Rules question

ronjo

I have a question that I am hoping to get clarity on.

I was playing a tournament yesterday and noticed that one of my partners was preparing to take a shot from deepish rough under a tree.
While checking his backswing he then purposely hit the branches with his club and after I found out that the intention was to knock the leaves that were causing an issue.

There were leaves obviously attached to a branch.
I was certain this was illegal as it was in no way part of his normal backswing but just whacked the branch a few times.

We agreed to check with marshall after and he said it was absolutely fine as he didnt break the branch but only knocked leaves.

Is this correct?

Berty44

No. Taking a leaf off on your practice swing is a penalty, rule 13.2

It is not a penalty to do in making your actual swing ( maybe this was what marshall thought ? )

ronjo

Berty44 wrote: »

No. Taking a leaf off on your practice swing is a penalty, rule 13.2

It is not a penalty to do in making your actual swing ( maybe this was what marshall thought ? )

THanks for the reply.

I was pretty sure of this but the discussion was in Slovak (I live over here) and marshall speaks very little English so the guy may have been liberal with the truth.

The thing that really p*ssed me off was he made a big point after of saying how I didnt know the rules.

Wichita Lineman

^ not exactly correct.


Merely changing an area protected by Rule 13-2 will not be a breach of Rule 13-2 unless it creates such a potential advantage for the player in his or her play.


Examples of changes that are unlikely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:
Accidentally knocks down several leaves from a tree in the area of intended swing with a practice swing, but there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected.

It is however a breach if as it sounds above he deliberately whacked leaves off the tree. If you do it accidentally in the course of a routine practice swing along the intended shot line there is no penalty. It's what he intended to do that matters in this case I think.

ronjo

Wichita Lineman wrote: »

^ not exactly correct.


Merely changing an area protected by Rule 13-2 will not be a breach of Rule 13-2 unless it creates such a potential advantage for the player in his or her play.


Examples of changes that are unlikely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:
Accidentally knocks down several leaves from a tree in the area of intended swing with a practice swing, but there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected.

It is however a breach if as it sounds above he deliberately whacked leaves off the tree. If you do it accidentally in the course of a routine practice swing along the intended shot line there is no penalty. It's what he intended to do that matters in this case I think.

Well yes sure thats why I said he "purposely whacked it a few times"

I am annoyed with myself for not arguing more as the attitude over here towards the rules can be really bad.

ETA, I see you were probably referring to the first reply and not to my OP

PARlance

ronjo wrote: »

I have a question that I am hoping to get clarity on.

I was playing a tournament yesterday and noticed that one of my partners was preparing to take a shot from deepish rough under a tree.
While checking his backswing he then purposely hit the branches with his club and after I found out that the intention was to knock the leaves that were causing an issue.

There were leaves obviously attached to a branch.
I was certain this was illegal as it was in no way part of his normal backswing but just whacked the branch a few times.

We agreed to check with marshall after and he said it was absolutely fine as he didnt break the branch but only knocked leaves.

Is this correct?

Rule 13-2 is the one to look for on this.

Bit of a strange scenario above as the player has clearly stated that he intended to improve the area of his swing. Did he make the rules official aware of that part?

The application of the rule is fairly subjective, you can swing and have a few leaves fall and it may not necessarily be improving your swing. Sometimes it might. Generally the removal of a branch or twig is seen as a breach.

We don't know if your partner actually knocked down any branches, twigs or leaves? If he did, and he clearly says he intended to (not that intent comes into it) improve his swing then it's against the rules.

Berty44

The question really comes down to does the practice swing improve the intended swing.

In circumstances it could be argued that if you have a heavily leafed tree there are so many leaves on the tree removing a couple could be deemed merely incidental and not improving the area of intended swing. Its a little ambiguous so this may also be the reason why the marshall indicated that decision as well. However I think that's a difficult one to argue and would agree with your interpretation, although I'm sure there are those who would argue differently !!

Edit: adding this for clarity on the rule as you said he "purposely"

2nd Edit: Was typing this when all the other contributors clarified the potential ambiguity !

Wichita Lineman

I agree with your interpretation of what you described ronjo, it's Berty44 I reckon is not entirely correct as he basically said there would be a penalty for a leaf knocked - end of.

ronjo

PARlance wrote: »

Rule 13-2 is the one to look for on this.

Bit of a strange scenario above as the player has clearly stated that he intended to improve the area of his swing. Did he make the rules official aware of that part?

The application of the rule is fairly subjective, you can swing and have a few leaves fall and it may not necessarily be improving your swing. Sometimes it might. Generally the removal of a branch or twig is seen as a breach.

