Firstly, the GRQOTW for week 44 

SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE: https://bit.ly/2I8KrVH

JOIN YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_GzvxPbX1UQBeFluD3OLQg/join

BUY MERCHANDISE: https://golfrulesquestions.myspreadshop.com/

GRQOTW 44 

The Answer is: 8

Stuart hit his tee shot, that is 1 He hit his second shot from the fairway, that is 2. He couldn’t find his second, so had to go back to where he played his stroke from in the fairway and drop a ball for a penalty of 1, that is 3. He placed it instead of dropping it, so effectively he has breached Rule 14.3b(3) and incurs a general penalty, we are up to 5. He then has a further 3 shots, so total 8.  

Bryson’s scenario at the Tour Championship. He hit his ball well left off the 18th during round 3, even left of the 9th hole, which I thought was about 70 yards, but someone on YouTube thought it was more like 200 yards. 

He wasn’t able to find it within the 3 minute search time, but after this had elapsed, the Committee were able to get a message out to him through their referee on hand that video coverage had picked up that a spectator had moved the ball, hence why it couldn’t be found. They applied the exception to Rule 18.2b and allowed Bryson to replace a ball on the estimated spot where it had been moved from for no penalty under Rule 9.6. Bryson went on to hit the green in two, one of only a handful of people to have done that all week, and two putt for a birdie.

On the saturday afternoon during the four-ball competition, Nelly Korda attempted an eagle putt, which sat on the edge of the hole. The referee thought it was overhanging, and as Madelene Sagstrom picked it up before the permitted time that Nelly was entitled to wait and see if her ball would fall in, Nelly was given the putt as holed, her eagle counted and the US won the hole. So let’s unpack this: Rule 13.3 is very clear about what the player is entitled to when their ball is overhanging the hole. Even in match play they are permitted the reasonable time it takes to get to the hole, including Nelly falling to her knees and then get back up and starting her journey, and then from there she would be able to wait ten seconds beside the hole to see if the ball will fall. Sagstrom took away this right by conceding the putt and picking up her opponent’s ball, and throwing it to her. So in that instance, there is no penalty applied, but the ball is considered holed. As that was the lowest score on the hole, the US won. The real answer all comes down to whether the ball was actually over hanging the hole. The referee thought it was, and the tv referee  (who I am led to believe was John Paramor) believed that too. So there was no other ruling that could be applied. The question was asked, well did Nelly and Team USA have to make a claim? Well no they didn’t but that wouldn’t have mattered. Because the referee was an allocated referee, it is up to the referee to decide what the correct outcome is. This is different when it is a roving referee, who should not get involved unless they have been asked by one of the players, or they see a situation under Rules 1.2, 1.3, 5.3, 5.6a, and 5.6b. So the referee had to rule as it was seen or reported to her. If she had missed it, then that’s good/bad fortune for someone.

Fraser has interference with the branches of a tree that are outside of a ground under repair area. This ground under repair area is defined by a white line. However, the tree is rooted in the ground under repair area. So the branches overhang outside the GUR, and fraser’s swing is hitting them, but none of the branches that interfere with his swing are inside the GUR area, but the tree is rooted inside the GUR area, is Fraser entitled to free relief?