Did they get rid of the replay option in match play when a ball strikes opponent?

[Augster]

Hey,

 

This happened today and I simply can’t find it. If you can point me to the answer it’d be appreciated. 
 

Match play. Player putts his ball past the hole and accidentally hits opponents ball that is on the putting green but wasn’t marked. 
 

Is this a 2SP under the Exception in Rule 11.1a, or does the player get to replay because he hit his opponent’s equipment? Or is it loss of hole (general penalty)? 
 

Is the replay of a shot even a thing anymore? I can’t find it. 
 

Thanks. 

[Mr. Bean]

In Match Play there is no penalty and the ball is to be played as it lies. See Rules 11.1a and 11.1b(2).

 

Edited August 21, 2024 by Mr. Bean

[Augster]

4 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

In Match Play there is no penalty and the ball is to be played as it lies. See Rules 11.1a and 11.1b(2).

 

I assume replaying the shot when striking opponents equipment went out in 2019? So many changes I should have known. 
 

But for this situation, under 11.1b(2), the ball at rest is just a MO. No 2SP because it’s match play. Play it as it lies because it’s match play. 
 

Thanks for the help! 

Edited August 22, 2024 by Augster

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, Augster said:

I assume replaying the shot when striking opponents equipment went out in 2019? So many changes I should have known. 
 

But for this situation, under 11.1b(2), the ball at rest is just a MO. No 2SP because it’s stroke play. Play it as it lies because it’s match play. 
 

Thanks for the help! 

 

Not sure what you mean by that. If a ball hit from the putting green hits another ball at rest on the PG there is a general penalty in stroke play. See Exception in 11.1a.

[Augster]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Not sure what you mean by that. If a ball hit from the putting green hits another ball at rest on the PG there is a general penalty in stroke play. See Exception in 11.1a.

AI autocorrect. 
 

I edited the post to clarify. Thanks for the help. 

[Mr. Bean]

It seems that the outcome was the same at least since 2014. This is from the Rules at that time:

 

19-5. BY ANOTHER BALL
a. At Rest
If a player’s ball in motion after a stroke is deflected or stopped by a ball in
play and at rest, the player must play his ball as it lies. In match play, there
is no penalty. In stroke play, there is no penalty, unless both balls lay on the
putting green prior to the stroke, in which case the player incurs a penalty of
two strokes

[bluedot]

This is the only difference in the Rules for match play vs stroke play for which the logic escapes me.  
 

Anyone care to explain the WHY of this particular difference?

[James the Hogan Fan]

18 minutes ago, bluedot said:

This is the only difference in the Rules for match play vs stroke play for which the logic escapes me.  
 

Anyone care to explain the WHY of this particular difference?

 

In match play, between two opponents, if B believes A could gain an advantage from B's ball, B may lift it before A plays and thus eliminate the advantage. 

 

Reading the rules of 1980 online, at that time if I were B and had my ball near the hole, if A's ball knocked it in, I would be credited as having holed out on my last stroke. That said, I did not have the option of lifting my ball if I thought it would help my opponent. An interesting trade-off. The modern rule is likely descendant of this mindset.

 

Anyway, in stroke play, B may or may not care to act/lift, and should A use B's ball as a backstop (that's about the only advantage I can envision A deriving from another ball on the green) he might save an entire stroke on the field. It goes back to "protecting one's interests" (rule 3.2, 3.2d (4), rule 20.c (2)) 

 

9 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

It seems that the outcome was the same at least since 2014. This is from the Rules at that time:

 

19-5. BY ANOTHER BALL
a. At Rest
If a player’s ball in motion after a stroke is deflected or stopped by a ball in
play and at rest, the player must play his ball as it lies. In match play, there
is no penalty. In stroke play, there is no penalty, unless both balls lay on the
putting green prior to the stroke, in which case the player incurs a penalty of
two strokes

It's worth noting to the OP the rules at the time considered a ball deflected by another ball to be a different situation than a ball deflected by the opponent/'s caddie/other equipment.

