GOLFING LAW

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 87, 6 January 1940, Page 20

GOLFING LAW

Difficult Problems Discussed WHAT RULES SAY

“A man may .be a very good lawyer *• and a very bad judge,” is a saying which, ’ while not wholly true, holds a semblance of fact; and the same thing may be said of the golfer and the umpire (writes ’lhe Caddie” in "The Star.” Johannesberg). The difficult decision comes to linn only seldom, and yet without making any mistake in law lie can rouse spectators and players alike to the brink of desperation. - He' may dart forward and forcibly dis--1 possess the caddie of the flag while somebody is getting ready to putt; or he may e insist on talking to the players who may r wish to devote themselves. to the busi--1 ness in hand and do not like to be too uncivil and tell him something. To the spectator the umpire appears 1 to have an easy time of it. He struts ' along, like the jolly young waterman, “whistling and thinking .of nothing at all,” yet all the while wondering whether any recondite point will be raised to which he will be expected to give an immediate answer. And if he has not L got a copy of the rules in one of his I pockets he' will be the more conscious ot > his imperfections. : But, generally speaking, he will oe asked to decide simple questions which decide themselves. Not many complica- ' tions arise during the course of a match, 1 but because of the number of .possibilities ■ the statute law of the game is coinpli--1 cated and, to most people, diflicult to re- , member. The ball may perform strange antics in which it may take refuge m a paper bag, a jam tin, even in a specta- ■ tor’s pocket. And the chances are about 10 to 1 that neither the players nor the umpire will be able to decide what should be done. It may disappear in the dram pipe leading from a water hazard when some wag among the crowd will dare the unfortunates to say that that is either the hazard or portion of it. It may bury itself in the viscous mud of a bunker from which the player, in his hearty attempt to dislodge it, may discover it attached to a blob of the bunker attached to the head of tbs niblick. It may impale itself in the barb of a wire fence which is out of bounds and by force ot impact turn the barb outside the imaginary line that demarcates the course. Holiday Happenings. lie would be a. knowledgeable golf lawyer who answered the two last points by the simple law of equity embraced in Rule 35. If, however, he decided that the ball in each instance is unplayable and that the unfortunate player must obey Rule 22, there is nothing more that can be said, however evil-minded the victim may be. , t . I am prompted to these thoughts by some letters that have come, as a result of happenings during the holiday. One among these contains a point that is at once interesting and diflicult. In a match a player playing a second ball “in order to save delay” struck his ball close to the hole, ami having discovered it to be to his advantage to declare the first ball, which was admittedly playable, and not out of bounds, to be unplayable under Rule 22, .promptly did so. His opponent denied his right to declare the first ball unplayable, and, therefore “dead.” and said he would ask for a ruling. The answer is contained in the rule. But the rule unfortunately allows a player to have a choice. Actually it does not say he is a judge or an arbiter in the sense of those words. It gives him an opportunity of making up his mind ] which of two .balls he- shall play. The point was raised in 1935 by Sir Ernley Blackwell, who, at the business meeting of the Royal and Ancient, moved an alteration of the rule which, in effect, .is as follows: — “To abolish the rule as to ‘unplay- , able balls.’ which, as interpreted by the ■ Rules of Golf Committee, allows a_ player to ‘deem’ unplayable a ball which is : actually playable because he thinks, hav- ’ ing regard to the position of his provi- J sional ball, that it is to. his advantage t to' <lo so.” . That proposal was rejected by 60 to 1 30, and the rule remains as it is, leaving ’ the right to .the player to do what the J gentleman in the match did. In essence * the rule is fair, and the point made by 1 Sir Ernley is perhaps a little far-fetched. J Yet it is a probability and should be t accepted in tennis of the law. The 1 gifted lawyer might argue that the in- 1 tention of the legislature was that the 1 player .should be merely judge of whether* a ball was unplayable or not t and that he should not have the choice ‘ of two .balls in play. The good judge J would possibly reply that the rule permits the player to decide whether a ■_ ball is unplayable or not; that he need fi ask advice from none and that iw I matter what happens to the provisional ball he may play whichever he s determines will be of advantage to him. And, as the law stands, he is not ” to be denied. So that whatever an op- ' ponent may think of the golfer who 0 would “deem unplayable” a ball that c was found on the course and playable be- t cause the provisional ball lay on the green, the fact remains that the law has ( ‘ offered its protection. ® A Fourball Incident. !

The second point is one of common occurrence. The rules governing the fourball match are few and simple. Yet it happens nearly each weekend that one or other of a side disremembers the penalties that are imposed by interfering with a ball in play. Fortunately most golfers are reasonable people and will immediately bow to a decision that seems equable. But let us take a case in point. A and B play to a short hole and both balls reach the green. C and D, to each of whom a stroke is conceded, play wild shots, one to a bunker, the other to a sandy hillside. Vainly they try to get out on one stroke; D, after futile hammering, gives up; C, having played two more, plays what he intended should be a chip to the hole, but which, scu tiering across the green, strikes the caddie bug laid down by A’s caddie, who helped in the search for D’s ball. There is some consternation, but B says: “It’s all right, I’ve two for the hole,” whereupon D replies, “I think not; your side loses the hole.” There is much conversation on the problem, which is finally reserved for decision.

There can be small doubt that A and B richly deserve a hole to which they had played two admirable strokes and that C and D should have hidden their heads in a bush. But again the law is inexorable. Nothing except holing out from the tee shot could in the circumstances have rewarded A and B. But, because A s caddie is in golfing law part of himself, and because the clubs which were in his trust obstructed the path of C's ball, it must be held that C had caused the obstruction and both he and his uartner must suffer. It may lie argued that the imposition is incomprehensible, but it eaunot be said that it is bad in law. The origin may be found in the old story of Willie Dunn and Tom Morris’s game at Musselburgh, where, at the Gas Hole. Old Tom, after playing four, stood aside to watch his enemy, who bad played three and lay dead as any stymie at the holeside. putt. “Gie't him. 'Dim ; gie't." roared the Musselburgh men. But Tom looked contemptuously at the crowd and roared : “Gie't him lie daumed.! lie mielil aye fa' dooti deid.” There is both humour and pathos in the intimidation; and though Willie Dunn did hole and win the match, Old Tom. with all Hie ardour of Jiis race, probably prayed .some accident would happen to allow him to square

There are many lessons to bo learned in tin* Blue Book and many to be gleaned from the rules. Golf is played nowadays in too “easy fashion’' as Old Da' used to sa.y, when men lifted their halls from the whins and drpoped it without mathematical consideration, in a pleasanter place. “Ahv’e seed them dae it. sir; aye, and wi’pot saying ae word.” and he added witji a twinkle: “Rules is rules, sir, mid ye cannot Ibrak through them. But there’s nae rule, sir, that makes ye play wi' th’ same man twice.” I may have given offence. 1 hope not. There the injles are: Huie 22 and Rule 7 of the rules for three-ball bestball and fourball matches. And 1 must shelter behind them camouflage. or none.