I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?

Thomopac wrote:
> I take it the whole mat is the teeing area? 
> 
> 

Not necessarily - it depends where the tee markers are and how big the 
mat is.

-- 
Durram

Demetri (Durram) wrote:
> Thomopac wrote:
>> I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?
>>
> 
> Not necessarily - it depends where the tee markers are and how big the 
> mat is.
> 
Also the playing conditions of the day, @ our course being above 900ft, 
in the event of a hard frost we are allowed to tee to the side!

Had a good medal round earlier this month. WON the 2nd div! Also have a 
new HC of 26 to boot! only taken me 7yrs to do it.

Hoping that it doesn't take another 7 for a repeat.

Cheers,

-- 
chris

Either side middle of the mat! and about 4ft x 2ft ?

"Thomopac"  wrote in message 
news:D_OdnWHp0cst1tXaRVnygQA@eclipse.net.uk...
> Either side middle of the mat! and about 4ft x 2ft ?
When the mats in use are around 4ft square or less, it is generally accepted 
that the whole of the mat is the teeing ground.  The tee markers are 
generally placed by the mat to indicate the mat is to be used, rather than 
to actually define the outer limits of the teeing ground.

We could discuss the teeing ground not being a full two club-lengths deep if 
you really want to go there.

Malcolm

On 24 Nov, 16:47, "M L Wadsworth"
 wrote:
> "Thomopac"  wrote in message

> We could discuss the teeing ground not being a full two club-lengths deep if
> you really want to go there.

Well, I've teed off from semi-rough length of grass behind the mat on
a few occasions, when the mat has been too slippy, or hard to get a
tee into. Is that acceptable etiquette, and would a local rule
effectively restricting to less that 2CL depth be valid?

(Will that do for initial provocation, Malcolm?)

"Ron Todd"  wrote in message 
news:cea64c9a-9789-4cbd-a1d1-db0608fe80d4@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Nov, 16:47, "M L Wadsworth"
>  wrote:
>> "Thomopac"  wrote in message
>
>> We could discuss the teeing ground not being a full two club-lengths deep 
>> if
>> you really want to go there.
>
> Well, I've teed off from semi-rough length of grass behind the mat on
> a few occasions, when the mat has been too slippy, or hard to get a
> tee into. Is that acceptable etiquette, and would a local rule
> effectively restricting to less that 2CL depth be valid?
>
> (Will that do for initial provocation, Malcolm?)

Well if you insist!
The Committee can determine the width of the teeing ground and where it is, 
but not its depth - its depth is fixed by the Rules (see Definition of 
Teeing Ground).
By indicating that play is to be from the mats (normally by placing the tee 
markers by them)  they are setting the front of the mats as the front of the 
teeing grounds and the sides of the mat as their width.
A player would be entitled to tee up behind a mat within two club-lengths 
from the front of it.  That can have its problems though, since mats are 
often raised up so the player risks striking it.

Regards,
Malcolm

"M L Wadsworth"  wrote in 
message news:49GdnbEVwb_g1NTanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Ron Todd"  wrote in message 
> news:cea64c9a-9789-4cbd-a1d1-db0608fe80d4@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On 24 Nov, 16:47, "M L Wadsworth"
>>  wrote:
>>> "Thomopac"  wrote in message
>>
>>> We could discuss the teeing ground not being a full two club-lengths 
>>> deep if
>>> you really want to go there.
>>
>> Well, I've teed off from semi-rough length of grass behind the mat on
>> a few occasions, when the mat has been too slippy, or hard to get a
>> tee into. Is that acceptable etiquette, and would a local rule
>> effectively restricting to less that 2CL depth be valid?
>>
>> (Will that do for initial provocation, Malcolm?)
>
> Well if you insist!
> The Committee can determine the width of the teeing ground and where it 
> is, but not its depth - its depth is fixed by the Rules (see Definition of 
> Teeing Ground).
> By indicating that play is to be from the mats (normally by placing the 
> tee markers by them)  they are setting the front of the mats as the front 
> of the teeing grounds and the sides of the mat as their width.
> A player would be entitled to tee up behind a mat within two club-lengths 
> from the front of it.  That can have its problems though, since mats are 
> often raised up so the player risks striking it.
>
> Regards,
> Malcolm
>

Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?

