Relief Denied when there is Interference with an Immovable Obstruction - Golf Rules
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @golfrulesquestions
GOLFRULES QUESTIONS MERCHANDISE
Get yourself a Roo&Coo polo: golfrulesquest...
SUBSCRIBE to GOLFRULES QUESTIONS bit.ly/2I8KrVH for all your golf rules.
Q. The player has interference from an immovable obstruction, but does that mean they are always entitled to free relief?
.
A. No.
There is no free relief when the stroke is unreasonable, e.g. the shot is to hit a ball straight out of bounds, or straight into a tree.
There is no free relief if the stroke or stance is abnormal for the golfer and not reasonable.
There is no free relief if the immovable obstruction is in a penalty area.
In all these scenarios, relief would be denied.
Rule 16.1.
.
.
.
Check out more videos on RUclips
And on Instagram @golfrules_questions
Nice that Adam Scott was closeby to help.
Lol
Jajaja
I loved that at the end she threaded the needle between the trees.
Very helpful explanation- that was fun - thank you
Question, isn't it true within the new rules of golf that you can use the longest club in your bag, with the exception of the putter?
True
I understand, don't totally agree with with your response for a few reasons.
1) there is 2 parts to this rule, first it says you must have interference and unable to "make a stroke" when this could but up to debate weather you can "make a stoke" in a different direction without altering a "normal" swing or stance.
I do agree with part 2 saying you do not gain free relief because of altering you club, stance, or shot.
My problem with this rule is who determines when the lie is "unreasonable" ? some rules are player discretionary and some by rules official??
If the ball was 3 inches back toward tee box is that still unreasonable even tho the tree is still in front of you??
There is plenty of instances on the PGA were players use the rules to improve their situation based on the rules given.
It's simple really. Pretend there is no cart path there. Show me the shot you are going to play. If there is no shot possible, you must take an unplayable. If a shot is possible, you are standing normally and your foot on the path, you get free relief.
A classic example of this I think was David Frost at the 1999 Open… he was stuck in deep rough, decided to play onto an adjacent path, then tried to claim the path interfered with his stance therefore he could have a free drop… the referees ruled that playing onto the path was an unreasonable shot tho.
3:27 - Pffft...Phil would left-hand (obviously) into the tree on the right, bouncing it onto the green on the ricochet.
with his driver.
With the 2023 addition to the 2019 rule set, the ball can now roll past the reference point towards the flag when taking "back on the line" relief, as long as it stays within 1 clublength of the the reference point. This solely applies to this method of dropping, and ofcourse it cannot roll closer to the hole than where the original ball came to rest. but contrary to the 2019 rules you can no longer drop it within 1 club length of the reference point. You must drop it directly on the line, and it must come to rest within 1 clublength of that point, which on the drop becomes the reference point.
At my course there is a fence protecting hole 14 tee box it runs perpendicular to the fairway for the hole we'd be on and sits on the right rough. Local rule considers it an immovable obstruction. Can I back up far away enough to have room to go over it and cut the corner (hole slightly curves right so can easily do this. Or is the straight line thing only for unplayable lie?
For a protective screen, the player can take free relief from interference with their lie of the ball, their stance, and their swing. There is no relief for interference on the line of play. However, IF the Committee has adopted Local Rule E-6, then the player can get free relief for interference by the protective fence on their line of play.
I would’ve had the same reaction if I hit it through the trees like that ! :)
The pro play would have been to putt it gently onto the cart path and let it run down the hill, hopefully ending up on or close to that nice bit grass 😂
not how it works but ok
@@jacobl3255 Why does gravity work backwards in Australia? 😜
@@jacobl3255 how come
@@anguspuddy892 Ball has to stay in the zone.
@@jeandupont8501 in the drop zone yes. Why cant a player then hit the ball down the cart path?
Ok so could I just chip the ball onto the cart path and let ball run down the path to where ever it lies next. Because it looks like you would b in a pretty good position down at the end of that path. Or would that b cheating
legal, but taking a lot of risk if it bounces right back into more hazard or OOB
Lovely long precise explanation but the situation needed only three words, NO, YOUR DREAMING!
🤣
It all happens at 6:33 hilarious 😂. ✅
New to golf, so this may be a really silly question; but in a situation like that is there a rule against leaving the ball as it lies, and gently chipping it onto the cart path to roll downhill?
No Rule stopping that.
If in the case when you can hit the ball sideways with a reasonable stance but your feet touches the path (immovable obstruction), what is the ruling.
You are entitled to free relief.
I'm surprised they didn't show the back-handed shot. She may have been standing on the cart path.
