I. The Leaf Rule

Foremost was puzzled by the cryptic email he received from his host on the eve of a highly-anticipated match at the lovely HCC …the HCC in Nashville.

“Come to lunch at 11:45 ….” said the message, signed by Reader and Host, FA, who added the following bullet points below his signature:

*USGA Rules are in effect

*Leaf Rule” is also in effect

*Local Rule – host of the event is final arbiter of the Rules

F’s head was spinning. Did USGA Rules, if in effect, permit a host to declare himself the final arbiter of the Rules? If the Host was misinformed as to his status as the sole arbiter of the ROG, might he also be misinformed as to the existence and effect of a “Leaf Rule”?

F arrived at the Club early to seek clarification. He asked for the Committee and was directed to the Head Professional.

“Well”, said the Committee, “we haven’t formally adopted the “Leaf Rule” as a Local Rule at this point, although as a Club we generally acknowledge it in October and November, and would defer to each group at this time in determining whether it is in effect.”

F accepted this declaration as confirmation that the “leaf rule” was in effect, but decided to mess with FA and press him on the point (as each group could make its own determination).

“Are you comfortable with this?”, he asked FA, pointing out that the “Leaf Rule” had not been officially adopted, and had not been communicated to Players in writing by Notice, or on the Scorecard, as recommended in Model Local Rules. (F failed to mention that the Model Rules permit communication “or by some other way”).

Yes indeed! FA insisted on play under the Leaf Rule. “This is Country Club Golf and we are going to play by ‘Country Club Rules’ “, he insisted (interjecting a set of rules F hadn’t seen in the ROG). FA expounded at length on the necessity of the Leaf Rule in accomplishing his desire to maintain pace-of-play, particularly in light of his observation that Sandwich was also in the group making a guest appearance.

So play began with the “Leaf Rule”. What could possibly go wrong?

Model Local Rule F-14

During play…any ground with temporary accumulation of ‘leaves’ in the general area or in a bunker is treated as ground under repair from which free relief is allowed under R16.1.

Facts

It was a splendid dry, crisp day at HCC with exciting play on all fronts as the group teed off on the demanding Par 4 9th Hole. Pace-of-play had been wonderful with the exception of proud Host FA who seemed to interrupt and delay each shot with helpful “Advice” relating to his vast local course knowledge.

If the green sloped sharply to the left, he might say, “Hit it to the right side of the green.” If a green fell off dramatically in the back he might say, “You don’t want to be long here”. Or, “You need to carry this shot to the green. It’s soft in front”, etc, etc…each interjection made as a player tried to make a shot.

The players appreciated his knowledge and enthusiasm noting, however, his “Advice” repeatedly bordered on a violation of R10.2 which prohibits comments (other than to a Partner) relating to a player’s strategy or tactics for play. Nevertheless, he was the Host and no formal protest was lodged.

So on the 9th Hole, F pulled his drive left into a hillside cart path area between the 9th fairway and the 10th green. F drove directly to a ball settled in the rough by the cart path, where his ball should have been, and determined that the ball wasn’t his. After a further short search FA (who was F’s cart companion and opponent) declared the Leaf Rule was in effect and F should just play the ball he found. F said he should drop a ball, but FA demanded that F play the ball as it lay, as this would be a fair result and he was concerned about pace of play.

F played a nice shot, digging the ball out of the rough into the center of the green.

Sandwich (FA’s partner and riding in a separate cart) then approached and found F’s original ball twenty yards ahead as it had obviously caught the cart path. FA told F to go ahead and just play this original ball. (FA had noted that an approach from this location was blocked by a tree). F refused saying he had already put his second ball in play and it was on the green next to the hole.

Sandwich then proclaimed that F had played a “wrong ball”, as he had not seen F drop and put another ball in play under the “Leaf Rule”. F explained that FA had insisted that he play the ball he had found as it lay.

F’s eventual winning par on the hole was disputed by FA who had wanted F to replay his second shot with his original ball from behind the tree, and by Sandwich, who claimed F never correctly put his second ball into play by dropping it as required by R16.1.

Ruling

Sandwich is correct that F should have dropped a ball in taking free relief under the Leaf Rule. Nevertheless, FA had announced and insisted that as Host he was the “final arbiter of the Rules” and F, as a humble and grateful guest, had simply played his second shot as directed by his Host.

F is pleased at how quickly he was able to adapt to Country Club Rules. F finds in favor of F.

II. A Correction

Believe it or not, F occasionally makes a rules mistake – this one noted by Reader CSo.

In a recent post, “Foremost Gets a Rules Spanking”, F discussed a scenario in Match Play in which a player tapped in a putt on a provisional ball while the opponents were searching for the original ball. F correctly noted that although the player might have tapped in his putt, opponents in match play could demand that he replay the shot in the correct order of play. F went on to say that the opponents would then have the full three minutes to complete their search for the original ball.

This last assertion by F was incorrect. Yes, The player may have to replay his tap-in, but once he has made a stroke at a provisional ball closer to the hole, the original ball is out of play and the search is over.

“However, cancelling the stroke would not change the status of the original ball, which is no longer in play”. (Int. 18.3c(2)/3.

It looks like F’s “Rules Spanking” was deserved!

As usual, all comments or corrections are welcome!

Respectfully submitted,

F