"Stratman"  wrote in message 
news:13klpm0jb65n799@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "M L Wadsworth"  wrote in 
> message news:49GdnbEVwb_g1NTanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "Ron Todd"  wrote in message 
>> news:cea64c9a-9789-4cbd-a1d1-db0608fe80d4@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>> On 24 Nov, 16:47, "M L Wadsworth"
>>>  wrote:
>>>> "Thomopac"  wrote in message
>>>
>>>> We could discuss the teeing ground not being a full two club-lengths 
>>>> deep if
>>>> you really want to go there.
>>>
>>> Well, I've teed off from semi-rough length of grass behind the mat on
>>> a few occasions, when the mat has been too slippy, or hard to get a
>>> tee into. Is that acceptable etiquette, and would a local rule
>>> effectively restricting to less that 2CL depth be valid?
>>>
>>> (Will that do for initial provocation, Malcolm?)
>>
>> Well if you insist!
>> The Committee can determine the width of the teeing ground and where it 
>> is, but not its depth - its depth is fixed by the Rules (see Definition 
>> of Teeing Ground).
>> By indicating that play is to be from the mats (normally by placing the 
>> tee markers by them)  they are setting the front of the mats as the front 
>> of the teeing grounds and the sides of the mat as their width.
>> A player would be entitled to tee up behind a mat within two club-lengths 
>> from the front of it.  That can have its problems though, since mats are 
>> often raised up so the player risks striking it.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Malcolm
>>
>
> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
>
They are normally immovable.
If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then taking relief 
from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be playing from the side, 
forget it.
Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet started 
the hole, you have no ball in play.

Regards,
Malcolm

I made a post here on this topic. It is in my "sent" file but I don't see it 
in the thread. Can anyone else see it?


"Thomopac"  wrote in message 
news:MsWdnSI-GLhkoNranZ2dnUVZ8sCknZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?
>

John Turner wrote:
> I made a post here on this topic. It is in my "sent" file but I don't see it 
> in the thread. Can anyone else see it?
> 
> 
> "Thomopac"  wrote in message 
> news:MsWdnSI-GLhkoNranZ2dnUVZ8sCknZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>> I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?
>>
> 
> 


It's not here in Oz John!

david

M L Wadsworth wrote:

>>>
>> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
>>
> They are normally immovable.
> If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then taking relief 
> from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be playing from the side, 
> forget it.
> Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet started 
> the hole, you have no ball in play.
> 
> Regards,
> Malcolm
> 
>
..ummmmm!

Malcolm,

This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the the
object interferes with the players stance or the area of his intended
swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision 13-2/14, although 
dealing with a different and even opposing situation, clearly
suggests that the question of 'ball in play or not' is irrelevant!

david

david s-a  writes:

> M L Wadsworth wrote:
> 
> >>>
> >> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
> >>
> > They are normally immovable.
> > If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then
> > taking relief from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be
> > playing from the side, forget it.
> > Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet
> > started the hole, you have no ball in play.
> > Regards,
> > Malcolm
> >
> ..ummmmm!
> 
> Malcolm,
> 
> This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the the
> object interferes with the players stance or the area of his intended
> swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision 13-2/14 clearly
> refutes your suggestion!

Isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that Decision 13-2/14 _clearly refutes_
the notion that Rule 24-2 is inapplicable when there is no ball in play?

Decision 13-2/14 does make it clear that a line of play and an area of intended
swing exist though the player's ball is not in play.

Getting back to Malcolm's player, he is welcome to take relief, under Rule 24-2,
from the immovable obstruction.  However, nothing in Rule 24-2 absolves him
from his responsibility to start the play of the hole from the teeing ground
per Rule 11-1.  It would, therefore, seem to be a little silly to take that
Rule 24-2 relief.  But, chacon son gout, c'est la vie, etc. etc.

