Searching for ball - identifying ball

[PapaPat]

However, I do not believe that you are not required to put on waders and carry a machete to play the game in the true spirit.

Oops, too many "nots"

[LobWedge]

Okay, this is what I've learned from reading Decisions 28/1, 28/2, and 27/13...

1. A player may declare his ball unplayble and proceed under the stroke-and-distance option (Rule 28a) without finding his ball.
2. Once a player declares and plays a provisional, he must go forward and search for the original ball.

There's nothing in the Rules that specifies that a player must find his ball. He can go forward and search for up to 5 minutes. But, if a FC or opponent finds what might be his ball within that 5 minutes, and he refuses to identify it, he's got some 'splainin to do.

[justsomeguy]

I know that there's the added wrinkle if the ball is found, that if the player decides to proceed under 28a, he has to go back to the previous spot. But, IMO, there's no difference in the pressure experienced in playing a provisional from the previous spot, or going back to play a ball after going forward. I've always thought that Rule 28 should allow the player to declare the provisional in play instead of having to abandon it if the original is found.

LW, I believe I addressed this earlier in the thread. The rule has nothing do with "pressure".

When you have to decide on which option to choose under the Rules (as you do in Rule 28), you choose your option FIRST and THEN you make your shot. Its a fundamental principle of the game.

If you allow a player to choose the "stroke and distance" option AFTER he has already played it, then that is just plain wrong. I think the only reason a provisional ball is even permitted at all in the Rules of Golf is because under Rule 27 there are no options to choose from.

[Kilroy]

I dunno Lobbie, but you don't seem to be understanding the question.

IF a player finds a ball during his search is he obliged to (without an FC requiring him to) identify the ball?

So I see a ball in a bush. I don't want to look closer to identify it, do I have to look closer? What if it's easily reachable, yet I still don't want to look close enough to get the bad news that it's mine?

My answer is not 100% sure so I am hoping someone else will chime in, yet the posts from some seem to not be addressing the question at all. It is the original topic of the thread.

[PapaPat]

While not a direct fit, 25-1/1 which deals with a ball that is difficult to retrieve in casual water offers some guidance as to what is required.

"Yes. A Player is not obliged to use unreasonable effort to retrieve a ball in casual water for identification purposes.
However, if it would not take unreasonable effort to retrieve a ball in casual water, the player must retrieve must retrieve it."

This deals with the obligation of the player in deciding which relief option the player is entitled to based on whether or not the ball is regarded as identified and thus found.

[mjf]

Agreed, but I am visualizing a scenario such as this;

You hit into the forest where there is some dense stuff and some areas where play would be possble. You look around in the area where you would be happy to find it, avoiding looking in the thick stuf you don't want to have to play from. While searching you spot a ball deep in the thick stuff. Do you have to look closer to try to identify it or can you ignore that you saw it at all?

Along a similar line (and something that was discussed before), what if you're walking through waste high rough on the way to some lighter rough and you step on something that feels like it might be a golf ball (it could also be a rock). Are you obliged to take a look at the object to ensure it is NOT your golf ball?

[LobWedge]

I dunno Lobbie, but you don't seem to be understanding the question.

IF a player finds a ball during his search is he obliged to (without an FC requiring him to) identify the ball?

So I see a ball in a bush. I don't want to look closer to identify it, do I have to look closer? What if it's easily reachable, yet I still don't want to look close enough to get the bad news that it's mine?

My answer is not 100% sure so I am hoping someone else will chime in, yet the posts from some seem to not be addressing the question at all. It is the original topic of the thread.

I understand perfectly what the question is. That's why I emphasized that there's nothing in the rules requiring a player to find his ball. IMO, the absence of any definition for the term "Found Ball" speaks volumes. Without evidence to the contrary, my answer would be 100% no.

[Kilroy]

I suppose, but doesn't it seem outside of the spirit of the game to avoid identifying a found ball in this way?
I was very surprised to find this scenario is not covered in the decisions.

[PapaPat]

Along a similar line (and something that was discussed before), what if you're walking through waste high rough on the way to some lighter rough and you step on something that feels like it might be a golf ball (it could also be a rock). Are you obliged to take a look at the object to ensure it is NOT your golf ball?

I think that we have done our best to answer your question and appear to be pretty much in agreement. It is time for your internal Rules Official to take over and give you some advice. When I am doing a session, I refer to what you are now doing as playing Stump the Sage on the Stage. Not all the answers in rules are definitive. I believe that we have made it pretty clear what we think is expected of you. Time for you to support any other contention, if you can.

[justsomeguy]

Once a player declares and plays a provisional, he must go forward and search for the original ball.

You are taking Decision 28/2 completely out of context. That is not what it says at all:

The player may not deem the first ball from the tee unplayable, disregard the provisional ball and put another ball into play under a stroke-and-distance penalty because, having played the provisional ball, he must find the original ball before he can declare it unplayable. Unless the original ball was found, the provisional ball would automatically become the ball in play.

There is no requirement to search for his original ball in this decision. There is only a prohibition against declaring a ball that has not been found as unplayable when a provisional has been played. The player in this situation was trying to use Rule 28 to avoid having his first provisional ball count for anything. This decision just reinforces that the only way that can happen is if he finds his original ball.

