Foremost received an urgent call as a debate raged in the BMCC locker room.

Facts

In a Match Play competition at BMCC, opponents BC and JB found themselves All-Square on the long and difficult 18th Hole. BC had pushed his drive into the healthy right rough and, in fact, had made a couple of passes in his cart just trying to find it.

“There it is”, said JB, who was also BC’s cart mate. This alert came too late, however, as BC ran directly over the ball before he was able to stop the cart. BC visually confirmed that the ball was his, although it was now “embedded” in the rut of the tire track he had just made during his search.

The parties both agreed BC was entitled to free relief. He lifted and cleaned his ball, dropped it in the smooth and firm tire rut, and played a lovely shot in front of the green, eventually making his “par” to tie the hole. (For those unfamiliar with BMCC, a 5 on the Par 4 18th is often called a “par” by the members).

JB had protested his opponent’s drop from the outset. His argument was that BC should been required to drop in the heavy grass rough, rather than the smooth and firm tire rut.

In the clubhouse following the match, JB was reviewing the circumstances of the incident with a crowd of by-standers, and fleshing out a case to present to the Committee.

Specifically, JB raised the following issues as he was said to be contemplating a lengthy letter of protest:

Issues

1) Is it a penalty to run over one’s own ball with one’s golf cart?
2) Was BC required to mark his ball before lifting? (which he had not done). 3) Was BC allowed to clean his ball upon lifting?
4) Was BC correct in “dropping” rather than “placing”?
5) Was BC entitled to drop his ball back in the tire rut from which he had taken relief… a tire rut that was now firm and smooth … as opposed to dense and gnarly adjacent rough?

Ruling

While BC might have taken appropriate relief for an “embedded” ball, unfortunately, his ball was not “embedded” as defined (See Def.), in that it’s location, packed into the turf, was not the result of “the player’s previous stroke”, but a result of having been run over by the golf cart.

Accordingly, BC’s “embedded ball” relief procedures were incorrect. Although no penalty is assessed for accidentally moving a ball during a search (R7.4), a player is required to “replace” the ball on the “spot” from which it was moved, a spot which if unknown, must be estimated (R9.4a; R14.2c).

The question then becomes, what was the correct “spot” for BC’s free relief. (It was fairly obvious that the only real movement of the ball had been in its vertical position relative to the ground as it had been pressed down onto the turf).

When the original lie of a ball is altered (ie., pressed down into the turf), the player must replace the ball “on the nearest spot with a lie most similar to the original lie”. R14.2d(2).

F finds that the “most similar” lie would have been in the rough outside the tire track, as the tire track and indentation were products of the original lie being altered by the golf cart. In F’s opinion, BC should have placed the ball in the rough at the nearest spot next to the tire track no closer to the hole.

Accordingly, F finds BC committed three violations as follows:

1) Failing to mark a ball that was required to be replaced on a spot: a one-stroke penalty (and no, reference to the existing indentation does not constitute “marking”)

2) Dropping instead of Replacing: a one-stroke penalty as well (ordinarily, this mistake results in the General Penalty (playing from a Wrong Place), although the New Rules provide an exception if the ball ends up in the correct “spot”, even though it was “replaced” in the wrong way. R14.2b(2).(For the record, BC insists his ball was dropped on the correct spot just behind the spot of the indentation).

Under the “bargain rule” (R1.3c(4) – a single penalty stroke for multiple violations related to the same related act), BC might have escaped with a single one-stroke penalty, except F finds the “spot” he chose to drop was incorrect.

3) By failing to create a lie “most similar” to his original lie, F finds BC played from a Wrong Place: the General Penalty (loss of hole in Match Play).

Assuming JB’s protest to the Committee was timely, F believes his argument would prevail.

(An unrelated pop test: name the school fight song with the stirring battle cry “Conquer and Prevail”. A hint — Beware, Dogs).

As usual, all comments and corrections are welcome!

Respectfully submitted,
F