Definitions
Agency (revised)
An ‘agency’ is any body capable of exerting
an influence on the ball or damage to the course by virtue of its own activity
or movement imparted by an external force.
Testing (new)
To ‘test’ means to take any action in
addition to the normal playing of the game which could be construed as seeking
to gain information.
ooOoo
Rule 16: The Putting Green
16-1.
General
a. Touching Line of Putt
The proposed line of putt may be touched by the player:
(i) in removing
sand, soil or other loose impediments;
(ii) in addressing
the ball;
(iii) in measuring
– Rule 18-6;
(iv) in lifting or replacing the ball – Rule 16-1b;
(v) in
placing, lifting or pressing down a ball marker;
(vi) in repairing
old hole plugs, ball marks or other damage to the putting green – Rule 16-1c;
and
(vii) in removing
movable obstructions – Rule 24-1.
(Indicating line for putting on putting green
– see Rule 8-2b)
b. Lifting and Cleaning Ball
A ball on the putting green may be lifted
and, if desired, cleaned. The position of the ball must be marked before it is
lifted and the ball must be replaced (see Rule 20-1).
When another ball is in motion, a ball that
might influence the movement of the ball in motion must not be lifted.
c. Repair of Hole Plugs, Ball Marks and Other Damage
The player may repair an old hole plug or
damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball, whether or not the
player’s ball lies on the putting green.
When the player’s ball lies on the putting
green he may repair any damage to his proposed putting line caused by an agency
other than his side.
If a ball or ball-marker is accidentally
moved in the process of the repair, the ball or ball-marker must be replaced.
There is no penalty, provided the movement of the ball or ball-marker is
directly attributable to the specific act of repairing such damage. Otherwise,
Rule 18 applies.
d. Testing Surface
During the stipulated round, a player must
not test the surface of any putting green by rolling a ball or with his club or
hand.
Exception: Between
the play of two holes, a player may test the surface of any practice putting
green and the putting green of the hole last played, unless the Committee has
prohibited such action (see Note 2 to Rule 7-2).
e. Standing Astride or on Line of Putt
The player must not make a stroke on the
putting green from a stance astride, or with either foot touching, the line of
putt or an extension of that line behind the ball.
Exception: There is
no penalty if such a stance is inadvertently taken to avoid standing on another
player’s line of putt or prospective line of putt.
f. Making Stroke While Another Ball in Motion
The player must not make a stroke from
anywhere on the course while another ball is in motion after a stroke on the
putting green.
Exception: If it was
the player’s turn to play, there is no penalty.
Note: If the balls collide,
Rule 19-5b applies.
(Lifting ball assisting or interfering with
play while another ball in motion – see Rule 22)
PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 16-1:
Match play – Loss of hole; Stroke play – Two strokes.
(Position of caddie or partner – see Rule
14-2)
(Wrong putting green – see Rule 25-2)
16-2.
Ball Overhanging Hole
When any part of the ball overhangs the lip
of the hole, the player is allowed enough time to reach the hole without
unreasonable delay and an additional ten (10) seconds to determine whether the
ball is at rest. If by then the ball has not fallen into the hole, it is deemed
to be at rest.
If the ball subsequently falls into the hole,
the player is deemed to have holed out with his last stroke, and must add a penalty
stroke to his score for the hole; otherwise, there
is no penalty under this Rule.
(Undue delay – see Rule 6-7)
ooOoo
Rule
19-5b (proposed)
b. In Motion
If a player’s ball in motion after a stroke
other than on the putting green is deflected or stopped by another ball in
motion after a stroke, the player must play his ball as it lies, without
penalty.
If a player’s ball in motion after a stroke
on the putting green is deflected or stopped by another ball in motion after a
stroke on the putting green,
(a) the stroke of the player whose turn it was is cancelled
and the ball must be replaced and replayed, without penalty;
(b) the player who played out of turn incurs a the penalty
prescribed by Rule 16-1f and the ball must be played as it lies.