We don't know if your partner actually knocked down any branches, twigs or leaves? If he did, and he clearly says he intended to improve his swing then it's against the rules for me.

He definitely knocked a few leaves.

To be honest I am pretty sure he actually attempted to hit the ball first, missed it and then took his anger out on the branch.
when the guy marking him quizzed him on it he denied it though and I wasnt close enough to be certain.

I was however close enough to see him then whack the branch 3 times.

PARlance

ronjo wrote: »

He definitely knocked a few leaves.

To be honest I am pretty sure he actually attempted to hit the ball first, missed it and then took his anger out on the branch.
when the guy marking him quizzed him on it he denied it though and I wasnt close enough to be certain.

I was however close enough to see him then whack the branch 3 times.

It's a little bit of a grey area in that leaves can fall and there may be no penalty, but I think your example is as black as they come in grey areas.

Berty44

Wichita Lineman wrote: »

I agree with your interpretation of what you described ronjo, it's Berty44 I reckon is not entirely correct as he basically said there would be a penalty for a leaf knocked - end of.

My reply was based on him "purposely" hitting the branches.

ronjo

PARlance wrote: »

It's a little bit of a grey area in that leaves can fall and there may be no penalty, but I think your example is as black as they come in grey areas.

I am going to raise it again in general next time I am there.

The marshalls have a poor grasp of the rules in general as far as I can make out and I want to see if it was either

1. The guy lied after the round when giving his explanation. I am surprised if he could have though as his marker was there listening and he was in agreement with me.
or
2. The head marshall really doesnt know this obvious rule.

PARlance

ronjo wrote: »

I am going to raise it again in general next time I am there.

The marshalls have a poor grasp of the rules in general as far as I can make out and I want to see if it was either

1. The guy lied after the round when giving his explanation. I am surprised if he could have though as his marker was there listening and he was in agreement with me.
or
2. The head marshall really doesnt know this obvious rule.

Sounds fairly suspect to me.

Another angle (and it'd be an odd one) could possibly be that he admitted to trying to improve the area of his swing but he said that whilst some leaves fell, they weren't improving his swing. i.e He tried to cheat and failed in doing so.

And while that would go against the spirit of the game, he wouldn't have broken a rule imo.

ronjo

PARlance wrote: »

Sounds fairly suspect to me.

Another angle (and it'd be an odd one) could possibly be that he admitted to trying to improve the area of his swing but he said that whilst some leaves fell, they weren't improving his swing. i.e He tried to cheat and failed in doing so.

And while that would go against the spirit of the game, he wouldn't have broken a rule imo.

The crux of the reply what I understood that leaves dont count, only branches which sort of rules out the changes that he might have lied.

I will look for clarification again next week if I can. It wouldnt bother me so much if the guy hadnt made a big show after of telling me I dont know the rules.

HighLine

Q.Rule 13-2 prohibits a player from improving certain areas. What does "improve" mean?

A.In the context of Rule 13-2, "improve" means to change for the better so that the player gains a potential advantage with respect to the position or lie of his ball, the area of his intended stance or swing, his line of play or a reasonable extension of that line beyond the hole, or the area in which he is to drop or place a ball. Therefore, merely changing an area protected by Rule 13-2 will not be a breach of Rule 13-2 unless it creates such a potential advantage for the player in his play.

Examples of changes that are unlikely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:

>repairs a small pitch-mark on his line of play five yards in front of his ball prior to making a 150-yard approach shot from through the green;

>accidentally knocks down several leaves from a tree in his area of intended swing with a practice swing, but there are still so many leaves or branches remaining that the area of intended swing has not been materially affected; or

>whose ball lies in thick rough 180 yards from the green, walks forward and pulls strands of grass on his line of play and tosses them in the air to determine the direction of the wind.


Examples of changes that are likely to create such a potential advantage are if a player:

>repairs a pitch-mark through the green five yards in front of his ball and on his line of play prior to making a stroke from off the putting green that might be affected by the pitch-mark (e.g., a putt or a low-running shot);

>accidentally knocks down a single leaf from a tree in his area of intended swing with a practice swing, but, as this was one of very few leaves that might either interfere with his swing or fall and thereby distract him, the area of intended swing has been materially affected; or

>pulls strands of grass from rough a few inches behind his ball to test the wind, but thereby reduces a potential distraction for the player, or resistance to his club, in the area of his intended swing.

The determination as to whether a player has gained a potential advantage from his actions is made by reference to the situation immediately prior to his stroke. If there is a reasonable possibility that the player's action has created a potential advantage, the player is in breach of Rule 13-2.