Ball assumed to be in hazzard is found after another ball is played.

[Kilroy]

This came up in our qualifier... On Manderley Central 7 there is a 2 tiered water hazard. The upper level is not visible from the fairway. The fountain is in the upper pond.

The player hits his third shot over the lower pond and sees a splash in the upper one. He drops a ball where the first one crossed over the hazard and plays to the green. When we reach the green we see his first ball laying in the rough, having obviously skipped on the water, but ending up on dry land. So much for seeing a splash being reasonable evidence that the ball is in the water hazard LOL!

We figured that the dropped ball is the ball in play and he lay 5 with it on the green. We were pretty sure we had the correct ruling, but the player finished with both balls just in case, scoring a 5 and a 7 respectively.

I never did hear how the commitee ruled on that, but I wanted to confirm that this was the correct ruling. In my opinion it is unfair to the player, but my opinion is not the issue here

[AAA]

At the time the second ball was dropped it would seem the player had determined that there was reasonable evidence that the original was lost in the WH.
In which case the second ball is the ball in play. The original may not be played.

[Gary Hill]

In my opinion it is unfair to the player...

You are correct that the player should have continued play with the dropped ball.

A dropped ball is the ball in play under Rule 27-1 and the player should have been penalized two strokes under Rule 15 (Wrong Ball; Substsituted Ball) for subsequently playing the original ball into the hole.

He would evidently have a score of 9.

What specifically is the "it" that you think is unfair to the player?

[Kilroy]

He did play out the second ball. He also played out the first ball in accordance with the proceedure for a uncertain ruling. Why should he be further penalized for that?

I think it's unfair that under circumstances like that, where the ball is in a blind area, and the reasonable evidence is incorrect but acted upon, the original ball must be abandoned. I get it, we knew it, we don't have to like it.

No, I was not the player involved

[Gary Hill]

In your post there was no mention of declaring a second ball BEFORE the second ball was dropped.

There is no such thing as incorrect reasonable evidence.

It was not reasonable BEFORE he walked forward.

[Kilroy]

Are you saying that there was a penalty incurred for playing out both balls and bringing it to the committee?

OK, so in this case we now know for sure that the dropped ball was the ball in play. At the time there was some doubt as to the ruling, so he covered his butt in the way prescribed by the rules (to the best of our collective knowlege), but i guess we were right about the ruling and wrong about the proceedure for uncertainty.

What would you have reccommended he do instead in light of the uncertanty over the ruling?

[gbower]

We told our guys that if there was a question about a ruling to play a second ball and it would be settled after the matches as we don't have rules officials on the course during our local tournaments or qualifying. I think that this is the only fair way to do it. I think that this is what was done in the situation you descibed and I see nothing wrong with that.

[AAA]

He should have declared that he was playinf a second ball under Rule 3-3.
After the doubtful situation has arisen and before taking further action he must announce to his marker or fellow competitor that he intends to take two balls and which ball he wishes to count if the Rules permit.
See Rule 3-3 in full

[Gary Hill]

I think that this is what was done in the situation you descibed and I see nothing wrong with that.

Unfortunately, that was not what was done in this case.

A ball was dropped, but not under the second ball Rule.

A ball dropped with no declaration becomes the ball in play under ALL circumstances and the original ball is deemed to be lost (See Rule 27).

The player having found this lost ball (his original) cannot retroactively decide to invoke Rule 3-3 and play both balls into the hole.

[Kilroy]

A ball dropped with no declaration becomes the ball in play under ALL circumstances

Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense, but it really makes for a tough call on the course. Oh well, that's golf.

[gbower]

I reread the situation and there is no question that the ball dropped is the one in play.

[Sakuraba]

If the player had declared his second ball to be a provisional ball, would he have been allowed to play it out?

Is he allowed to declare a provisional ball in a circumstance like this? I'm sure you can't because then we'd be declaring provisionals after every drop, wouldn't we?

BTW, that is some fine photography, that is a beautiful hole!

[AAA]

You may only play a provisional if the ball may be lost outside a water hazard or may be out of bounds.