 

And it appears the replay of a ball accidentally deflected by an opponent was eliminated in 2019

[davep043]

57 minutes ago, James the Hogan Fan said:

The modern rule is likely descendant of this mindset.

As I understand it, the reason for the current Rule is that a Player can protect his own interests in Match Play.  If I think my ball on the Putting Green might help yours, I am allowed to lift it, and you MUST wait while I do so.  If you think my ball might interfere with your stroke, you may require me to lift it.  In Stroke Play, the General Penalty for the 11.1a Exception protects the field, you're penalized if you intentionally allow a ball to be left in place to help you, and your putted ball actually does hit it.

 

1 hour ago, James the Hogan Fan said:

Reading the rules of 1980 online, at that time if I were B and had my ball near the hole, if A's ball knocked it in, I would be credited as having holed out on my last stroke. That said, I did not have the option of lifting my ball if I thought it would help my opponent.

Yeah, at one time the Player "controlled" his Opponent's ball.  That rule changed in 1984, I think.

[Augster]

It was 19-3 in the Rules up to 2019. I have no idea how I missed it changing FIVE years ago. 
 

 

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, Augster said:

It was 19-3 in the Rules up to 2019. I have no idea how I missed it changing FIVE years ago. 
 

 

 

Not the ball but Outside Agency. You were talking about the ball and that was Rule 19-5 as I wrote. And that did not change as James explained but 19-3 did. Today they are the same since 1.1.2019.

[bluedot]

5 hours ago, davep043 said:

As I understand it, the reason for the current Rule is that a Player can protect his own interests in Match Play.  If I think my ball on the Putting Green might help yours, I am allowed to lift it, and you MUST wait while I do so.  If you think my ball might interfere with your stroke, you may require me to lift it.  In Stroke Play, the General Penalty for the 11.1a Exception protects the field, you're penalized if you intentionally allow a ball to be left in place to help you, and your putted ball actually does hit it.

 

Good explanation; thanks.

 

That said, it’s still curious to me that this difference persists; a standardized rule for both formats wouldn’t seem to have a downside, would it?  It would have seemed a logical change to have made in 2018. 

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, bluedot said:

Good explanation; thanks.

 

That said, it’s still curious to me that this difference persists; a standardized rule for both formats wouldn’t seem to have a downside, would it?  It would have seemed a logical change to have made in 2018. 

 

There are lots of rules differences between stroke play and match play, so no, I don't agree that this is one that should be standardized. Match play is against just one opponent. Except for agreeing to waive rules and that sort of thing, there's no "field" to protect — only yourself as the opponent.

[davep043]

1 hour ago, bluedot said:

Good explanation; thanks.

 

That said, it’s still curious to me that this difference persists; a standardized rule for both formats wouldn’t seem to have a downside, would it?  It would have seemed a logical change to have made in 2018. 

I don't see a good reason to change it.  Match play truly IS different from Stroke, with a number of issues left in the hands of the players, rather than being governed by rules requirements.  The option to require an Opponent to replay a stroke if he plays out of turn, the option to ignore a breach, the authority to agree on a ruling if you're not sure of the rule, and this matter for balls on the putting green are some of them.  The principles which makes these match play rules reasonable (at least to me) are in the Purpose statement for Rule 3.2

[bluedot]

Guys, I play a LOT of match play, and a LOT of stroke play, both in competition.  I'm aware of the differences in the Rules, and in every other case, I can absolutely see the logic and the need for separate rules.  I also understand the difference between protecting the field in stroke play, as opposed to playing one opponent in match play.  That's all well and good, and I get it, 100%.

 

In every other case that I can think of, though, there is solid logic behind the differences in match vs stroke play rules; I can and do explain (and sometimes defend) each of those differences to the guys on the interclub team I captain at my club. 