What if the drop falls forward past her reference point/intended drop spot. And then a second time. Can she then place the ball?
I see a lot of pros manipulate their drops so they can place the ball on a preferred lie
If the player's drop rolls outside their relief area, they would be required to re-drop. If the player's re-drop rolls outside the relief area, they would be required to place their ball on the spot within the relief area that the ball first hit on the re-drop. ruclips.net/video/2-FmAMA7PlY/видео.html
Blakey can I go back on a line and try to drop on the cart path? And then get free relief from the path?
Yes. You could take an unplayable, and then drop on the path. If after the correct drop you have interference for a reasonable shot from the path, you'd be entitled to free relief from the immovable obstruction.
@@GolfRulesQuestions ok thanks so much!
I should have just sent you a link to a video that explains that: ruclips.net/video/YKjQM7mXw3I/видео.html
@@GolfRulesQuestions wow thanks so much! Exactly what I was wondering. Your videos are so helpful, thanks a ton for getting back to me!!
Rules are clear in this case; The ball should be immediately placed in your pocket,a slow walk to the clubhouse bar,keeping in middle of fairway at all times,any other balls encountered should be picked up, PLACED beside your ball in pocket.at least seven points of Bitta to be consumed,then ,and only then ,approach the Lady Captain,and abuse her roundly about the State of the course!!!
🤣😂🤣
This is fantastic!
Great shot, worth the wait :)
Simp
How does this square with the fact that they just allowed a player to claim he was going to hit a shot left handed to get relief, and then took the drop and hit it right handed. That seems to be unreasonable to me, yet they allowed it in tournament play.
ruclips.net/video/9B-H_gVmk7c/видео.html
now I know why belly putters became popular... addendum: and why the putter is no longer allowed to mark a club length.
Would a taller person get a benefit if their stance is naturally wider than a short person?
Yes, that is a possibility.
Even if your stance is on the path, your free relief is in that other tree..
She already pointed that out in the video.
Lots of players would take unplayable, drop on cart path, then take relief from cart path.
Using one hand to take a backward swing can get your left foot on the cart path. That’s a legit shot and entitles you to relief.
You get a 360 deg radius from your reference point when dropping back on the line, don't you?
Yes, from 1 Jan 2023, you must drop your ball on the line, but it can roll up to one club-length from where the ball touched the ground. This video was filmed in Aug 2019, when the Rule was that you could drop anywhere within a one club-length half circle, no nearer the hole, where the club-length started from the line.
i would have chipped it from the original position and let it roll down the cart path. heck yes!
Why is standing on a cart path a problem ?
It's not, but if you have interference, you're permitted free relief for a reasonable stroke when your ball is in the general penalty, a bunker or on the putting green.
Who is to say what is a reasonable stroke if I wanted to hit the ball directly into the tree and bounce it backwards I would have path interference
That isn't a reasonable stroke. You are only trying to hit it into the tree to gain free relief. You are not trying to hit it in that direction to complete play of the hole in the minimum number of strokes, which is what the main aim of golf is.
@@GolfRulesQuestions where is any of your response in the rules ? What if the tree was 50 yards away ! or a bunker, water hazard or thick rough, which could be avoided by dropping.
This is the problem with rules there isn’t a correct answer, largely because R&A USGA try to be clever by adding in a “definition”, there is no harm in taking a free drop nobody’s going die over a free drop !
There never used be definitions the rules were simple, golf was simple, people enjoyed playing, why doesn’t golf go back to that.
@@chrisbates7743 it depends if it is a reasonable or unreasonable stroke. In this video, hitting it straight into a tree is unreasonable.
@@GolfRulesQuestions Wrong, any shot is reasonable if the player thinks its reasonable, you're a joke, just because your bitch ass can't make good shots doesn't make other golfer attempts unreasonable punta
@@jakefavre if you think hitting it straight into a tree is reasonable, and you’re doing it to gain free relief. Then you’re a cheater.
Unplayable lie relief, 2 club lengths left, could drop on the cart path. Probably it would roll away. Then place it and play from path. Looks like nice gap to the green from the cart path.
5 sec to call it an unplayable lie and drop back towards the tee if your two club lengths of relief won't clear the obstruction of concern
sorry i disagree. who are you or anyone to tell me that my stance is "unreasonable"? I might want a wide stance here for stability. in that case I get relief from the cart path. Now the question is, does it matter? Because the relief is not going to help.
Why take the chance ,just take the unplayable.trying to hit out of that lie could cost her more then one stroke.
