Unsure if rule is broken

[Uisce Beatha]

Two players have the same irons (550C/Project X if it matters  ).  On hole #5 it is noticed that player B has both seven irons in his bag.  Player A used his on hole #2 and player B used his (maybe) on hole #3.  Seems to be two possibilities:

1)  Player A used his on hole #2 and replaced it in player B's bag.

2)  Player B pulled player A's club from A's bag on hole #3 and put it back in B's  bag. 

If under scenario #1 player B played player A's club he's in trouble under 4-4a/5.  If he played player A's club under scenario #2 he's also in trouble under 4-4.  I understand all that. 

What we don't know is if B actually used A's club at all.  There's no way to know at the time both clubs were found in B's bag.  It's perhaps likely, I don't know. 

Benefit of doubt or burden of proof on player B?  I realize if there's a committee involved you just turn it over to them.  But it's a casual round.  The whole players as committee thing is going on.  What do we, the player committee, do?

P.S.  Hate golf cart golf.   

[Clive]

4-4a/3 Competitor Withdraws During Round and Puts His Clubs in Fellow-Competitor’s Bag
Q. In stroke play, B withdrew during a round, put his clubs in A’s bag, making the total number of clubs in the bag exceed 14, and carried A’s bag for the remainder of the round. Should A be penalized under Rule 4-4a?

A. No, provided he did not use any of B’s clubs.

4-4a/5 Fellow-Competitor’s Club Put in Competitor’s Bag by Mistake During Round Used Unintentionally by Competitor
Q. In stroke play, A and B both started with 14 clubs. They were using iron clubs of the same model. At one hole, B’s caddie inadvertently put one of B’s clubs into A’s bag. At a subsequent hole, A played a stroke with B’s club by mistake. What is the ruling?

A. Rule 4-4a states: “The player must start a stipulated round with not more than 14 clubs. He is limited to the clubs thus selected...” A complied with the first sentence and therefore incurred no penalty for carrying B’s club. However, when A played a stroke with B’s club, he did not comply with the second sentence and was subject to penalty under Rule 4-4a.


4-4a/6 Excess Club Put in Player’s Golf Bag After Player Has Counted His Clubs at 1st Tee; Error Discovered After Player Has Started Round
Q. A arrives at the 1st tee, counts his clubs and confirms that he is carrying 14. He then removes his driver from his golf bag, leaves the bag beside the tee and checks in with the starter. At this point, X, a player in another match or group, by mistake puts his putter in A’s golf bag, which was identical to X’s bag. A then drives from the 1st tee. During play of the 1st hole, A discovers that X’s club has been put in his (A’s) golf bag. Does A incur a penalty for starting the round with more than 14 clubs?

A. Yes.

Are both players equally anal-retentive about cleaning their clubheads after a shot?  Did both have the same sort of lies, such that no difference can be discerned as to dirt, grass, or sand on the clubhead (to divine which player might have last used which club)?

Failing all that, I'd say burden of proof rests with the player.  I liken it to:

27/10 Player Unable to Distinguish His Ball from Another Ball
Q. A and B hit their tee shots into the same area. Both balls were found but, because A and B were playing identical balls and neither had put an identification mark on his ball, they could not determine which ball was A’s and which was B’s. What is the ruling?

A. Since neither player could identify a ball as his ball, both balls were lost — see Definition of “Lost Ball.”
This incident underlines the advisability of the player putting an identification mark on his ball — see Rules 6-5 and 12-2.

[Uisce Beatha]

Are both players equally anal-retentive about cleaning their clubheads after a shot?  Did both have the same sort of lies, such that no difference can be discerned as to dirt, grass, or sand on the clubhead (to divine which player might have last used which club)?

Player A used it for a tee shot on a par-3.  Player B used it for a fairway shot.  Both clear their clubs to the point they don't have to be touched post round.  I'm not sure if we might have been able to tell but that's good thinking.  I think it has the potentially to prove one way or another. 

Failing all that, I'd say burden of proof rests with the player.

I tend to agree and that's how we proceeded.  I'm Player B by the way.   

[Aske]

 

[TFT]

I say burn them both at the stake for being obvious copycat ****ual deviants.

Sounds more equitable.

[Uisce Beatha]

I say burn them both at the stake for being obvious copycat ****ual deviants.

Who you calling obvious?

[stroh]

Sounds more equitable.

Holy *fudge*.  Don't try arguing that word over there.  You get ostracized, in the most sincere way.  I can't even ask a nearest point of relief question anymore, with this Mark of the beast Scarlet letter I'm sportin'.