[LobWedge]

You are taking Decision 28/2 completely out of context. That is not what it says at all:

The player may not deem the first ball from the tee unplayable, disregard the provisional ball and put another ball into play under a stroke-and-distance penalty because, having played the provisional ball, he must find the original ball before he can declare it unplayable. Unless the original ball was found, the provisional ball would automatically become the ball in play.

There is no requirement to search for his original ball in this decision. There is only a prohibition against declaring a ball that has not been found as unplayable when a provisional has been played. The player in this situation was trying to use Rule 28 to avoid having his first provisional ball count for anything. This decision just reinforces that the only way that can happen is if he finds his original ball.

Why else do you play a provisional ball if you're not going forward to search for the original?

[mjf]

Why else do you play a provisional ball if you're not going forward to search for the original?

Of course I would intend to search for it, but if I hit a perfect provisional shot then there's a bit less urgency to find the original... especially if it's in a spot from where my best option is to re-tee if it's unplayable.

[PapaPat]

I understand perfectly what the question is. That's why I emphasized that there's nothing in the rules requiring a player to find his ball. IMO, the absence of any definition for the term "Found Ball" speaks volumes. Without evidence to the contrary, my answer would be 100% no.

But as you have already stated there is a requirement to identify balls that are found. You are right there is no definition of a ball which is found other than the meaning of the words in English. The player is required to make a reasonable effort to identify "a ball" as his. The penalty for truculence bordering on dishonesty is severe. Either that, or perhaps I no longer understand the question.

27/13 Refusal to Identify Ball
Q. A player purposely refuses to identify a ball as his. What can the opponent or a fellow-competitor do in such a case?
A. An opponent or fellow-competitor has the right to be satisfied about the identification of a player's ball.
If a player has dishonestly not identified his ball, the opponent or fellow-competitor may refer the dispute to the Committee — Rule 34-3. In such a case, the Committee would be justified in imposing a penalty of disqualification under Rule 33-7.

[justsomeguy]

Why else do you play a provisional ball if you're not going forward to search for the original?

The reasons why are irrelevant.

Under Rule 27 if the original ball may be lost or OB, a provisional ball may be played. That's it. You don't have to justify the reasons for it, and there's no requirement to search for anything after you do.

You may recall a well-known incident with Phil Mickelson where he did NOT want his original ball found after playing his provisional. HE certainly didn't look for it, nor was he under any obligation to do so.

[LobWedge]

The reasons why are irrelevant.

Under Rule 27 if the original ball may be lost or OB, a provisional ball may be played. That's it. You don't have to justify the reasons for it, and there's no requirement to search for anything after you do.

You may recall a well-known incident with Phil Mickelson where he did NOT want his original ball found after playing his provisional. HE certainly didn't look for it, nor was he under any obligation to do so.

There is only one reason for playing a provisional ball, you intend to go forward and search for the original. You may very well change your mind after the fact, and continue play with the provisional until it's at the point where it is now tha ball in play, but playing a provisional assumes you're intending to go forward and search.

[justsomeguy]

But as you have already stated there is a requirement to identify balls that are found. You are right there is no definition of a ball which is found other than the meaning of the words in English. The player is required to make a reasonable effort to identify "a ball" as his. The penalty for truculence bordering on dishonesty is severe. Either that, or perhaps I no longer understand the question.

27/13 Refusal to Identify Ball
Q. A player purposely refuses to identify a ball as his. What can the opponent or a fellow-competitor do in such a case?
A. An opponent or fellow-competitor has the right to be satisfied about the identification of a player's ball.
If a player has dishonestly not identified his ball, the opponent or fellow-competitor may refer the dispute to the Committee — Rule 34-3. In such a case, the Committee would be justified in imposing a penalty of disqualification under Rule 33-7.

I think you're reading too much into this decision. It says nothing about making a "reasonable effort" to identify a ball. It only says that he cannot refuse to identify a ball.

The use of the term "refusal" (along with the continued references to "the opponent or fellow-competitor") implies to me that at some point he was asked to verify the identity of a ball and he declined.

[justsomeguy]

There is only one reason for playing a provisional ball, you intend to go forward and search for the original. You may very well change your mind after the fact, and continue play with the provisional until it's at the point where it is now that ball in play, but playing a provisional assumes you're intending to go forward and search.

You are reading things into the Rules of Golf that simply aren't there:

If a ball may be lost outside a water hazard or may be out of bounds, to save time the player may play another ball provisionally in accordance with Rule 27-1.

That's it. The only assumption made by Rules of Golf is that the original ball may be lost outside of a WH or OB.

Perhaps the player originally intended to search for the original - perhaps not. The player's intentions are irrelevant and the reasons why don't matter. If the Rules of Golf allow him to do something, then he can do it - with or without a good reason for it.

[PapaPat]

I think you're reading too much into this decision. It says nothing about making a "reasonable effort" to identify a ball. It only says that he cannot refuse to identify a ball.

The use of the term "refusal" (along with the continued references to "the opponent or fellow-competitor") implies to me that at some point he was asked to verify the identity of a ball and he declined.

And, simularly, it does not say anything about being asked. If he has seen it, he is certainly aware of it. What if a spectator or forecaddie points it out as I believe was the case in the Mickelson situation.

[AAA]

And, simularly, it does not say anything about being asked. If he has seen it, he is certainly aware of it. What if a spectator or forecaddie points it out as I believe was the case in the Mickelson situation.

Original post edited:

See Dec 27-2c/2