Welcome
Welcome to golfrules

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!

MGA 2017 Q3

MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Doug » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:29 pm

3. A competitor is about to tee off. As he begins his downswing, the ball is deflected off the tee by a wayward shot from an adjacent fairway. The competitor completes his swing.

What is the ruling?
A) The stroke doesn’t count and the ball should be replaced.
B) The stroke doesn’t count and the ball should be played as it lies.
C) The stroke counts and the ball should be replaced.
D) The stroke counts and the ball should be played as it lies.
User avatar
Doug
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Wetherby, UK
Your location: UK

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Colin L » Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:16 pm

A)
As soon as the player's ball is hit by the wayward ball, he is not in my view completing his swing with the intention of striking at and moving his ball. You can't have an intention to hit something that isn't there. I'm not, however, sure how to differentiate this situation from that of the ball falling off the tee. The player has a responsibility to tee up securely whereas he has no control over the wayward ball?
Colin L
 
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:55 pm
Your location: Edinburgh

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Doug » Thu Feb 02, 2017 10:22 pm

A) 18-1
User avatar
Doug
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Wetherby, UK
Your location: UK

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Wendy » Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:26 pm

18-5. But, the ball is not in play until the player makes a stroke at the ball. He has just begun his downswing, not yet made a stroke.
Wendy
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:45 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Wendy » Fri Feb 03, 2017 12:21 am

Correction! Doug is correct. The ball played from another hole is an outside agency.
Wendy
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:45 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby RJM » Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:09 am

Wendy wrote:18-5. But, the ball is not in play until the player makes a stroke at the ball. He has just begun his downswing, not yet made a stroke.

Doesn't 14/1 suggest that he has made a stroke (unless his intent ceased as in 14/1.5)? I offer that 14/1 would be applicable whether the club moved or the ball moved.
RJM
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Doug » Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:45 am

I would suggest that 14/1.5 would, in equity, be more appropriate in that his swing line was not aimed at the (new) position of the ball.
User avatar
Doug
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Wetherby, UK
Your location: UK

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Halebopp » Fri Feb 03, 2017 12:56 pm

It is stated in the question he completed the swing. In my opinion it would say something else if his intention had changed once the ball started to move.

Thus, in my opinion he made a stroke. I don't like it but that's the way I see it.
Halebopp
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:29 pm
Your location: Finland

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby RJM » Fri Feb 03, 2017 3:02 pm

If he made a stroke at the ball, then the ball is in play.
Don't agree with using equity to apply 14/1.5 as the situation is covered in 14/1, and the last sentence of 14/1.5 says any doubt should be resolved against the player.
I don't see anything in the Rules about "aiming the club at the ball", only an intent to strike at and move the ball.
RJM
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3a#

Postby Ron » Fri Feb 03, 2017 4:50 pm

Hi All,

My two pence FWIW.
D is my choice.
The player, having started and completed his downswing, has by definition, made a stroke.
Accordingly, the stroke counts in his score for the hole, and the ball is in play, and should be played as it lies if he wishes to AVOID any penalty under S&D should he decide to lift and re-tee the ball. See answer attached to D18-2/2.

Regards,
Ron
Ron
 
Posts: 1564
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:33 am
Location: Gloucester

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby regole » Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:20 pm

Hi Ron and All,
In Decision 18-2/2 is the player who caused his ball to move.
In our case, according to the definition, stroke does not exist because the ball from hitting, to an external cause, there is no longer.
Agree answer A)
regole
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:16 pm
Your location: Cagliari / Sardegna

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Adrian Mackenzie » Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:44 pm

I opt for D) after referring to the definitions of Stroke and Ball in Play.
Adrian Mackenzie
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 7:18 pm
Your location: SP Brazil

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby RJM » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:35 pm

It's interesting that Rule 18 is remarkably inconsistent in saying whether the ball at rest and moved was in play or not in play. It is however, very consistent in saying that the moved ball MUST be replaced. Yet all of the answer choices say the ball SHOULD be replaced.
RJM
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Chippings » Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:02 pm

Well spotted Rjm
I noted the same anomaly.
Actually the only option where the second part of the sentence is correct in relation to the first part of the sentence is D where it states "the ball shoild be played as it lies."
As you stated the wording is incorrect for all other options.
So this is the answer MGA are expecting.