Feck 'em.

[Uisce Beatha]

Sounds more equitable.

Holy *fudge*.  Don't try arguing that word over there.  You get ostracized, in the most sincere way.  I can't even ask a nearest point of relief question anymore, with this Mark of the beast Scarlet letter I'm sportin'.

Feck 'em.

LOL, was that you?  I'm probably guilty of ostracizing you to some degree.  I don't login over there these days so I can't be sure what I wrote.   

I'm a kinder, gentler guy these days.  Quitting FIGS was good for my soul.  If I'm guilty of offense, I do apologize.

But you deserve the Scarlet letter anyway 'cuz you're a *trollop*.

[spacey]

Sounds more equitable.

Holy *fudge*.  Don't try arguing that word over there.  You get ostracized, in the most sincere way.  I can't even ask a nearest point of relief question anymore, with this Mark of the beast Scarlet letter I'm sportin'.

Feck 'em.

LOL, was that you?  I'm probably guilty of ostracizing you to some degree.  I don't login over there these days so I can't be sure what I wrote.   

I'm a kinder, gentler guy these days.  Quitting FIGS was good for my soul.  If I'm guilty of offense, I do apologize.

But you deserve the Scarlet letter anyway 'cuz you're a *trollop*.

LOL. I think my first real interaction with our good friend stroh involved me being a bit of a *feces*bag as well. Since I'm good and kind to all men, I'll blame him for it and offer up no apologies.

[stroh]

Sounds more equitable.

Holy *fudge*.  Don't try arguing that word over there.  You get ostracized, in the most sincere way.  I can't even ask a nearest point of relief question anymore, with this Mark of the beast Scarlet letter I'm sportin'.

Feck 'em.

LOL, was that you?  I'm probably guilty of ostracizing you to some degree.  I don't login over there these days so I can't be sure what I wrote.   

I'm a kinder, gentler guy these days.  Quitting FIGS was good for my soul.  If I'm guilty of offense, I do apologize.

But you deserve the Scarlet letter anyway 'cuz you're a *trollop*.

   Nah.  Funk came in at the end.  Albeit tried to rekindle the flames, and stir the ashes, with the inquiry on "Facist Proclamation" duration.   

My beef was with 3 of the non human blue bloods.  Assclowns.

 

[stroh]

Sounds more equitable.

Holy *fudge*.  Don't try arguing that word over there.  You get ostracized, in the most sincere way.  I can't even ask a nearest point of relief question anymore, with this Mark of the beast Scarlet letter I'm sportin'.

Feck 'em.

LOL, was that you?  I'm probably guilty of ostracizing you to some degree.  I don't login over there these days so I can't be sure what I wrote.   

I'm a kinder, gentler guy these days.  Quitting FIGS was good for my soul.  If I'm guilty of offense, I do apologize.

But you deserve the Scarlet letter anyway 'cuz you're a *trollop*.

LOL. I think my first real interaction with our good friend stroh involved me being a bit of a *feces*bag as well. Since I'm good and kind to all men, I'll blame him for it and offer up no apologies.

If you capitulated an apology, I would call you weak, and strike you down, without quarter.

All I remember thinking was "Aw *fudge*!(it's origin, see )  It's that know it all dip*feces* and his dog.


*In reality, you were quite kind, and gave me a decent berth.  I thought you were pretty cool for that.   You could have gone straight to the Ringer treatment for me, but must have seen my weak constitution, and knew I would be an easy apprentice to the dark side. Now.  We shall never speak of it again.*

[Aske]

who here have I ever been nice to
 

[Uisce Beatha]

who here have I ever been nice to
 

You did post in one of my threads once.

[1puttpar]

Straight from the USGA:

In reply to your Rules of Golf inquiry, it is a question of fact as to
whether the player used, or did not use, his fellow competitors club in
playing a stroke. The Committee, in reaching its decision, should take
into account all of the evidence and testimony available to determine
whether or not a violation of the Rules occurred. Possible evidence
might include: dirt or grass on the clubface used; types or wear of
grips; stickers on the shafts, etc.. If the player is positive of which
club was originally his, that he used that club, and demonstrates this
to the Committee, the Committee would be just in accepting this
information. Any doubts as to whether the player was in violation of
Rule 4-4 would be resolved against the player.

[Uisce Beatha]

Thanks 1pp.  Not only for the answer but the warm fuzzy that I'm not the only one.