1-4/12 Player Breaches Rules More Than Once; Whether Multiple
Penalties Should Be Applied
Situations arise prior to or as a result of a stroke in which a player breaches
a single Rule more than once, or breaches separate Rules, in a single act or in
different but sequential acts. The question arises whether it is appropriate to
apply a penalty to each separate breach.
The Rules expressly provide that multiple penalties are not to be applied
in certain situations (e.g. Rules 15-2, 18, 20-7 and 21). However, there are
many other situations where multiple breaches of the Rules may occur and
the Rules themselves do not expressly specify whether a penalty should be
applied to each separate breach. In such cases, equity (Rule 1-4) applies, and
the following principles should be used:
1. O ne Act Results in One Rule Being Breached More Than Once –
Single Penalty Applied
Example: In stroke play, a competitor’s ball on the putting green strikes a
fellow-competitor’s ball in breach of Rule 19-5a and then strikes another
fellow-competitor’s ball, also in breach of Rule 19-5a. The ruling would
be a single two-stroke penalty.
2. O ne Act Results in Two Rules Being Breached – Single Penalty
Applied
Example: In stroke play, a competitor is considering putting his ball from
a bunker and rakes a footprint in the bunker on his line of play. Both Rule
13-2 and Rule 13-4a have been breached. The ruling would be a single
two-stroke penalty.
3. Related Acts Result in One Rule Being Breached More Than
Once – Single Penalty Applied
Example 1: In stroke play, a competitor takes several practice swings in a
hazard, touching the ground each time. The practice swings are related
acts breaching a single Rule. The ruling would be a single two-stroke
RULE 1 32
RULE 1
33
penalty under Rule 13-4b (see Decision 13-4/3 but also see Principle 6
Example 3).
Example 2: A and B are fellow-competitors playing a par three hole. B is
to play first and A asks B whether it is best to play for the centre of the
green or to play for the flagstick and B advises that it is best to play for
the centre of the green. A then asks what club B is going to use. B says he
will hit a six iron. After B’s stroke, which fell short of the green, A asks
B if he had hit it well and B confirms that he did. A then hit his shot. The
ruling is that both competitors incur a single two-stroke penalty under
Rule 8-1 for seeking or giving three related pieces of information all of
which might assist A in his choice of club for his next stroke and the way
to play it. (But see also Principle 6 Example 2).
4. Related Acts Result in Two Rules Being Breached – Single
Penalty Applied
Example 1: In stroke play, a competitor is considering putting his ball
from a bunker and rakes several footprints in the bunker on his line of
play. Both Rule 13-2 and Rule 13-4a have been breached multiple times by
related acts. The ruling would be a single two-stroke penalty.
Example 2: In stroke play, a competitor’s ball moves prior to address
and, while it is in motion, it is accidentally stopped by the competitor’s
club in breach of Rule 19-2 and comes to rest against it. The competitor
then moves the club, as a result of which his ball moves – a breach of Rule
18-2a. These related acts would result in a single one-stroke penalty (see
Decision 19-2/1.5).
5. U nrelated Acts Result in Two Rules Being Breached – Multiple
Penalties Applied
Example 1: In stroke play, a competitor (1) touches the ground in a
hazard with his club while taking practice swings in a hazard and (2)
improves his line of play by bending a shrub with his hand. The ruling
would be a two-stroke penalty under Rule 13-4 (touching the ground
in a hazard with his club) and a further penalty of two strokes under
Rule 13-2 (for the unrelated act of improving his line of play by moving
something growing), giving a total penalty of four strokes (see Decision
13-4/28).
Example 2: Under Example 2 in Principle 4 above, if the ball is not
replaced before the competitor makes his next stroke, the failure
to replace the ball is an unrelated act and the competitor incurs an
additional penalty of two strokes under Rule 18-2a.
6. U nrelated Acts Result in One Rule Being Breached More Than
Once – Multiple Penalties Applied
Example 1: In stroke play, a competitor (1) purposely steps on another
player’s line of putt with the intention of improving the line, and then
(2) purposely stops his own ball in motion after it began moving without
apparent cause before address. As the two acts were unrelated, the
ruling would be two separate penalties, each of two strokes, for breaches
of Rule 1-2, giving a total penalty of four strokes.
Example 2: A and B are fellow-competitors waiting for the green to
clear at a par three hole. A, who has been hitting all his iron shots right
of target, asks B if his (A’s) alignment has been wrong. B confirms that
A’s alignment has been wrong. After the green clears A asks B what club
B is going to play. B does not answer. The ruling would be that A and B
both incur a two-stroke penalty for asking for and giving advice about
A’s alignment (advice on the method of making a stroke). A incurs an
additional two-stroke penalty for asking for information from B, which
might assist A with his choice of club. Although both requests by A
are breaches of the same Rule (Rule 8-1) their character is sufficiently
different to warrant two separate penalties.
Example 3: Under Example 1 in Principle 3 above, the competitor then
makes a stroke and fails to get the ball out of the hazard. He makes two
more practice swings in the hazard, again touching the ground each
time. The ruling would be two separate two-stroke penalties under
Rule 13-4b. The link between the acts was broken by the competitor’s
intervening stroke (see also Decision 1-4/14).
For the purposes of this Decision:
• in making the judgment whether two acts are related or unrelated, the
Committee should consider, among other things, the similarity of the
acts, how close to one another they are in terms of time and location and
whether there were any intervening events;
• each principal subsection of a Rule is considered a separate Rule (e.g.
Rules 1-2, 1-3 and 1-4 are considered separate Rules); and
• the following sub-subsections (but only these ones) are also considered
separate Rules: 4-3a, 4-3b, 13-4a, 13-4b, 13-4c, 14-2a, 14-2b, 16-1a,
16-1b, 16-1c, 16-1d, 16-1e, 16-1f, 17-3a, 17-3b, 17-3c, 18-2a and 18-2b.
(Revised)
， 我没有找到更合适的判例。
