question about Solheim ruling Friday
 

when a ball is hit in a hazard, do you still have the option of returning to approx. area where the errant ball was originally hit or line of sight???

Peterseen group, not sure of partner's name during afternoon 4-ball, spent every bit of 25 to 30 minutes, first trying to locate ball then trying to determine where she could drop her ball with the assistance of a RANGE FINDER and a rules official and Anika S, assistant to European Team Captain and spokes-person for "While we are Young"....

In the mean time, Stacey Lewis shows concern that rules official gave actual yardage thru information that was gathered via range finder...Also to add to this comedy of errors, three groups are backed up on tee....This cannot be USGA's proudest moment!!

Sure would have been easier to take "line of sight" ruling and drop!

Rule 26-1 is here. USGA: Rules and Decisions

One option (26-1a) is to return to the place from which you hit into the hazard, NOT the approx area, remember what happened to Tiger in the Masters.

I am not sure what you mean by line of sight. You can go back as far as you want (26-1b) keeping the point the ball last crossed hazard between you and the hole.

I did not see match, but it sounds like she incorrectly tried to apply rule 26-1c. That rule applies to lateral hazards and allows the player to drop with two club lengths of the last point of entry or a point on the opposite side of hazard.

If I am correctly reading what she did, they allowed her to apply rule 26-1b keeping the point on the opposite side of the hazard between her and the flag. You can only apply 26-1b using the point the ball last crossed into hazard, not the point on opposite side.

Nice summary here, likely less confusing than mine :sigh:

2013 Solheim Cup - Stacy Lewis Furious Over Incorrect Ruling | Golf Channel

It was an incorrect ruling, but I think our gals didn't play very well anyway!

I love Stacey, but I think her frustration was really from her mediocre play, not so much from the ruling. She had a bad day for sure.

Watching the discussion, after the match, between Stacy Lewis, Dottie Pepper and the rules official left me with the impression that he did not understand that rule too well. Also not sure that the official using the range finder and then saying out loud the distance should have been doing that. Throw in 25 minutes to find the ball and decide on the proper drop location and you have a change in momentum.

But Stacy played poorly Friday and all of the above just did not help.

First of all:
THERE ARE NO SUCH TERMS IN THE RULES OF GOLF AS "LINE OF SIGHT" OR "LINE OF FLIGHT"!
I spent a lifetime trying to get people to stop using those terms. It is one of my pet peeves.

AJBrown has quoted the rule correctly.

That being said, I saw the situation, but I really wasn't paying attention. I was doing something else and the television was on in the background.

According to the story to which AJBrown posted a link, the ball was deemed to be in a lateral water hazard.

Brad Alexander, an official, was incorrect in that article. When a ball in in a lateral hazard, the player has two additional options under the rules. The options of a crossing water hazard are still available to the player and I believe that is what the player proceeded under.

As I said, I wasn't really paying attention. I did hear a bit if Stacy Lewis' complaint and discussion with the official and saw the video of the official using the range finder and giving the player a yardage. Her main complaint that, I heard, was that the official gave the player a yardage before she played.

I don't know why they would have been measuring yardage in this particular instance as the only relevance that distance to the hole has in this situation is hat the ball cannot be dropped closer to the hole than the point where it last crossed the margin of that hazard. That point could have easily been determined, as it had been done for two hundred years before the invention of the rang finder, without all that measuring.

There didn't seem to be any need for the official to be well to the left of the hazard, in the middle of the fairway, measuring distances.

Like I said, I wasn't there and really didn't pay that much attention to it, but based on what I know this official screwed up.

But, the bottom line here is that under the rules of golf the decision of an official, even if incorrect, stands. It would be very unfair to penalize a player for proceeding under an official's direction.

Dr. Winston
 

OOOOOh, Ouch!:loco::loco::wave::wave:
What I was trying to say, isn't there an option to go back to last shot, with penalty of course.....Let's face it the Rules of Golf are BORING and I personally have to make a mistake to remember ANY rule....Certainly didn't want your "pet peeves" to upset you!....Please forgive....See, I've learned a new golf rule thru my mistake, Do NOT upset Dr. Winston!

Yes. Playing the next shot from the spot of the previous shot (with penalty stroke added) is an option. It's not used often as the loss of distance can be significant. Essentially it is treating it as a lost ball or OB.

I agree with Stacy that the official erred in announcing the yardage out loud. All he had to do was note it, then find the spot opposite the point of entry with the same yardage. In effect, he provided the Euros with the precise information they needed.

However, I agree that overall, the Euros soundly outplayed the US team.

Sorry. Like I said I spent my life trying to get people to understand things like that. Line of sight and line of flight are two of the most misused terms when discussing the rules.

I agree, the rules can be very dry. But they are very important.

And like I said, this has been done for two hundred years without laser range finders.

As I said, I really wasn't paying attention. It appeared to me that the official was out in the middle of the fairway well to the left of the hazard taking some kind of measurement. Am I mistaken in that?

Conceded putt
 

Once again I learned something yesterday while watching the conceded putt "drama":

More Solheim Cup Drama Over Conceded Putt on Day 2 | Golf Channel

It had nothing to do with the concession or the potential infraction of rules by Annika giving advice. It was the fact that in a fourball match play, a player can continue to play the hole even though their next stroke is irrelevant.

Creamer was putting for par after Europe had already holed a birdie. I would have never thought to give an irrelevant putt? I likely would have made a fool of myself and said "Hey Paula what the heck are you doing, I already made 3; which may have started a brawl :laugh:

I happened to be watching it when this event occurred. The caddy yelled out the putt was good as Paula was moving her putter and things went downhill from there. Paula picked up and then after a discussion with the group official he asked Paula if she wanted to put the ball back down and putt it out. She did not play the ball.
As the on air rules official explained it, a caddy may not concede a putt in match play and if Paula had played that ball after picking it up then Lexi could not finish the hole and since Euro had already birdied the hole then USA would have lost the hole.
Another official that does not know the rules and I do not understand why there is not a penalty incurred for a breech like this by the caddy.

I agree! A caddy cannot concede a putt, but I don't know what violation he committed besides bad sportsmanship. I guess that if Paula had gone ahead and putted anyway to show Lexi the line, then Lexi would have been allowed to putt because Paula's putt was never officially conceded by one of the European players.

I don't believe that there was a question of a rules infraction by Annika. The USGA definition of advice is:

I don't believe that suggesting that a player concede a stroke is considered advice.

Secondly, although a player is allowed to play after a stroke has been conceded, that player may not do so in a fourball competition if by playing that stroke they would be assisting their partner.

Conceding a putt like that is very common in stroke play. I've had it done to me and have done it hundreds if not thousands of times. It is not poor sportsmanship.

The only poor sportsmanship, in my humble opinion, was Paula Creamer acting like a little crybaby over it. Yes, they probably should not have waited until she was ready to pull the trigger, but that does not excuse her behavior.

Creamer lost her singles match today----maybe yesterday had an effect on her play today. Pressel lost her match today too. So called U.S. "A" players didn't come through---not today.