[AlbertC]

Since I have waaaaay too much time on my hands some days, I did some research on Na's situation. According to the Rules of Golf, there are nine situations when a dropped ball must be re-dropped.
Included on the list is a ruling that a dropped ball must be re-dropped if it "rolls and comes to rest more than two club-lengths from where it first struck a part of the course." In this situation, the ball "must be placed as near as possible to the spot where it first struck a part of the course when re-dropped."
Most likely, Na, after stepping away several times, eventually dropped and re-dropped the ball, which probably bounced and rolled more than two club-lengths from the point it initially struck the path. He then would have had to place the ball on that spot on the cart path.

[Pturner]

Hi AlbertC,
I understand where you're coming from. When I saw him drop on the cart path, my thought was that it might have been his third drop (the camera wasn't on him at first), and that he had hoped it would roll too far so he could place it. Or that it was his first drop, but that he planned to keep dropping it on the path and let it roll too far. If that was his intent though, you would never know it by his reaction. He seemed not at all surprised that it stayed on the path and seemed perfectly happy to hit it from there.

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by Pturner

Hi AlbertC,
I understand where you're coming from. When I saw him drop on the cart path, my thought was that it might have been his third drop (the camera wasn't on him at first), and that he had hoped it would roll too far so he could place it. Or that it was his first drop, but that he planned to keep dropping it on the path and let it roll too far. If that was his intent though, you would never know it by his reaction. He seemed not at all surprised that it stayed on the path and seemed perfectly happy to hit it from there.

NO - If he was taking relief from the path he wouldn't be dropping on the path. He would need to take complete relief. The re drop thing and then again and then spot it applies to the relief being taken. He was not taking relief from the cart path or he would not have been able to place it on the path.

That is what we were discussing earlier. He had to be taking relief from something OTHER than the path.

[jimbo2012]

How does this sound, an official can define something during the round that was not marked as GUR at the beginning of the round.

Well the ground was tore up by the bystanders, which i believe he can get free relief from because the PGA allows it because its not the original condition of the course or caused by other players (divots), it was damaged by outside forces.

If he were taking relief from the cart path, he must take full relief. If however, he had two conditions, the cart path (which is an obstruction) and GUR, which is an Abnormal Ground Condition, he is not required to take relief from both. He may take relief from one and not the other.

I do not know what actually was talked about with the rules official, but taking relief from an Abnormal Ground Condition (GUR) does allow your Nearest Point of Relief to be on an Obstruction (Cart Path).

It's up to the player whether or not he wants to take relief from the Cart Path after taking relief from the GUR.

The reverse would also be true allowing a player to take relief from a cart path and drop in an Abnormal Ground Condition.


.

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by jimbo2012

How does this sound, an official can define something during the round that was not marked as GUR at the beginning of the round.

Well the ground was tore up by the bystanders, which i believe he can get free relief from because the PGA allows it because its not the original condition of the course or caused by other players (divots), it was damaged by outside forces.

If he were taking relief from the cart path, he must take full relief. If however, he had two conditions, the cart path (which is an obstruction) and GUR, which is an Abnormal Ground Condition, he is not required to take relief from both. He may take relief from one and not the other.

I do not know what actually was talked about with the rules official, but taking relief from an Abnormal Ground Condition (GUR) does allow your Nearest Point of Relief to be on an Obstruction (Cart Path).

It's up to the player whether or not he wants to take relief from the Cart Path after taking relief from the GUR.

The reverse would also be true allowing a player to take relief from a cart path and drop in an Abnormal Ground Condition.


.

I think you are correct. I have seen this happen a few times.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by PennBF

For those who follow the rules. Originally, when golf was first played there were only 3 rules. (1) Play the ball as it lies, (2) Play the course as it is and
(3) If you can't do either, do what is fair.
We now have rules books 5 -6 inches thick trying to define these 3 basic
rules.

Well, that's not exactly the way it was. What you have quoted is the basic premise upon which the rules are founded.
An original rule book was found at St Andrews and it contains 13 rules. One of which was that if you felt that your ball was unplayable you could take relief, except that if your opponent felt that you were trying to take the easy way out, he was allowed to try to play your ball and if he was successful in extricating your ball from it's position, any stokes that he took would be added to your score.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Under the rules, an official may declare any part of the course to be GUR or an abnormal ground condition at any time.