For amateurs that's fine. But in real competitive play a ball has to be literally unplayable. It can't just be a bad lie where you know you can't do anything but try to punch it out from behind the obstruction.
@@Rowgue51 Rule 19.1 is pretty clear you are entitled to call unplayable at any time (except in a penalty area where you must take that relief instead). In pretty much every case though your relief options are not worth the extra penalty stroke if you can get it out somehow with a normal stroke. Even a punch out is most likely going to be in better position than the lateral drop, back on the line in many cases is further out of the fairway and regardless goes the wrong way from the hole, and stroke and distance is basically eating two strokes for no gain.
What? If stuff is in your way, no relief. If you are able to make a reasonable shot, you are allowed relief?
in short: if it is an unplayable lie, you can't claim it is your stance that makes it unplayable.
Here's what I'll say. What is the definition of a reasonable stroke if I want to make that stroke? Yes, I could ricochet it off the tree, Yes, I could play it in the back of my stance to keep the ball down and if the stance or club is interfered with by that path I get a drop period, Now if the nearest point of relief is a worse position, I would consider the unplayable lie option. The referee cannot dictate to me what the reasonable or unreasonable stroke is if I want to hit a driver off of that lie or if I wanted to attempt to ricochet that ball backwards because that is what that lie is dictating or if I wanted to putt it or anything using a normal stroke. I'm not saying taking a 5ft wide stance, but if there was a stump there or tree root there that would dictate me taking that 5ft wide stance to play the shot I am envisioning...I get a drop sorry you are wrong there. Why do I know this, a USGA rules referee told me so in a tournament situation and I thought a player was trying to take advantage of the rule in question and I called the referee in for a ruling!
I'm not sure what this "USGA" ref told you, but there is such a thing as a reasonable and unreasonable stroke...it's in the book.
@@GolfRulesQuestions It was a USGA rules official. The rules official said player wanted to play a particular shot with a particular club, in the course of swinging that club because it was longer than an 8 iron it was hitting an obstruction. The player is allowed relief. That relief improved the lie, allowed the player to hit a lofted club onto the green and make bogey. The player played 2 balls. one he made bogey, one he made 7. Bogey counted, Player won his division by 2 shots...What is considered a reasonable shot. Is a ricochet a reasonable shot...answer the question? And if it is...., if my stance or club comes in contact with an obstruction, of course it could be to my advantage to then take advantage of a rule. That's the point of a rule. And just because you the referee cant play the shot I envision because you dont have the talent or imagination to execute the said shot, doesnt deem it unreasonable!
A reasonable shot is one where the player would make a stroke at their ball with a reasonable chance that they will advance it into a better position. An unreasonable stroke is one where a player is saying they make a stroke at their ball with a different club, swing, direction than they normally would, just so they can have interference from an abnormal course condition for which they want free from in order to get out of the poor lie they are in.
If the ball was in an animal scraping at the base of the tree would there be no free relief from the scraping because the tree was preventing a reasonable shot. I have seen golfers many times claiming relief from supposed animal scrapings to get relief from a bush or a tree.
If it wasn't the rabbit hole that was stopping the player from playing a reasonable stroke, then they would not be permitted free relief.
Example:
Ball in pipe underground outside of a penalty area. Pipe is an immovable obstruction, but it is the ground that is stopping the player from making a reasonable stroke. Therefore, free relief denied.
@@GolfRulesQuestions not sure I've got this clear. If the ball is in a scraping at the base of tree it might be that if the scraping wasn't there the tree roots would prevent a reasonable shot, i.e. the ball is unplayable but if the tree was not there the scraping was preventing a reasonable shot. Would there be free relief? Which obstruction has priority in decision making.
If the animal hole was not there, but you couldn't play a reasonable shot, then you wouldn't be permitted free relief.
If the tree is there, but you can play a reasonable stroke and you have interference from the animal hole, you would be entitled to free relief (other than in a penalty area).
@@GolfRulesQuestions thank you for that. I thought that was the case but wanted to be certain.
I think your best play is to knock it on the cart path and let it roll down the hill and take free relief at the bottom 🤣
I don’t know what you’re talking about. You should get free relief there. The way I would play that shot is directly into the tree, so that it would bounce backwards. Unless there’s some thing behind the camera that I don’t see. Any other direction put you either in those heavy brush area to the left, or hitting the ball towards the other trees. There’s no reason you wouldn’t get free relief from that.
Hitting it into the tree, hoping it will bounce into a better position just so you can say it's a viable option, would not be considered a reasonable stroke.