 

In THIS case, though, to have two separate rules for essentially the same situation on the putting green just adds complexity to the Rules without any real benefit that I can think of. 

 

No need to reply; the logic for two different rules escapes me, that's all.

Edited August 23, 2024 by bluedot

[Mr. Bean]

9 hours ago, bluedot said:

No need to reply; the logic for two different rules escapes me, that's all.

 

So... you do not want to understand the logic, is that it..?

 

Stroke play. Let us assume there is no penalty for hitting another playr's ball with one's own ball. Rick leaves his ball one foot from the hole, a bit behind it, in order to help his mate Justin, who is very close to win the competition (or for no apparent reason, maybe lazyness as teher will be no penalty whatsoever to Justin). Thus he leaves Justin a backstop so Justin may hit his ball a bit harder without fearing to 3-putt. So, in the end Justin may gain one stroke AGAINST ALL OTHER COMPETITORS. Fortunately in current Rules there are two Rules that either give or may give Rick a penalty. So in real life Justin requires Rick to lift his ball.

 

Match play. Rick would not do the same thing if he wants to win the match so he lifts his ball without being asked. In fact, if Rick says he will lift his ball and Justin makes a stroke before Rick could have lifted his ball Justin will get a penalty. If Rick leaves his ball there it can only hurt him, nobody else. Thus it is his choice and his choice only.

 

To me having two different Rules makes perfect sense.

 

EDIT: Of course one could ask why cannot there be a General Penalty for that also in Match Play, how would that change things? From the top of my head I cannot see any other reason than pace of play. Maybe someone can find a more solid reason. After all, this difference between SP and MP arises from the concept of stymie and that was discarded already in late 50's, IIRC.

 

Edited August 23, 2024 by Mr. Bean

[Mr. Bean]

9 hours ago, bluedot said:

In every other case that I can think of, though, there is solid logic behind the differences in match vs stroke play rules; I can and do explain (and sometimes defend) each of those differences to the guys on the interclub team I captain at my club. 

 

 

Out of curiosity, how do you defend to those guys at your club player's option to cancel the opponent's stroke made out of order? How does that protect the player and potentially change the outcome of a hole or a match?

[James the Hogan Fan]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

So... you do not want to understand the logic, is that it..?

 

Stroke play. Let us assume there is no penalty for hitting another playr's ball with one's own ball. Rick leaves his ball one foot from the hole, a bit behind it, in order to help his mate Justin, who is very close to win the competition (or for no apparent reason, maybe lazyness as teher will be no penalty whatsoever to Justin). Thus he leaves Justin a backstop so Justin may hit his ball a bit harder without fearing to 3-putt. So, in the end Justin may gain one stroke AGAINST ALL OTHER COMPETITORS. Fortunately in current Rules there are two Rules that either give or may give Rick a penalty. So in real life Justin requires Rick to lift his ball.

 

Match play. Rick would not do the same thing if he wants to win the match so he lifts his ball without being asked. In fact, if Rick says he will lift his ball and Justin makes a stroke before Rick could have lifted his ball Justin will get a penalty. If Rick leaves his ball there it can only hurt him, nobody else. Thus it is his choice and his choice only.

 

To me having two different Rules makes perfect sense.

 

EDIT: Of course one could ask why cannot there be a General Penalty for that also in Match Play, how would that change things? From the top of my head I cannot see any other reason than pace of play. Maybe someone can find a more solid reason. After all, this difference between SP and MP arises from the concept of stymie and that was discarded already in late 50's, IIRC.

 

I think it goes back to some line of thinking that in match play, the opponents ball is a valid obstacle/challenge of playing the hole. (And "the ball shall not be touched" rules (Hence the stymie). Then after the stymie the opponent's ball could be left or removed at player's option. And then finally the opponent could remove his ball of his own volition. It's a slow evolution

 

 

One could also ask why the general penalty in match play is loss of hole instead of 2 strokes added to the player's score for that hole.

