MGA Quiz 2019 •
HiMr. Bean wrote: ↑37 minutes agoWho did you get that answer from? David? Conor? Shona? Kevin? Grant?FrazNic wrote: ↑2:38 PM - TodayThom... following our PM exchange... I forgot to add that I sent this to the R&A and they did reply to confirm the player would have no option but to take S&D under 18.1 as they cannot identify their original ball.Thom wrote: ↑9:10 AM - Jun 03The key point for me is both 18.3c(2) AND 18.3c(3) provide a precise fit. So RBs have introduced a problem and only they can resolve it. I think there is little point in arguing which is the better fit.
IMO, it is highly unlikely the Clarifications system is going to be used for this kind of obscure issue.
On Fraser's new bizarre/unlikely question, there is only one published rule in the book that fits this situation - the original ball can no longer be identified so the player is looking at S&D unless the original ball can again be reliably identified - similar to the situation in the fourth bullet point in 18.2a(1)/1. It is a bizzare way to lose a ball. IMO, the only way we can avoid penalising, is if RBs rule no penalty out of some kind of "it's so unfair, 20.3 should apply" mentality. Personally, I'm not sympathetic, the player should be responsible for their dumb mistake.
I note this question has sat on the USGA Rules of Golf public discussion Facebook page for nearly a fortnight but the USGA has not been moved to answer.
Cheers
Fraz
On this occasion, it was simply signed by The R&A Rules Team... no individual name was provided.
Thx
Fraser
statistics: Posted by FrazNic — 33 minutes ago