-- 
             Leon Chamae
             Directeur du Personnel
             Bureau de Change

John Turner wrote:
> I made a post here on this topic. It is in my "sent" file but I don't see it 
> in the thread. Can anyone else see it?
> 
> 
> "Thomopac"  wrote in message 
> news:MsWdnSI-GLhkoNranZ2dnUVZ8sCknZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>> I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?
>>
> 
> 
I can only see this one

John Turner in :

>I made a post here on this topic. It is in my "sent" file but I don't see it 
>in the thread. Can anyone else see it?
>
>
>"Thomopac"  wrote in message 
>news:MsWdnSI-GLhkoNranZ2dnUVZ8sCknZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>>I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?

I can see one from you in this thread. Some details:

|From: "John Turner" 
|Newsgroups: uk.sport.golf
|Subject: Re: Winter mats
|Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 09:28:16 -0500
|Message-ID: 
|
|"M L Wadsworth"  wrote in 
|message news:49GdnbEVwb_g1NTanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@bt.com...
<snip>
(beginning of your text:)
|At Lahinch we post a club rule (not a local rule), see attachment. 
<snap>

I wondered why this attachment came through on my news server (which uses
"cleanfeed" software to avoid some irregularities like attachments).

Maybe your news server blocks attachments more effectively than mine...(?)

Ciao,

Paul

Leon Chamae wrote:
> david s-a  writes:
> 
>> M L Wadsworth wrote:
>>
>>>> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
>>>>
>>> They are normally immovable.
>>> If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then
>>> taking relief from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be
>>> playing from the side, forget it.
>>> Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet
>>> started the hole, you have no ball in play.
>>> Regards,
>>> Malcolm
>>>
>> ..ummmmm!
>>
>> Malcolm,
>>
>> This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the the
>> object interferes with the players stance or the area of his intended
>> swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision 13-2/14 clearly
>> refutes your suggestion!
> 
> Isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that Decision 13-2/14 _clearly refutes_
> the notion that Rule 24-2 is inapplicable when there is no ball in play?
> 
> Decision 13-2/14 does make it clear that a line of play and an area of intended
> swing exist though the player's ball is not in play.


Now that's what I should have said!


And...as you so rightly put it...

> It would, therefore, seem to be a little silly to take that
> Rule 24-2 relief.  But, chacon son gout, c'est la vie, etc. etc.
> 

Perhaps it is the 'gout' that is troubling Malcolm!

:-)

david

"John Turner"  wrote in message 
news:2I-dnUUa1JJ5rNbanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@golden.net...
>I made a post here on this topic. It is in my "sent" file but I don't see 
>it in the thread. Can anyone else see it?
>
>
> "Thomopac"  wrote in message 
> news:MsWdnSI-GLhkoNranZ2dnUVZ8sCknZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>>I take it the whole mat is the teeing area?
>>
>
>

I can see a posting by you dated 256/11/2007 and timed at 14:28 There was 
also an attachment

Denis

On 26 Nov, 21:34, Leon Chamae  wrote:
> Rule 24-2 relief.  But, chacon son gout, c'est la vie, etc. etc.
>
> --
>              Leon Chamae
>              Directeur du Personnel
>              Bureau de Change

"Chacon son gout"?

I must now assume that your French persona is a blind, Leon!

(BTW, kudos to Malcolm for cheerfully rising to the bait.)

;-)

So here again is my post, without the attachment which I included as part of 
the post instead.

At Lahinch we post a club rule (not a local rule), see attachment. It states 
that you must either place a ball on the mat, or tee the ball up on the mat. 
Further, you must stand on the mat to play your tee shot. We have them in 
use on par three holes and only occasionally on a longer hole where the 
whole teeing area has been refurbished. We usually place the tee markers, 
stones, on the ground towards the back of the mat where they are least 
likely to be struck. There is a weather proofed printout of the rule in 
large print posted near each mat. You will notice that if the player 
breaches the Club Rule, it says that he should add a penalty stroke to his 
score, and not that he must. Fellow competitors are rather good at helping a 
player's conscience decide what to do. The Committee has on occasion had to 
reprimand a player for failing to observe the rule. After all, on the teeing 
ground it has to
be a deliberate act.

As to the Rules of golf; if CONGU sees fit to consider a competition played 
with either fairway mats or even pegging up a qualifying round, then why 
argue about two feet or so being denied on the teeing ground. It is after 
all a measure taken to allow us to play golf in conditions that require us 
to protect the course.

