Rules Question - Casual Water vs. Lateral Water Hazard

[BostonBob]

Casual Water vs Later Water

I'm sure all of you know the answer to this, but my playing partners and I had some disagreement about the dispositon of the following. Here are the facts as I know them:

1. Poorly hit tee shot ends up in an area which can be characterized as an unmarked body of seasonal water (probably a river's overflow marsh). No stakes of any color to be seen anywhere near or in the vicinity.
2. The ball lands on the one place where the water has receded for long enough that the mud there has developed a slight crust. All around is deep mud, and water, for about 20 yards.
3. It is obvious where the ball is, because there is a round hole where ball has broken through the mud crust and plugged. Actually easy to find, but required me to slog through shin deep mud for about 20 yards to retrieve it.
4. When I slog out to the ball and took a stance, naturally I'm back in ankle deep mud. The mud has clearly visible water on top of it when I take my stance.

Solutions?

1. I proposed that rule 25.1.b was the correct resolution (move the ball to clear the casual water, drop w/in one club length).
2. My playing partner proposed that whether the water was marked or not it was obviously a lateral water hazard because it ran because it alongside the playing area, and that whatever the correct relief was that it surely involved a penalty stroke.
3. Now that I've researched it, I think the right call was rule 25.1.c and decision 25.1/1, which I like much better because not only was no penalty involved, but I could have substituted a clean ball for the wretched mudball I ended up playing and wouldn't have played the rest of the day with such .

Ultimately, after a lively and spirited discussion, our little field tribunal selected 1. above - no penalty, move it way back, and hit the mudball from legs of clay.

What do you think?

Thanks,

Bob

[jjj912]

I'm inclined to go with #2 - you were in a lateral hazard; though I understand the arguments for an abnormal ground condition.

 

Your playing partner's assertion that it was "obviously a lateral water hazard" and the phrase "seasonal water" in your description causes me to think that you are in a lateral hazard.

[BostonBob]

jjj912 quoth in part: ... the phrase "seasonal water" in your description causes me to think that you are in a lateral hazard.

 

It appeared to be "seasonal water' (my term) in that it appeared to be a flood plain for afterwinter runoff, which was receding back into what appeared to be an established body of water. My confusion was that what appeared to be the "established" body wasn't even marked.

 

BTW, I ask not to find agreement, but to know the answer. Score is already signed and accepted, and frankly, a point or two either way made NO difference at that stage of things!!

 

Thanks,

 

Bob

[jjj912]

A water hazard is a water hazard, whether or not it is marked as such.

[mikpga]

Is there a MARKED water hazard nearby?

[BostonBob]

mikpga quoth in whole on Apr 29 2009 at 09:20 AM: Is there a MARKED water hazard nearby?

 

Michael:

 

The lack of marking is pretty much where the confusion starts, I think. IF it had been marked, the right thing to do would have been clearer. However, there were no stakes, no line(s) on the ground, no comment on the score card, and no rules verbally given on it at the start of the tournament.

 

I suppose it could have been possible that the receding water could have taken either of the first two with it, but didn't see any evidence of that being a possibility.

 

Yes, the right thing to do would have been to ask, which would have cleared this whole thing up. Frankly I had to go on to the next part of my day and things were busy with the tournament closing out, etc. so I didn't.

 

Thanks --

 

Bob

[BugsyinNC]

See rule 26/2 where it states that if the ball is clearly within the hazard, even though the hazard is marked incorrectly, the ball must be played as if it was in the hazard.

 

The rule is kind of vague to me though, if it is the first time playing the course, how would someone know if the hazard is incorrectly marked or if it is truly casual water.

In a friendly round, I would give my partner the benefit of casual water, in a tournament, I'd let the officials figure it out.

Hope this helps.

[BostonBob]

Wow.. for lack of a stake!!! How about this as another thought?

 

25/2 Overflow from Water Hazard

 

Q. If a pond (water hazard) has overflowed, is the overflow casual water?

 

A. Yes. Any overflow of water from a water hazard which is outside the margin of the hazard is casual water.

 

Even if it were a water hazard, the area was an over flow area - which would seem to be addressed by the above. (?)

 

Eesh. Thanks, Bob

[jjj912]

As you have seen there are rules and decisions covering this situtation up, down, left, and right. The problem is that they all presume you know whether or not you were in a water hazard. Note that a water hazard does not have to have water in it to be water hazard.

[BostonBob]

<laughing> So true! Given the confusion here, its a good thing my playing partners were reasonable and mature.

 

So, my new strategy for such instances? As Captain Sig on the Most Dangerous Catch is fond of saying to his crew when things go sideways:

 

"Shut up. And fish."

 

Thanks, everyone -

 

Bob