Eagleton Golf resort is becoming popular. For the last two years, KGA and BGC golf courses were in various phases of renovation and Eagleton got the privilege to host many tournaments in Bangalore.A few months back, it hosted the All India Ladies Tournament.
Aditi Ashok is a budding young star hardly 8 years old.She is very serious about her golf.I see her regularly in my home course BGC, practicing, with her father Ashok. She won the match play in Ladies bronze category, beating many older seasoned Ladies. Aditi,is also a eager learner of Rules. She also participated in the Stroke Play for Ladies.
Eagleton has a lot of paved buggy paths.Free relief is provided under R 24-2 for these paved paths.
During her stroke play round,On par 4 ,Hole no 16,her ball was on a paved buggy path close to the Green. She was not sure about her rights about free relief under R 24-2.We had only 2 referees- Dasharathy and I.She could not get a ruling immediately. Rightly, she invoked R 3-3 and opted to play 2 balls- the original ball as it lay and a second ball with relief under R 24-2.Strangely, she announced that original ball to count, if rules permit.She scored a 5 with the original ball and a 4 with the second ball dropped under R 24-2. She checked with me , before submitting her card about which score to put for the hole. She confirmed she announced her original ball to count.Under the circumstances,I told her that her score for the hole will be 5 under
R 3-3b. Later I inferred that she probably misunderstood the term "to count"as a better score of the two balls she played rather than the advance nomination of her choice.
This incident also led to a heated debate between me and fellow referee Dasharathy.He argued that a player had no right to nominate the original ball to count.I pointed out that Rules should cover many situations. For example,if a ball is in GUR on the putting Green 1 foot from the hole and relief may take the ball to 3 ft from the hole and if the player is not sure about his rights, he may invoke R 3-3 and announce his original ball to count.Dasharathy also argued in Aditi's case, she could be docked under R 6-7(undue Delay) for invoking R 3-3 and then nominating the original ball! May be , he had a point there.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Ball At Rest Moved
Coimbatore in South India is a favourite place for me-not only for its climate which is very similar to my home town Bangalore,but also for providing interesting Rules episodes. Sampathchari,Tournament Director, PGTI and one of the best known tournament officials in the Indian and Asian circuit invited me to assist him as a referee in the Coimbatore Open conducted by PGTI from Aug 20-23. 08. Sampath Chari commands a lot of respect from the players and Referees.
The tournament was keenly fought and won by the mercurial Digvijay Singh narrowly.On the third day,after the cut, many of the seasoned pros were jockeying for a place at the top.Rafiq Ali, one of the veteran pros was fighting hard. On the par 3, Hole 14, his tee shot fell short of the green.The ball was at rest on a slight slope.The player , for purpose of measuring,paced his steps.When he was taking his strides, the ball moved about 6 inches from the original position and came to rest. The player called me for a Ruling.He confirmed that he had not addressed the ball and the ball when he was pacing his steps.I concluded that the players action of pacing close to the ball caused the ball to move and applied one stroke penalty under R 18-2.I was also guided by analogous decision 18-2a/30 when a ball in play is moved due to several practice swings about one foot from ball.However,Rafiq Ali appealed to Tournament Director Sampath Chari.After examining the issues, Sampath Chari gave the benefit of doubt to the player and reversed my decision and allowed the player to play the ball from its new position, without penalty.He also weighed in the wind factor, which was heavy and the slope. He was guided by decision 18/10.
The tournament was keenly fought and won by the mercurial Digvijay Singh narrowly.On the third day,after the cut, many of the seasoned pros were jockeying for a place at the top.Rafiq Ali, one of the veteran pros was fighting hard. On the par 3, Hole 14, his tee shot fell short of the green.The ball was at rest on a slight slope.The player , for purpose of measuring,paced his steps.When he was taking his strides, the ball moved about 6 inches from the original position and came to rest. The player called me for a Ruling.He confirmed that he had not addressed the ball and the ball when he was pacing his steps.I concluded that the players action of pacing close to the ball caused the ball to move and applied one stroke penalty under R 18-2.I was also guided by analogous decision 18-2a/30 when a ball in play is moved due to several practice swings about one foot from ball.However,Rafiq Ali appealed to Tournament Director Sampath Chari.After examining the issues, Sampath Chari gave the benefit of doubt to the player and reversed my decision and allowed the player to play the ball from its new position, without penalty.He also weighed in the wind factor, which was heavy and the slope. He was guided by decision 18/10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)