Home >  > 规则中关于“暂定球”和“错误球”一个判例

规则中关于“暂定球”和“错误球”一个判例

0

今天晚上在宿舍时和舍友碰到了一个判例,我们两个在宿舍辩论了半天,后来终于明白为什么那个案例中要以违反15-3来处置。

判例问题和答案如下:27-2c/3

Q: A player's ball came to rest 20 yards over a green and beyond a white stake which the player's caddie said was a boundary stake. The player played a provisional ball which came to rest short of the green, but closer to the hole than his original ball. The player played the provisional ball onto the green. At that point, he walked behind the green towards his original ball, which had been visible all along, and discovered that the white stake was not a boundary stake and that his original ball was in bounds. What is the ruling?

A: The player should have determined the status of his original ball before playing a second stroke with the provisional ball and, since the original ball was not out of bounds, he should have abandoned the provisional ball. When he failed to do so, the second stroke with the provisional ball was a stroke with a wrong ball – Rule 27-2c.
In match play, the player lost the hole (Rule 15-3a).
In stroke play, he incurred a two-stroke penalty (Rule 15-3b) and was required to hole out with the original ball.

我们之间的争论在于,为什么该球手的情况不能按27-2b进行处理,即暂定球在该情况下成为使用中球;而判例却判定球手打了错误的球。

我们把相关的问题集中了一下,还找了27-2b/1和27-2b/2两个判例进行了对比,发现我们的思路并没有错,而且27-2b/1和27-2b/2两个判例也证明暂定球在球手放弃寻找初始球而打了暂定球的时候(当然,还要符合其它要求)该暂定球会成为使用中球。

那么,为什么会是打了错误的球呢?

后来我们再看了一遍原文,发现,我们又再一次成为粗心的马大哈。原文中说打了球进了(误以为是界外)的桩外面,并且一直都可以看得到球(his original ball, which had beed visible all along)!所以,在这样的情况之下球手有责任去确认他的球的状态是不是已经OB了,没有OB的话而他的球却一直都看得到,不算lost ball,所以无法按27-2b进行处置,打了球也就违反了15-3a或15-3b。

看来,还是不够细心。



相关文章

目前在观澜湖高尔夫球会任职。

发表评论