Get a Ruling • Re: Ground under repair

Doug wrote:

Thom wrote:

Doug wrote:

We don't don't know the ball didn't cross the margin as we don't know where it is. We must make an assumption. IMO of course.

Perhaps that is the case.  But we can envisage a case where that is not feasible.  On Chippings OP, canopy spread to 10yards+ from the ground level margin of the GUR, we can easily imagine a situation where there is no possible way the ball has crossed the ground level margin of the GUR on it's way to being lost KVC in the canopy:  picture a situation where that canopy is directly between the ball and the hole; the ball is close to the ground level GUR markings but those markings are not between the ball and the line to the hole - in fact the player is hitting away from the ground level GUR markings.  Shot hits a surface root in front on the ball and pops directly up into the canopy while staying on the line to the hole.  So in this situation, there is absolutely no doubt, the ball did not cross any ground level marking of the GUR, in fact it never got any closer to the GUR marking than where the shot was taken from.

How do we comply now with the rules?  R25-1c does not appear to give us an answer unless we can use the footprint of the canopy - nothing else in that rule applies.  This would seem to be yet another situation not contemplated by the Rules.  So perhaps we use R1-4 to point to the point of crossing the footprint of the canopy?  I can't come up with any other solution.

As good as any I suppose but I won't worry about it until it happens 

Edit. If a tree and GUR may present such a difficult situation, why not simply mark the tree base as not in the GUR?

Statistics: Posted by Thom — Today, 00:28