Rule 5:
The Ball
5-1.
Conforming Ball
Any ball used by a player must conform with
the specifications adopted by the Committee. If a player is in doubt as to the
conformity of a ball he should consult the Committee.5-2. Foreign Material
The ball the player plays must not have foreign material applied to it for the purpose of changing its playing characteristics.
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 5-1 or 5-2:
Disqualification from the competition.
5-3.
Ball Unfit for Play
A ball is unfit for play if it is visibly
cut, cracked or out of shape. A ball is not unfit for play solely because mud
or other materials adhere to it, its surface is scratched or scraped or its
paint is damaged or discoloured.
If a player has reason to believe his ball
has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, he may lift the
ball, without penalty, to determine whether it is unfit.
Before lifting the ball, the player must
announce his intention to his opponent in match play or his marker or a
fellow-competitor in stroke play and mark the position of the ball. He may then
lift and examine it, provided that he gives his opponent, marker or
fellow-competitor an opportunity to examine the ball and observe the lifting
and replacement. The ball must not be cleaned when lifted under this Rule.
If the player fails to comply with all or any
part of this procedure, or if he lifts the ball without having reason to
believe that it has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played,
he incurs a penalty of one stroke.
If it is determined that the ball has become
unfit for play during play of the hole being played, the player may substitute
another ball, placing it on the spot where the original ball lay. Otherwise,
the original ball must be replaced. If a player substitutes a ball when not
permitted and makes a stroke at the wrongly substituted ball, he incurs the
general penalty for a breach of Rule 5-2, but there is no additional penalty
under this Rule or Rule 15-2.
If a ball breaks into pieces as a result of a
stroke, the stroke is cancelled and the player must play a ball, without
penalty, as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was
played (see Rule 20-5).
*PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 5-3:
Match play – Loss of hole; Stroke play – Two strokes.
*If a player incurs the general penalty for a breach of Rule
5-3, there is no additional penalty under this Rule.
Note 1: If the opponent, marker or
fellow-competitor wishes to dispute a claim of unfitness, he must do so before
the player plays another ball.
Note 2: If the original lie of a ball to be placed
or replaced has been altered, see Rule 20-3b.
In answer to your previous post.
ReplyDeleteI think the path is a long one, and I am not refering to the amount of words.
With regard to this latest post.
Are you not including any Appendix? I can't see any improvment in your wording of 5-1 from the current rule book. When does a player consult a committee about the conformity of his ball. After the round is a little late.
The onus of a ball conforming is the players responsibility, you seem to be putting this on the committee.
5-1 does not concern foreign material that is covered in 5-2 so why have it in the heading?
Penalty statment under 5-3, should read 5-3 not 5-2
ReplyDeleteThanks arny
ReplyDeleteThese comments are just what I need.
1. I do not plan any Appendices as there is nothing in them which the player needs to know. I am of course open to correction on this view.
2. It is possible that there may be little or no improvement to some of the present rules. The changes to Rule 5 are minor and mainly structural, but a few words are saved and requirements of no real interest to the average player have been removed.
3. Re: conforming ball. I think that this is only likely to come up in ‘serious’ competitions where there are published conditions. In these (as well as in club) situations I would expect that any player in doubt would be checking the legitimacy of the ball prior commencing.
4. The onus is definitely on the player to ensure that the ball is conforming but it would seem to me to be reasonable that the people managing the competition (the committee) would be the ones with the information readily at hand. How would you propose that ‘the player’ should, for example, measure the initial velocity capabilities of the ball s/he propose to use?
And what about the specifications on clubs! It is not realistic to expect that any player will be interested in, or capable of, assessing his/her clubs against 11 pages of specifications.
5. I have (hopefully) fixed the drafting errors on the website and (on re-reading) have modified both Rule 4-1 and Rule 5-1.
Thanks again.
PS: I agree about the length of the path.