Golf With An Attitude
Re: Wrong Balls, Concessions, Casual Water (Rs 2,15,25)
Foremost has to admit he fidgeted in his seat, somewhat uncomfortably at times, during the Nashville Ballet’s masterful performance of “Attitude”, a reflection on the various stages of the holocaust, which challenged the viewer to reflect on themes of man’s inhumanity to man, courage, luck, resilience, joy, and defeat. The dancers were outstanding, and F ached with them visually and emotionally as they twisted and turned and were cast happenstance into human piles from which they eventually emerged victorious. At least, this description is what F thinks he observed. He looks forward to comparing interpretations with Reader JB, who had lost his wife by the end of the performance, and who F found roaming the halls of TPAC. They spoke briefly, and discussed what a fine day it had been for golf.
Upon reflection, and without in any way intending to minimize the holocaust, F found the chaotic jumble of bodies he witnessed on stage the perfect metaphor for the rules confusion he had witnessed this same day on the golf course.
1. Facts
Opponent JS faced a bunker shot on the first hole. He asked F to mark his partner RM’s ball which was in his line of play only 4 feet from the hole. F confirmed this authorization to mark from RM, picked up and marked the ball, and handed it to F’s caddie E who was approaching with outstretched arm to clean the ball.
Deep in concentration, F missed his 12 foot birdie putt.
“Where is my ball?”, asked RM.
“I gave it to caddie E”, responded F.
“I gave it back to you”, said caddie E.
Indeed, F looked in his hand and realized he had putted with RM’s ball.
Issue(s)
Does F get another opportunity to putt with his own ball? Is this innocent mistake one of any consequence … after all, it was just the first hole?
Ruling
F played with a “wrong ball” which is defined as a ball “other than the player’s” and includes “another player’s ball.” (Def, “wrong ball”). A player who makes a stroke at a wrong ball loses the hole in match play (R15-3a).
2. Facts
It did not take long for this group to encounter another rules issue. The second hole at BMCC is a long par three. While the players searched for EC’s ball in the left bunkers, EC’s partner F played up with a lovely flop shot over the right bunker to three feet below the hole. EC spotted his ball not in a bunker, but 20 yards away on the cart path by the #3 tees.
“I guess I’m out of the hole,” announced EC, still standing by the bunkers.
As EC turned to the #3 tee and his ball, opponents RM and JS both played up leaving 6 and 8 foot par putts. All players then watched as EC hollered “Fore”, took a drop from the cart path and hit a nice chip shot to the green. As EC approached, RM announced EC had disqualified himself from the hole.
Issue
Was EC’s “I guess I’m out…” comment a concession? Was he out of the hole?
Ruling
A Player may concede a hole at any time prior to the conclusion of that hole. R2-4. The concession may not be withdrawn.
Although the specific words, “I concede”, were never uttered, F finds that the statement, “I guess I’m out of the hole” implied a concession. (See, Dec2-4/13, where a player who announced “Let’s move on to the next hole” was deemed to have conceded even though his ball was found shortly thereafter within the 5 minute search period).
Fortunately, all was not lost for the EC/F team on this hole as F was able to two-putt his three-footer to secure a halve.
3. Facts
On the par 5 hole #8, EC barely missed a sneaky, downhill 8-footer to win the hole. The ball meandered another 18 inches past the hole. EC stepped up to the ball, placed his putter behind it, paused briefly, and asked in a polite, business-like fashion if this putt was good. The question was met with a stony silence. EC, apparently upset with this response, slapped the ball vigorously past the hole and proceeded to the next tee. The ball was not holed.
Opponents RM and JS walked unperturbed and expressionless off the green saying nothing. F, doing his utmost to keep score for the match, politely asked RM if the putt had been conceded as no objections had been raised after the slap.
“Did you hear a concession?”, asked RM.
“I did not”, said F truthfully.
“Then write it down”, said RM. “We are up two.”
Issue
Perhaps RM and JS could have been more gracious? (EC, who was a tad annoyed anyway that his opponents were calling him “Cheddar Man” in response to a news story of the day, remarked that he wasn’t sure he even wanted to play in a game where short putts weren’t given!)
May a Player assume the concession of a short putt? May the concession of a putt be implied?
Ruling
Certainly, an opponent may concede the next shot at any time (R2-4); but a Player may not assume that his short putt will be conceded or rely on this assumption if it is not so tendered. (EC knows this as well as anybody… he was just messin’ with them, and he knew there were plenty of holes to go; and, to be honest, his feelings were not hurt by being called Cheddar Man, if any Reader is concerned with this apparent slight).
F would note, however, that a concession of a short putt could be implied by the opponents’ actions. For instance, if JS and RM had turned and walked off the green after the initial miss, EC might have assumed that his next putt was conceded. Instead, they hovered over EC’s putt like a pair of vultures, conduct which contradicted any possible implication of a concession. *
Silence is actually the perfect response to the question, “Is that good?” Other comments are often inappropriate. F remembers once agonizing over a short come-backer in the face of silence from opponent and Reader RB, an incident which led to a heated verbal altercation over RB’s lack of sportsmanship. Although RB has since given up the game, in his playing days he projected a nice guy image which belied his fierce competitiveness. On this occasion, after an initial dead silence, as F carefully addressed his short putt, RB whispered at the last second, “ Take your time.”
4. Facts
In a preamble to the ballet F would see later that night, opponent JS was aggressively toeing the ground around his ball just off the fairway on hole #17. He asked F if he could take relief from casual water.
F arrived at the scene and advised JS that he, frankly, didn’t see any casual water. JS responded to this observation with an athletic series of demi-pointes, plies, and rond de jambes, all in the area of his intended stance — all to illustrate that water could be raised with significant heel or toe pressure.
Issue
Is a Player entitled to relief from casual water if such casual water is visible only after exerting extraordinary foot pressure?
Ruling
A Player is indeed entitled to relief from “casual water” under R25-1 which offers relief from Abnormal Ground Conditions. By definition, however, the water must be visible before or after the Player takes his stance. Water visible only “through undue effort” such as pressing down soles (or toes) of the feet is not casual water. Dec.25/4.
As Reader PP recently reminded on these very pages, it is the “stance” and not the “dance” which offers relief from casual water.
But how fitting to end these Rulings where we began, with a dance!
As usual, all comments or corrections are welcome!
Respectfully submitted,
F
* F is aware of the 2015 Solheim Cup incident with Norwegian Suzann Pettersen in which the Rules official determined a putt by American Alison Lee was not conceded although Pettersen and her partner had both turned their backs and walked off the green. Most analysts have since agreed either that an implied concession was extended, or that the incident was a case of mistaken concession, in which case in equity under R2-4, the American should have been granted the opportunity to replace the ball and putt out. F is confident that, in light of this highly-publicized incident, an implied concession would prevail in future competition under similar circumstances.
2 thoughts on “Golf With An Attitude”
What is the penalty for ‘losing your wife’ after a TPAC performance. How long do you have to search for the ‘lost wife’?
JB
and be careful to avoid the penalty for playing with a “wrong” wife
Comments are closed.