John T



CLUB RULES REGARDING MATS



From November 1st until further notice, excepting during the Hamper 
competitions, the following club rules are in effect regarding the mandatory 
use of fairway mats in all forms of play on the Old Course, and the use of 
tee mats on both courses.



Definition

"Through the green" is the whole area of the course except:

1                 The teeing ground and putting green of the hole being 
played; and

2                 All hazards on the course.



Mandatory Use of Fairway Mats

A ball lying on a closely mown area through the green, but not on or inside 
the broken white line at the front of the green or on the green surround of 
a par three hole, must be lifted without penalty. Before lifting the ball, 
the player must mark its position. Having lifted the ball, he may clean it. 
He must then position a fairway mat so that the ball, when placed on the 
mat, will be within six inches of and not nearer the hole than where it 
originally lay. If the player uses a tee to secure the mat to the ground, 
the ball must not be placed on the tee. The player may only use a fairway 
mat provided by Lahinch Golf Club. This procedure may not be ignored because 
the player wishes to use a putter from outside the broken white line at the 
front of the green.



A player may position the mat and place his ball only once, and it is in 
play when it has been placed. If the ball when placed comes to rest on the 
spot on which it is placed and it subsequently moves, there is no penalty 
and the ball must be played as it lies, unless it has rolled off the mat in 
which case it must be replaced on the mat.



If the player fails to mark the position of the ball before lifting it, or 
plays a ball from other than on a mat, he is in breach of this club rule, 
and he should add one stroke to his score for the hole. If a player is 
observed to be knowingly and repeatedly breaching this club rule, the 
Committee will impose sanctions on the player.



A ball lying on or inside the broken white line at the front of the green, 
or on the green surround of a par three hole, must be played as it lies.







 Mandatory Use of Tee Mats

Where a mat has been placed on the tee of a hole, the front of the teeing 
ground is defined as the front of the mat; the sides of the teeing ground 
are defined as the sides of the mat. The depth of the teeing ground is 
defined as the depth of the mat and not two club-lengths. In teeing, the 
player must place the ball on a tee-peg placed into the mat, or place the 
ball directly on the mat. He may tee the ball anywhere on the mat, 
regardless of the position of the stones. The player must stand on the mat 
when playing from the mat. If a player breaches this club rule, he should 
add two strokes to his score for the hole. If a player is observed to 
knowingly and repeatedly breach this club rule, the Committee will impose 
sanctions on the player.

Ron Todd  writes:

> On 26 Nov, 21:34, Leon Chamae  wrote:
> > Rule 24-2 relief.  But, chacon son gout, c'est la vie, etc. etc.
> >
> > --
> >              Leon Chamae
> >              Directeur du Personnel
> >              Bureau de Change
> 
> "Chacon son gout"?
> 
> I must now assume that your French persona is a blind, Leon!

French?  moi?  It's safe to say that you can discern from my
posts as much about my height as you can about my ethnicity.

Sur Internet, personne ne sait que vous jtes un chien.

-- 
             Leon Chamae
             Directeur du Personnel
             Bureau de Change

Jo-)hn Turner wrote:
> So here again is my post, without the attachment which I included as part of 
> the post instead.
> 
> At Lahinch we post a club rule (not a local rule), see attachment. It states 
> that you must either place a ball on the mat, or tee the ball up on the mat. 
> Further, you must stand on the mat to play your tee shot. 

Oh dear! 'Building a stance'?....see Decision 13-3/1

[quote]
'Standing on Mat on Teeing ground'

Q Is it permissib;e for a player to carry a mat and stand on it when 
playing from the teeing ground?

A No. The player would be building a stance in breach of Rule 13-3
[/unquote]

But of course, you knew that!

