Everyone
remember the relief from a bush that Bubba Watson was granted in Phoenix? Well, we’re back in Phoenix (Phoenix area)
for the LPGA Founders Championship, and this time we have a different result.
Morgan
Pressel was on a roll in her first
round. Through 11 holes she was -9 and
on the 3rd hole (her 12th) she found her ball nestled
comfortably in a desert bush. She called
over the official to ask about potential relief for a burrowing animal
hole. In Watson’s situation about a
month ago, he was granted relief because a burrowing animal hole interfered
with his area of intended swing for a reasonable, albeit difficult, stroke from
within the bush. In that case he was
granted relief and didn’t have to pull off the would-be miraculous punch out.
Pressel,
seeing burrowing animal holes in the vicinity, wondered if she might be
entitled to relief as well. The official
on site wisely asked the appropriate questions.
He asked how she would play the stroke, and she answered a left handed
shot. The official stated that would be
a reasonable stroke, however for the left-handed stroke there was no
interference from the burrowing animal hole.
Yes, her right-handed impracticable stroke might have her standing on a
hole, but the stroke she intended to play was left-handed and did not have
interference from that burrowing animal hole.
She had to take an unplayable and she dropped within two club-lengths of
where the ball lay, no nearer the hole with a one-stroke penalty in accordance
with Rule 28c.
This
exchange between Pressel and the official brings about some important tips for
applying the Rules and determining whether or not relief is available.
-First,
determine what the intended stroke is.
The same Exception comes in both Rules 24-2 and 25-1 that states, “A
player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interference by anything
other than an immovable obstruction/abnormal ground condition makes the stroke
clearly impracticable or (b) interference by an immovable obstruction/abnormal
ground condition would occur only through use of a clearly unreasonable stroke
or an unnecessarily abnormal stance, swing or direction of play.” The intended stroke must be reasonable and
the player can’t be using an abnormal stance in order to achieve
interference. In Pressel’s case, her
right-handed stroke that had some interference was clearly impracticable due to
the bush. Her left-handed stroke was
actually reasonable; however no interference occurred for that stroke.
-Then,
if there is interference for the intended stroke, the player must be able to
play the stroke. Is it reasonable? If so, determine relief for THAT stroke, not
the stroke the player wants to be able to play but can’t.
-Once
relief is taken for the intended stroke, if the player wishes to then turn
around and play normal-handed, that would be ok (see Decision 24-2b/17).
-Generally,
if the player would take an unplayable rather than play the stroke, it should
be considered impracticable.
Hope
that helps you when trying to determine if relief should be available in
particular dire situations.
No comments:
Post a Comment