@@GolfRulesQuestions I'm not just saying that. It's what I would do, rather than taking a penalty. The ball isn't buried between roots, and you have a clear shot out it. In fact, if I was in a tournament and they ruled that I didn't get the free relief, I'd still take the shot. Now, if there were another tree behind you, or the area where you ended up dropping the ball was water or heavy brush, I'd agree with you. But the scenario you set up is, in my mind, a no brainer.
@@johnmiller7682 you're more than welcome to attempt the shot, but that doesn't mean you will be entitled to free relief. There are ways of hitting this shot with a clear direction of play, and in doing so, you wouldn't have interference with the immovable obstruction. If you were to try play a reasonable shot and you did have interference from the IO, then you would be entitled to free relief.
Actually you can't say she is not entitled to a second ruling as that is allowed.
That is incorrect. She is not entitled to a second opinion unless the first referee grants her that option.
@@GolfRulesQuestions I just watched DeChambeau do that.
@@wolfeson1 the attending referee allowed Bryson a second opinion.
@@GolfRulesQuestions ohhh bitch Bryson did that so what now? Delete your channel
@@jakefavre this is in the Terms of the Competition on the USPGA Tour, something the Committee added in that every player is permitted a second opinion, that’s not how the Rule is written, but is an option for the Committee.
lol it’s okay we have all day
I'd use my instep wedge to improve the lie
Simple, kick it to fairway when your buddies aren’t looking cuase your going to shoot 98 anyway so it won’t matter 😆
How you stand should not be judged by the rule
It certainly is.
Happy gilmore could make that shot around the tree to the flag
I bet Bryson would find a way to get free relief 🤣
Ants.
John Daly would find a way to get a free hamburger too! 🍔
Marcella is very pretty! Great video!
Just give her a free relief.... We are not playing for million dollars anyway....
Yes, I want free relief too when I go in the water. Rediculous statement. What's the point of having trees if you get a free drop if you go behind one.
Donald Trump woulda found a way
let it go Hillary lost
these types of rules and their ambiguity are some of the worst aspects of the greatest game.
You don't have to take relief, you always have the option of playing it as it lies.
@@aussieexpat yes. i agree. still doesnt stop players from taking 10 minutes to decide they dont want to take relief and they just wanna punch out 90 degrees....
Where’s the ambiguity?
@@petermcgill1315 littered throughout the entirety of the rules of the game.
Are we ever going to talk about the stupidity of golf rules?
You can justify playing into the tree here in my opinion as you may want to play for a ricochet.
A ricochet into dense bush? Maybe if the ricochet was onto the green, but not if you are just saying you will play a ricochet so you can claim interference from an immovable obstruction.
@@GolfRulesQuestions you can justify the ricochet to put the ball into the clear. As such free drop from the path. That's a lot more realistic then the grey area of one rule for one person, and a different rule for another "based on skill". You can't ajudicate on that nonsense.
The chance of it ricocheting into the clear is dependent on where the player is, and it also depends on the player’s skill level.
@@GolfRulesQuestions every ball I hit is based on luck (due to my skill level), does that mean I can never claim interference from an immovable obstruction?
@@Steve12314324 Even a beginner may have interference from an immovable obstruction for a reasonable stroke, where they don't even hit the ball.
Drop rule changes in 2023
Tin cup would prove you wrong for 50 bucks.
Denying relief based on reasonable vs unreasonable doesn't mean the player can't go ahead and attempt the stroke.
"Berry cobbler"....yikes
Lion territory.. If u found a lie from that.. Your lying
woah xhamster has gotten really cerebral recently…
I would play the ball of the tree so I would get relief
You wouldn't if the only reason you're playing into the tree is to get free relief.
Well pitching out to the left isn’t a good option because of the terrain. The best place to pitch out from that lie is where she dropped it. The only way to get it there is to take a lob wedge and play it off the tree. Since that is the way I want to play my shot I would get relief if my stance touches the cart path.
Here is the true question: Can a rules official force me to play off a cart path?
Yes, they could deny your request for relief based on it being an unreasonable stroke.
Sup girl
Lose the man bun
I saw a police officer with one of those ... smdh.
Jeezus. Keep taking those golf lessons so you can stay in the fairway. "brought me over here somehow."
3:56 "A player can ask for a second opinion, but it is up to the referee in determining whether they will allow them to have one". There are many strange rules in golf but this has to be one of the strangest I've ever seen. Surely the only time someone would ask for a second opinion is when they believe the referee's reasoning to be flawed.
Woman goes to his doctor.
Doctor: "It appears you are morbidly obese"
Woman: "I'd like a second opinion"
Doctor: "You're ugly"
Marcela is beautiful. She can teach me the rules anytime!