:-)

david

"david s-a"  wrote in message 
news:5r0rrpF118il2U1@mid.individual.net...
>M L Wadsworth wrote:
>
>>>>
>>> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
>>>
>> They are normally immovable.
>> If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then taking 
>> relief from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be playing from 
>> the side, forget it.
>> Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet 
>> started the hole, you have no ball in play.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Malcolm
>>
> ..ummmmm!
>
> Malcolm,
>
> This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the the 
> object interferes with the players stance or the area of his intended 
> swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision 13-2/14 clearly 
> refutes your suggestion!
>
> david
>
David,
I think you will find 25-1b/4 is more relevant ;-)

Regards,
Malcolm

M L Wadsworth wrote:
> "david s-a"  wrote in message 
> news:5r0rrpF118il2U1@mid.individual.net...
>> M L Wadsworth wrote:
>>
>>>> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
>>>>
>>> They are normally immovable.
>>> If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then taking 
>>> relief from an immovable obstruction, such that you would be playing from 
>>> the side, forget it.
>>> Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not yet 
>>> started the hole, you have no ball in play.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Malcolm
>>>
>> ..ummmmm!
>>
>> Malcolm,
>>
>> This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the the 
>> object interferes with the players stance or the area of his intended 
>> swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision 13-2/14 clearly 
>> refutes your suggestion!
>>
>> david
>>
> David,
> I think you will find 25-1b/4 is more relevant ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> Malcolm 
> 
> 


Malcolm,

Take that up with Leon!

:-)
david

david s-a  writes:

> M L Wadsworth wrote:
> > "david s-a"  wrote in message
> > news:5r0rrpF118il2U1@mid.individual.net...
> >> M L Wadsworth wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Would the mat then be a moveable (or even immovable) obstruction?
> >>>>
> >>> They are normally immovable.
> >>> If you are thinking of teeing up on or behind the mat and then
> >>> taking relief from an immovable obstruction, such that you would
> >>> be playing from the side, forget it.
> >>> Relief is only afforded to a ball in play and since you have not
> >>> yet started the hole, you have no ball in play.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Malcolm
> >>>
> >> ..ummmmm!
> >>
> >> Malcolm,
> >>
> >> This is either a new rule or a mistake! Relief is afforded if the
> >> the object interferes with the players stance or the area of his
> >> intended swing, whether the ball is in play or not. Decision
> >> 13-2/14 clearly refutes your suggestion!
> >>
> >> david
> >>
> > David,
> > I think you will find 25-1b/4 is more relevant ;-)
> > Regards,
> > Malcolm
> 
> 
> Malcolm,
> 
> Take that up with Leon!

Those silly RBs should say 'ball in play' (in the Rule) if
they mean 'ball in play.'

-- 
             Leon Chamae
             Directeur du Personnel
             Bureau de Change