As a secondary note I cannot think of a situation where rule 18 applies to a ball that is not in play.

However equity could be adopted for a ball on a tee moved by a spectator / bird. ( outside agency ) before it is in put into play by a stroke .The O/A would have to be very fast and I believe the player would have good grounds for such an appeal.
I do not believe MGA are thinking down these lines.
As usual the question needs more information than supplied.
Chippings
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:00 pm
Your location: Bristol

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Doug » Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:11 pm

Chippings wrote:As usual the question needs more information than supplied.

I don't necessarily disagree but what information do you believe is needed?
User avatar
Doug
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Wetherby, UK
Your location: UK

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Chippings » Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:32 pm

Fair question Doug.

Intent to strike or not.

If the ball disappears from the tee early on during the downswing it is much easier just to swing through rather than stop or deviate .( Tiger woods excepted)
Yet if the ball moves at the last moment the intent is probably still there.

I remember the tour last year having to interview Kevin Na when he continued a ferocious swing at the ball and missed it.
After the round they accepted his explanation that he decided not to strike it half way down even though to all the onlookers ,etc it looked like an air shot off the tee.
Chippings
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:00 pm
Your location: Bristol

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby jhansen31 » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:06 pm

A competitor is about to tee off. As he begins his downswing, the ball is deflected off the tee by a wayward shot from an adjacent fairway. The competitor completes his swing. What is the ruling?
Answer = D

Dec 19-1/2
Player's Ball Deflected by Stroke of Player in Another Group
Q.A hit his ball over onto another fairway where, before it came to rest, it was struck by X in the course of striking his own ball. X's ball went 20 yards. A's ball could not be found. What is the ruling?
A.Each player was an outside agency in relation to the other.
Under Rule 19-1, A would have been obliged to play his ball as it lay, without penalty, if it had been found. Since it was not found, A must proceed under Rule 27-1. X must play his ball as it lies, without penalty.


Competitor made a stroke as the definition is:
A "stroke" is the forward movement of the club made with the intention of striking at and moving the ball, but if a player checks his downswing voluntarily before the clubhead reaches the ball he has not made a stroke
Nothing in the description of the situation states he tried to check it.
jhansen31
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:58 pm
Your location: USA

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby golfbuddy3 » Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:14 am

First time post here. Have enjoyed reading and studying these Rules questions. I am a beginner when it comes to learning the Rules, but after reading D1-4/1, the definition of Stroke, R18-1 and/or R18-5, I vote for answer C. I will be interested to know the answer.
golfbuddy3
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:12 pm
Your location: USA

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby auatay » Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:08 pm

Sequence of events is important.
In my opinion: Ball in play and at rest (ball became in play once the downswing started) had been moved by an outside agency and MUST be replaced (18-1).
As the ball was moved before the competitor may have attempted to check downswing, whether the downswing was stopped voluntarily or completed becomes irrelevant and the stroke doesn't count.
auatay
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:34 am
Your location: Ankara

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby marcalex » Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:15 pm

C) I think (Without much conviction :) )
Definition of "Stroke" (nothing indicate that the intent to strike has stopped, and the ball was there when the stroke has begun).
R18-1 : don't matter if the ball was in play or not at the moment it has been moved, R18-1 say that a ball mouved by OA must be replaced.
marcalex
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:51 pm
Location: France
Your location: Golf of Bussy

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby regole » Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:01 pm

regole wrote:Hi Ron and All,
In Decision 18-2/2 is the player who caused his ball to move.
In our case, according to the definition, stroke does not exist because the ball from hitting, to an external cause, there is no longer.
Agree answer A)


