Decision 12-1/4 states:
Player Touches Ground in
Hazard When Searching for Ball Believed to Be Covered by Loose Impediments in
Hazard
Q. A player's ball is believed to be
in a bunker covered by leaves. The player probes for the ball with a club which
touches the ground in the bunker. What is the ruling?
A.There is no penalty. Rule 12-1 specifically authorises touching ground in the
hazard while probing. Such permission overrides any prohibitions in Rule 13-4.
Firstly, one might
ask if this Decision is meant to apply to all parts of Rule 12-1, or, more
likely, has there been an oversight by the Castle Dwellers who have simply
failed to realise the implications of their 2012 modifications to Rule 12-1?
But,
let’s give the CDs the benefit of the
doubt and assume that they mean what they say. Let’s assume that they really
intend this Decision to apply only to Rule 12-1b: Searching for or
Identifying Ball Covered by Loose Impediments in Hazard.
This
Rule states:
In a hazard, if the player’s ball is
believed to be covered by loose impediments to the extent that he cannot
find or identify it, he may, without penalty, touch or move loose
impediments in order to find or identify the ball. If the ball is found or
identified as his, the player must replace the loose impediments.
If the ball is moved during the touching or moving of loose
impediments while searching for or identifying the ball, Rule 18-2a
applies; if the ball is moved during the replacement of the loose
impediments, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced.
While
Rule 13-4 states:
Ball in Hazard; Prohibited Actions
Except as
provided in the Rules, before making a stroke at a ball that is
in a hazard (whether a bunker or a water hazard) or that,
having been lifted from a hazard, may be dropped or placed in thehazard,
the player must not:
a. Test the condition of the hazard or any
similar hazard;
b. Touch the
ground in the hazard or water in the water hazard with his hand
or a club; or
c. Touch or move a loose impediment lying in or
touching the hazard.
The question is: Which words in Rule 12-1b ‘specifically authorises touching
ground in the hazard while probing’ thus overriding ‘any prohibitions in Rule 13-4’?
I do not think
that there are any.
As a matter of interest, Rule 12-1 in the 2008-2011
Book states, in part:
In a hazard, if a ball is believed to be covered by
loose impediments or sand, the player may remove by probing or raking with a club or otherwise, as many loose impediments or as much sand
as will enable him to see a part of the ball.
These words do constitute a specific authorisation.
In my view Decision 12-1/4 is not just definitely
dodgy, since there is no foundation for it within the Rules, it is quite simply
wrong.
For
further analysis on this issue, see Rog’s Blog: Rule 12-1 (Part 1, Part 2, Part
3 and Part 4)
If anybody is interested, this rule has been the subject of a thread on the Leith Society. One of the eminent contributors to that site has it on good authority (R&A) that decision 12-1/4 is definitely dodgy and will be amended in the next book. We will just have to put up with this until then!
ReplyDeleteThanks Larry
ReplyDeleteIt will be very interesting to see what, if anything, happens.
The irony is that while this Decision is bad, it is the revised Rule 12-1, itself, which is the big problem, as you will have noted from the Blog.
I suspect that any attempt at a mid-term patch-up will simply result in greater confusion and we will probably have to wait until 2016 for the situation to be rectified.
And while we are on dodgy decisions what about 26-1/12?
ReplyDelete26-1/12 Hazard Marked as Water Hazard Where Ball Last Crosses Margin and as Lateral Hazard Where Ball Comes to Rest
Q.A body of water is defined in part as a water hazard and in part as a lateral water hazard. A ball last crosses the hazard margin at a spot where it is marked as a water hazard but it comes to rest in that part of the hazard marked as a lateral water hazard. In addition to playing the ball as it lies, what are the player's options?
A. Since the ball last crossed the margin of the hazard where it is defined as a water hazard, the options in Rule 26-1c are not available. Thus, the player is limited to the options in Rules 26-1a and 26-1b.
26-1/12 Hazard Marked as Water Hazard Where Ball Last Crosses Margin and as Lateral Hazard Where Ball Comes to Rest
I am puzzled at the above question and response.
How can a ball that lies within a lateral water hazard have “last crossed the margin of the hazard where it is defined as a water hazard”?
Surely the demarcation between water hazard and lateral water hazard (usually an imaginary line across water) is the boundary of both. If it is the boundary of both one would assume that it is this margin that the ball last crossed. As such it would be the margin of both water hazard and lateral water hazard with the lateral water hazard being the side that the ball last crossed.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks General
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting proposition. Clearly, as you state, the two types of water hazard have, in this case, a common boundary.
With your indulgence, I will add 26-1/12 to the 'dodgy decisions' list to be addressed in time.