John Turner wrote:
> So here again is my post, without the attachment which I included as part of 
> the post instead.
> 
> At Lahinch we post a club rule (not a local rule), see attachment. It states 
> that you must either place a ball on the mat, or tee the ball up on the mat. 
> Further, you must stand on the mat to play your tee shot. We have them in 
> use on par three holes and only occasionally on a longer hole where the 
> whole teeing area has been refurbished. We usually place the tee markers, 
> stones, on the ground towards the back of the mat where they are least 
> likely to be struck. There is a weather proofed printout of the rule in 
> large print posted near each mat. You will notice that if the player 
> breaches the Club Rule, it says that he should add a penalty stroke to his 
> score, and not that he must. Fellow competitors are rather good at helping a 
> player's conscience decide what to do. The Committee has on occasion had to 
> reprimand a player for failing to observe the rule. After all, on the teeing 
> ground it has to
> be a deliberate act.
> 
> As to the Rules of golf; if CONGU sees fit to consider a competition played 
> with either fairway mats or even pegging up a qualifying round, then why 
> argue about two feet or so being denied on the teeing ground. It is after 
> all a measure taken to allow us to play golf in conditions that require us 
> to protect the course.
> 
> John T
> 
> 
> 
> CLUB RULES REGARDING MATS
> 
> 
> 
> From November 1st until further notice, excepting during the Hamper 
> competitions, the following club rules are in effect regarding the mandatory 
> use of fairway mats in all forms of play on the Old Course, and the use of 
> tee mats on both courses.
> 
> 
> 
> Definition
> 
> "Through the green" is the whole area of the course except:
> 
> 1                 The teeing ground and putting green of the hole being 
> played; and
> 
> 2                 All hazards on the course.
> 
> 
> 
> Mandatory Use of Fairway Mats
> 
> A ball lying on a closely mown area through the green, but not on or inside 
> the broken white line at the front of the green or on the green surround of 
> a par three hole, must be lifted without penalty. Before lifting the ball, 
> the player must mark its position. Having lifted the ball, he may clean it. 
> He must then position a fairway mat so that the ball, when placed on the 
> mat, will be within six inches of and not nearer the hole than where it 
> originally lay. If the player uses a tee to secure the mat to the ground, 
> the ball must not be placed on the tee. The player may only use a fairway 
> mat provided by Lahinch Golf Club. This procedure may not be ignored because 
> the player wishes to use a putter from outside the broken white line at the 
> front of the green.
> 
> 
> 
> A player may position the mat and place his ball only once, and it is in 
> play when it has been placed. If the ball when placed comes to rest on the 
> spot on which it is placed and it subsequently moves, there is no penalty 
> and the ball must be played as it lies, unless it has rolled off the mat in 
> which case it must be replaced on the mat.
> 
> 
> 
> If the player fails to mark the position of the ball before lifting it, or 
> plays a ball from other than on a mat, he is in breach of this club rule, 
> and he should add one stroke to his score for the hole. If a player is 
> observed to be knowingly and repeatedly breaching this club rule, the 
> Committee will impose sanctions on the player.
> 
> 
> 
> A ball lying on or inside the broken white line at the front of the green, 
> or on the green surround of a par three hole, must be played as it lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Mandatory Use of Tee Mats
> 
> Where a mat has been placed on the tee of a hole, the front of the teeing 
> ground is defined as the front of the mat; the sides of the teeing ground 
> are defined as the sides of the mat. The depth of the teeing ground is 
> defined as the depth of the mat and not two club-lengths. In teeing, the 
> player must place the ball on a tee-peg placed into the mat, or place the 
> ball directly on the mat. He may tee the ball anywhere on the mat, 
> regardless of the position of the stones. The player must stand on the mat 
> when playing from the mat. If a player breaches this club rule, he should 
> add two strokes to his score for the hole. If a player is observed to 
> knowingly and repeatedly breach this club rule, the Committee will impose 
> sanctions on the player.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Thanks for that JT, though I'm not too sure our greens staff will be 
happy at maintaining a broken white line during winter.

In your preamble to the Mandatory Use of Tee Mats you write that the 
player should add the penalty of ONE stroke to his score but in the 
actual copy of the rule you provide it states TWO strokes, (which does 
sound a bit harsh).

Is this a missprong or have you only been adding one to your score 
instead of two when you breach the rule?

-- 
Durram

"Demetri (Durram)"  wrote in message 
news:figve3$7ur$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> John Turner wrote:
>> So here again is my post, without the attachment which I included as part 
>> of the post instead.
>>
BIG SNIP

>>
>>
>
> Thanks for that JT, though I'm not too sure our greens staff will be happy 
> at maintaining a broken white line during winter.
>
> In your preamble to the Mandatory Use of Tee Mats you write that the 
> player should add the penalty of ONE stroke to his score but in the actual 
> copy of the rule you provide it states TWO strokes, (which does sound a 
> bit harsh).
>
> Is this a missprong or have you only been adding one to your score instead 
> of two when you breach the rule?
>
> -- 
> Durram

You are right, and I gave an incomplete account in the preamble.

Generally, if a player breaches the fairway mat rule it is by forgetting to 
use the mat altogether, easily done, and so we used the one stroke penalty 
found at the end of the specimen local rule for preferred lies and not the 
general penalty. We thought that they equated somewhat. Breaching the tee 
mat rule is a deliberate act and not one of forgetfulness, so a two stroke 
penalty, the equivalent of breaking the specimen LR. Not perfect logic, but 
given the impossibility of writing a Local Rule that would pass the RBs, I 
thought that the author and his Committee deserved a pat on the back.

David s-a,  13-3/1 refers to a player carrying a mat so that he may stand on 
it when playing from the teeing ground. Even a really beefy chap like 
Demetri would have trouble lugging one of our tee mats around, so our Club 
Rule must be ok. But then I'm sure you knew that. I suppose that also means 
that it is ok for a player to carry a mat to use when playing a shot from 
TTG.

Cheers

JohnT