Hello People

A friend of mine decided to putt from the fringe in a friendly round
on the weekend. Unfortuately, for him, there was a sprinkler head in
his line of putt & he asked if he could move his ball. I expressed
doubt as, as far as I'm aware this would be an integerel part of the
course, though another player said he could. As it was just a few of
us on a friendly afternoon stroll I decided to give the other
"adviser" the benifit of the doubt but still thought I was right by my
decision (exept in the case of winter rules - move, clean & place,
etc. or if it interfered with your stance [I think?])

Please advise for future reference.

Mark.

Mark  wrote in news:1181762753.169466.193150
@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

> Hello People
> 
> A friend of mine decided to putt from the fringe in a friendly round
> on the weekend. Unfortuately, for him, there was a sprinkler head in
> his line of putt & he asked if he could move his ball. I expressed
> doubt as, as far as I'm aware this would be an integerel part of the
> course, though another player said he could. As it was just a few of
> us on a friendly afternoon stroll I decided to give the other
> "adviser" the benifit of the doubt but still thought I was right by my
> decision (exept in the case of winter rules - move, clean & place,
> etc. or if it interfered with your stance [I think?])
> 
> Please advise for future reference.
> 
> Mark.
> 
> 

Given my poor golfing credentials, you can either accept or reject 
this... ;-)

Our local rule states;  "A ball may be played as it lies or be lifted 
and dropped (or placed on the putting green) without penalty to obtain 
relief from the following: A hole cast or runway made by a burrowing 
animal or a bird: Divot marks on the fairway: Closely mown or prepared 
pathways: All sprinkler heads, hydrants, etc.: All steps, seats and 
indicator posts: or when the line of a putt is obstructed by a relief 
hole cut into the green."

This seems to me to be eminently fair and totally within the spirit of 
the game.  Most hazards on courses are designed to imitate natural 
features, rather than artifical; and therefore a sprinkler head not 
being noted in may natural history books would seem to be outside that 
field.

Regards

Nigel

PS: How do you turn a duck into a black soul singer?

Mark in :

>A friend of mine decided to putt from the fringe in a friendly round
>on the weekend. Unfortuately, for him, there was a sprinkler head in
>his line of putt & he asked if he could move his ball. I expressed
>doubt as, as far as I'm aware this would be an integerel part of the
>course, though another player said he could. As it was just a few of
>us on a friendly afternoon stroll I decided to give the other
>"adviser" the benifit of the doubt but still thought I was right by my
>decision (exept in the case of winter rules - move, clean & place,
>etc. or if it interfered with your stance [I think?])
>
>Please advise for future reference.

See RoG 24-2. Immovable Obstruction
|a. Interference
|Interference by an immovable obstruction occurs when a ball
|lies in or on the obstruction, or when the obstruction interferes
|with the player’s stance or the area of his intended swing. If the
|player’s ball lies on the putting green, interference also occurs
|if an immovable obstruction on the putting green intervenes on
|his line of putt. Otherwise, intervention on the line of play is
|not, of itself, interference under this Rule.

Ciao,

Paul

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181762753.169466.193150@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Hello People
>
> A friend of mine decided to putt from the fringe in a friendly round
> on the weekend. Unfortuately, for him, there was a sprinkler head in
> his line of putt & he asked if he could move his ball. I expressed
> doubt as, as far as I'm aware this would be an integerel part of the
> course, though another player said he could. As it was just a few of
> us on a friendly afternoon stroll I decided to give the other
> "adviser" the benifit of the doubt but still thought I was right by my
> decision (exept in the case of winter rules - move, clean & place,
> etc. or if it interfered with your stance [I think?])
>
> Please advise for future reference.
>
> Mark.
>

Appendix 1 to the Rules of Golf explains action that may be taken in the 
circumstances you quote.

A local rule is required to obtain relief from these special conditions.

These Local Rules usually appear on the back of the card. I have, however, 
seen on a number of cases where there is mere reference to the provisions 
under rule 24.2 in the belief that this invokes the specimen Local Rule. 
Unless the Local Rule is properly quoted the additional relief in these 
special circumstances is not available

Denis

Mark wrote:
> Hello People
> 
> A friend of mine decided to putt from the fringe in a friendly round
> on the weekend. Unfortuately, for him, there was a sprinkler head in
> his line of putt & he asked if he could move his ball. I expressed
> doubt as, as far as I'm aware this would be an integerel part of the
> course, though another player said he could. As it was just a few of
> us on a friendly afternoon stroll I decided to give the other
> "adviser" the benifit of the doubt but still thought I was right by my
> decision (exept in the case of winter rules - move, clean & place,
> etc. or if it interfered with your stance [I think?])
> 
> Please advise for future reference.
> 
> Mark.
> 
  Your friend would have been entitled to relief from the sprinkler head 
if a local rule was in force which conforms with the detail of the 
'recommended' specimen Local Rule shown in the Rules of Golf, Appendix 
lB, part 5, "Immovable Obstructions Close to Putting Green". (page 128 
of my R&A issue).

This Local Rule basically expands Rule 24-2 to provide that relief may 
also be obtained if the ball lies off the green (not in a hazard) and 
lies wihin two club lengths of an immovable obstruction (sprinkler head 
etc) intervening on the line of play which itself is within two 
clublengths of, or is on the green. The ball must be dropped at the 
nearest point which avoids the interference and is no nearer the hole or 
in a hazard. There is similar relief available if the ball is on the 
green and the obstruction is off but within two clublengths of the green 
and interferes with the line of putt. (It is not unusual for a player to 
direct his putt off the green if the terrain/contour dictates this is 
the line. In this case the player 'places' his ball at the appropriate 
spot.)

This suggested Local Rule earlier applied specifically to *fixed 
sprinkler heads* only but was modified in the current issue of the Rules 
to apply to all forms of immovable obstruction.

cheers
david

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the ball and not the club he uses. Thus when a player is 
going to use his putter from the fringe, he has a line of play and not a 
line of putt.

Cheers

JohnT

On 14 Jun, 20:16, Mark  wrote:
> One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>

Marker posts and WH posts are obstructions, either movable or
immovable (depending on whether they are physically movable or if the
committee has deemed them immovable).

OOB posts are different: the rules say they are deemed to be fixed and
not obstructions.  No relief available from any interference in that
case.

Thanks to all, especially the last two posts. They've cleared both
queries up. Mark.

OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
(please let me know if I haven't).

If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
local rule as above?

Mark.

"Mark"  wrote in message 
news:1181848562.593980.307710@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> OK, thanks to you all, I think I've got the gist of the answers so far
> (please let me know if I haven't).
>
> If the sprinkler head or any other man made obstructions impedes
> swing, stance or if the ball itself is on it, you get relief but if
> your intended putting line is intersected by a sprinkler head etc. (&
> there isn't a local rule giving you relief) then you have to play the
> ball as it lies. One other question (bearing in mind my general
> interpretation is correct) how would you fair with OOB, direction or
> water hazard markers. Are they deemed as obstuctions or an integeral
> part of the course or, perhaps, would they have to be covered by a
> local rule as above?
>
> Mark.
>

Mark,

Your original post referred to the ball being on the fringe and not on the 
green. Therefore the player did not have a line of putt, he had a line of 
play. A player does not get relief from intervention on his line of play, 
but he does get relief from intervention on his line of putt.

So it is important to understand the difference and be careful with the 
terminology when both presenting a situation and the solution to it. The 
fact that the player has a line of putt and not a line of play is determined 
by the position of the b