

[hoganfan924]

I thought I saw a clip of Tiger Woods having a few people move a boulder one time?

 

BTW, a 2' x 3' slab... come on, grab it with straight legs and jerk it up with your back.

 

He didn't have that option, his ball was sitting on the rock

 

 

 

 

If it can be defined as a movable obstruction (and I'm not making that determination, I'm just posing the why not) then...

 

<H5 class=gray>

<H5 class=gray>24-1. Movable Obstruction</H5>A player may take relief, without penalty, from a movable obstruction as follows:

 

a. If the ball does not lie in or on the

obstruction

, the

obstruction

may be removed. If the ball

moves

, it must be replaced, and there is no penalty, provided that the movement of the ball is directly attributable to the removal of the

obstruction

. Otherwise, Rule

18-2a

applies.

 

b. If the ball lies in or on the

obstruction

, the ball may be lifted and the

obstruction

removed. The ball must

through the green

or in a

hazard

be dropped, or on the

putting green

be placed, as near as possible to the spot directly under the place where the ball lay in or on the

obstruction

, but not nearer the

hole

.

 

 

 

24-1 b. is that I'm talking about. I'm not sure what defines a movable versus immovable obstruction. But Tiger's crew seemed to be moving something I would have thought to be immovable.</H5>

 

 

A boulder (or rock) is not an obstruction, it's a loose impediment. You can't lift the ball off of a loose impediment.

[jjj912]

It sounds like you took improper relief from a loose impediment. That would be a two stroke penalty.

[atlanta golfer]

Looking at it now, it does seem pretty clear that I took improper relief. It just seemed so wrong to be sitting a few feet off the fairway on a big bed of rock, surrounded by lush grass. I am thinking they left it there during course construction in order to be decorative. It was on a slope so perhaps they assumed that a golf ball would not normally come to rest in that place. Located in quite a narrow chute, exactly where a person's second shot on the par 5 would normally land.

[limpwrist]

It sounds to me that the rock was not a loose impediment by any means because it was apparently embedded into the ground. I would interpret it as an integral part of the course. Like it or not, take it up with the designer or course maintenance crew. Imagine if it were 30 yards off the fairway at the base of a cliff. You (general you, not specific you) wouldn't complain about it or expect to get free relief then, would you? Then why should you get relief just because it is only a few feet/yards from the fairway?

 

23/2 Meaning of "Solidly Embedded" in Definition of "Loose Impediments"

Q. The Definition of "Loose Impediments" states that a stone is a loose impediment if it is not "solidly embedded." When is a stone solidly embedded?

A. If a stone is partially embedded and may be picked up with ease, it is a loose impediment. When there is doubt as to whether a stone is solidly embedded or not, it should not be removed."

 

 

 

And here are the two decisions that applied to Tiger's infamous loose impediment (boulder).

 

"23-1/2 Large Stone Removable Only with Much Effort

Q. A player's ball lies in the rough directly behind a loose stone the size of a watermelon. The stone can be removed only with much effort. Is it a loose impediment which may be removed?

 

A. Yes. Stones of any size (not solidly embedded) are loose impediments and may be removed, provided removal does not unduly delay play

(Rule 6-7).

 

 

23-1/3 Assistance in Removing Large Loose Impediment

Q. May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc., assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?

 

A. Yes."