Note: Nothing in this Rule
overrides the provisions of Rule 10-1 (Order of Play in Match Play) or Rule
16-1f (Making Stroke While Another Ball in Motion).
Testing
ReplyDelete........ as seeking to gain information about the playing surface.
aaa
ReplyDeleteTo my knowledge, the concept of 'testing' appears in the playing rules in two forms:
1. Testing the surface (eg; 7-1b, 16-1d), and
2. Testing the condition (13-4).
I think to modify the definition as you suggest would be redundant in the case of 'form 1' references and be inappropriately restrictive in the case of 'form 2'.
I do confess, however, some difficulty in imagining the substantive relevant difference between testing the 'surface' and testing the 'condition'. Do you have a view?
Anyway, that is why I have chosen to keep the definition of 'testing' generic.
I take the point but the definition as you have worded it includes things like probing for tree roots or barely covered rocks.
ReplyDeleteI would just leave the specific prohibitions in the relevant rule.
aaa
ReplyDeleteI agree that the specific prohibitions in the relevant rules need to remain but would like to include something to clarify the meaning of ‘testing’ as it applies to golf, if that is at all possible. The situation we have at present is, in my view, too vague.
The wording which I have proposed (which is by no means immutable) would, when taken with the specific references, prohibit probing for roots and stones (I believe). While the option to check for such obstacles would make very good sense in terms of player safety, it is, I would think, contrary to rules of golf principles, or at least could be argued to be so.
Do you have a suggestion for a form of words for a definition which will meet the objective of clarifying the concept of ‘testing’ within the context of golf?
A peripheral point relates to what constitutes a ‘dangerous situation’ and, therefore, what rights the player should have to relief without penalty.
As you know the Rules are not very generous in this regard, classifying situations such as stinging nettles, cacti and poison ivy as examples of mere ‘unpleasantness’!
On the other hand surface tree roots and (partially) covered rocks present a real risk of player injury.
In general I do not see a place on a golf course for surface tree roots encroaching onto fairways (or rough) or the likes of poison ivy. Given the access which is available to (and encouraged among) players of all ages, unnecessarily risky situations should, in my view, be avoided or mitigated by free relief options. But I do not intend to go there at this stage!
Re tree roots.
ReplyDeleteThere are hundreds of 100 year old plus parkland courses in England which have trees and exposed roots. It is something expected on a golf course. Everyone knows that if one interferes, you play it carefully or resort to rule 28.
Officiating yesterday at a county team championship, I watched a player debating his options with his caddie. He chose to go for it. Managed to get the ball away a short distance and hurt his wrist. After a few expletives, he turned to me, shrugged and said 'Dumb choice'.
Yes, I accept that.
ReplyDeleteMy concern is where tree roots protrude onto the playing surface, many metres from the tree, just below the surface and sometimes barely visible. Unless one is particularly vigilant one can suffer a nasty injury (which I have seen). We have such a species on my course and sometimes these roots are marked GUR while they are awaiting removal. But is simply not possible to cover them all: some even come to light in bunkers.
As I indicated, I think that this is a vexed question, which I am happy to put in the 'too hard' basket. It does go, however, to the 'duty of care' of the course management and it is not something which will be easily fixed other than by removal of all potentially dangerous situations on a course. And we know that this is virtually impossible. In the end it is all down to the player to take care but I can see a court treating a club quite harshly when this is tested (as it surely will be).
The player has no case. He has an easy alternative. Which is why the rule was introduced.
ReplyDeleteIf you
y don't want to play it use rule 28
Yes, I agree that the player has an viable option, and a responsibility for his/her own safety.
ReplyDeleteHowever the potential risk is not always obvious to a player (particularly a visitor) and the way a court may view the 'duty of care' of the management is not always so definitive.
While the player may have 'no case' in golf terms, whether there may be 'no case' under the law is not, in my view, quite so clear.
During the time I was involved in club/course management we treated the matter of risk management (in all matters) as a matter of priority. It is in this way, I think, that the general matter of 'tree roots' needs be handled.