 

On a par 3, A hits his tee shot out of bounds, and his second shot onto the green, where he takes 2 putts for a 5. B hits his tee shot into rough near the green, plays a wrong ball, and in stroke play would find the original ball, hit his now 4th onto the green, and make the putt, also for 5. But in match play the hole was over as soon as B played the wrong ball stroke. Stroke play 5 = 5, match play A 1 up. 

(Oddly enough, in the 1946 rules, apparently it was only loss of hole to play the opponent's ball, and the player could correct the error of "playing ball outside the match" without penalty before his opponent's next stroke.)

[Mr. Bean]

4 hours ago, James the Hogan Fan said:

1) I think it goes back to some line of thinking that in match play, the opponents ball is a valid obstacle/challenge of playing the hole. (And "the ball shall not be touched" rules (Hence the stymie). Then after the stymie the opponent's ball could be left or removed at player's option. And then finally the opponent could remove his ball of his own volition. It's a slow evolution

 

 

2) One could also ask why the general penalty in match play is loss of hole instead of 2 strokes added to the player's score for that hole.

 

3) On a par 3, A hits his tee shot out of bounds, and his second shot onto the green, where he takes 2 putts for a 5. B hits his tee shot into rough near the green, plays a wrong ball, and in stroke play would find the original ball, hit his now 4th onto the green, and make the putt, also for 5. But in match play the hole was over as soon as B played the wrong ball stroke. Stroke play 5 = 5, match play A 1 up.

 

1) Slow evolution indeed but that does not answer neither bluedot's nor my question. Why must there be two different Rules, why not just one with a penalty?

 

2) Probably because 2 stroke penalty means losing the hole in 99+% of cases so losing the hole directly adds simplicity and shortens the duration of the match.

 

3) Certainly possible but pretty rare case, I'd say.

[James the Hogan Fan]

4 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

1) Slow evolution indeed but that does not answer neither bluedot's nor my question. Why must there be two different Rules, why not just one with a penalty?

 

2) Probably because 2 stroke penalty means losing the hole in 99+% of cases so losing the hole directly adds simplicity and shortens the duration of the match.

 

3) Certainly possible but pretty rare case, I'd say.

Again, speculation, but from what I understand golf was invented as match play. Stroke play therefore makes compromises to the match play rules to exist, and not the other around. The different penalty in stroke play was created to make stroke play more fair, but there was no reason to make a change for match play, and thus the rules diverge. 

 

Had stroke play been developed first, I would imagine match play would have later been invented and the rules would be "play out the hole as in stroke play and compare scores, the lower winning the hole" 

 

But again, I don't really know...

[Mr. Bean]

15 minutes ago, James the Hogan Fan said:

Again, speculation, but from what I understand golf was invented as match play. Stroke play therefore makes compromises to the match play rules to exist, and not the other around. The different penalty in stroke play was created to make stroke play more fair, but there was no reason to make a change for match play, and thus the rules diverge. 

 

 

Absolutely. I am simply playing with the thought that as lots of Rules were streamlined in the Great Turmoil six years ago should this have been one of them.

 

As I wrote earlier, I am perfectly happy with the difference but having pondered the thought for quite a while I cannot see any good reason why there could not be a General Penalty also in MP. After all, the players may and can protect their own rights with or without that penalty. The key question is would it change something?

 

Just pondering...

[Colin L]

There are of course 2 stroke penalties possible in matchplay. 

 

 

 

[sui generis]

1 minute ago, Colin L said:

There are of course 2 stroke penalties possible in matchplay. 

 

 

 

I can think of two. A two-stroke penalty that applies to R19.3b, Extra Relief Option, the fourth relief option for an unplayable ball in a bunker. And, MLR E-5, Alternative to Stroke and Distance, if that’s in effect.

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, Colin L said:

There are of course 2 stroke penalties possible in matchplay. 

 

 

But not for breaches.