|
| | |
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 08/07/2009 11:50:29
Posts: 1, Visits: 9 |
| | Last Sunday I was asked by my playing partner to mark my ball that was in the rough (1 yard away).The ball was not interfering with line or stance and in no danger of being hit. My playing partner claimed it was in his line of site and interfering with his play. Was he correct to ask me to mark my ball? |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 25/02/2010 08:29:55
Posts: 33, Visits: 267 |
| Hi Erik,
Rule 22-2 says that a player may have another ball lifted if he considers it MIGHT interfere with his play.
The word 'might' is interesting, because, as so often in the Rules, it leaves room for debate.
I would say one yard away was doubtful, but within a margin for debate.
But there is no such thing as line of sight interference by another ball.
In fairness though, you lose nothing by marking and lifting your ball.
Just remember, you must not clean your ball when it is lifted in these circumstances.
I hope this helps,
ATB,
SH. |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 25/02/2010 08:29:55
Posts: 33, Visits: 267 |
| Hi again Erik,
I must apologise, I gave you some duff information.
A player may have another ball lifted on the grounds of 'mental interference'.
Here is a Decision from the R&A Decisions Book.
22/1 Mental Interference by Another Ball
Q. In order for A to be entitled to have B's ball lifted because of interference, does B's ball have to be on or near A's line of play and thus in a position to interfere physically with A's ball? Or may A also have B's ball lifted if it is off his line of play but catches his eye and thus constitutes mental interference?
A. A player may, under Rule 22-2, have another ball lifted if the ball interferes either physically or mentally with his play.
Interestingly though, a player is not allowed relief from an Immovable Obstruction on the grounds of 'mental interference'.
ATB,
SH. |
| |
|
|