Hi All
I reflected for a while about this situation that I consider very intriguing.
It 's my opinion but the sequence of events is very important for the ruling.
By definition of a stroke, when the player He began his downswing that ball was in play. Waves so that, again for the definition of stroke, the player not having checked his downswing voluntarily, has made a stroke. At this point the stroke counts, however, since the ball in play has been moved by an OA, under the rule 18-1 the ball should be replaced.
So my answer is C)
regole
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:16 pm
Your location: Cagliari / Sardegna

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby RJM » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:02 am

regole wrote:
regole wrote:Hi Ron and All,
In Decision 18-2/2 is the player who caused his ball to move.
In our case, according to the definition, stroke does not exist because the ball from hitting, to an external cause, there is no longer.
Agree answer A)


Hi All
I reflected for a while about this situation that I consider very intriguing.
It 's my opinion but the sequence of events is very important for the ruling.
By definition of a stroke, when the player He began his downswing that ball was in play. Waves so that, again for the definition of stroke, the player not having checked his downswing voluntarily, has made a stroke. At this point the stroke counts, however, since the ball in play has been moved by an OA, under the rule 18-1 the ball should be replaced.
So my answer is C)


Rule 18-1 is intriguing because it doesn't specify that the ball at rest and moved was a ball in play. Further, Rule 18-1 says that the ball MUST be replaced. All of the prospective answers use SHOULD. Does this imply an equity decision?
RJM
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby regole » Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:48 am

RJM wrote:
regole wrote:
regole wrote:Hi Ron and All,
In Decision 18-2/2 is the player who caused his ball to move.
In our case, according to the definition, stroke does not exist because the ball from hitting, to an external cause, there is no longer.
Agree answer A)


Hi All
I reflected for a while about this situation that I consider very intriguing.
It 's my opinion but the sequence of events is very important for the ruling.
By definition of a stroke, when the player He began his downswing that ball was in play. Waves so that, again for the definition of stroke, the player not having checked his downswing voluntarily, has made a stroke. At this point the stroke counts, however, since the ball in play has been moved by an OA, under the rule 18-1 the ball should be replaced.
So my answer is C)


Rule 18-1 is intriguing because it doesn't specify that the ball at rest and moved was a ball in play. Further, Rule 18-1 says that the ball MUST be replaced. All of the prospective answers use SHOULD. Does this imply an equity decision?


Hi RJM,
I think that since by definition the stroke begins with the downswing by then even the the ball, always by definition, is in play,
regole
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:16 pm
Your location: Cagliari / Sardegna

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Chippings » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:37 pm

Rjm
We are thinking on the same lines.

A and B are definitely wrong as the wording is inaccurate even allowing for equity.
The only correct wording based on the rules without equity is D
C would only be an option if equity is used for the reason you have stated " should instead of must (18-1)
So if equity is an option and C is MGA suggested answer then it is only an opinion.
Equity is a decision by the Committee when
"This is situation which has not been contemplated by the rules."

As I stated in an earlier post-- if the ball was moved very early in the downswing by an outside agency leaving the player with no chance to strike the ball, the Commiittee may decide that the player be allowed to replay the stroke.

Imagine the furore at a top tournament if the committee ruled a stroke
Chippings
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:00 pm
Your location: Bristol

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby kjellkri » Sun Feb 26, 2017 12:25 pm

My opinion:
Rule 18-1 is not applicable as play of the hole has not begun.
The reason for "ball at rest" and not "ball in play" is to cover a provisional ball, a second ball etc.
If you mark your ball on the green and set it aside rule 18 is not applicable for that ball.

It would also be utterly unfair to the player if the stroke was to count when he had no possibility to influence the situation.
kjellkri
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2013 11:37 am
Location: Falkenberg, Sweden
Your location: Falkenberg, Sweden

Re: MGA 2017 Q3

Postby Doug » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:15 pm

C R18-5, Def. Stroke & Ball in Play
User avatar
Doug
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Wetherby, UK
Your location: UK


Return to MGA Quiz 2017

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
suspicion-preferred