Seems like if P4 wanted compensation/penalization for the mis-plunge, they should have gotten the TD involved right away, instead of joking about it, playing on, then walking away. It isn’t terribly uncommon for players to adopt a no-harm-no-foul stance to that sort of thing happening in a casual event, particularly when the ball can be recovered.
Seems like P4 (and maybe the group as a whole) could have handled it better by communicating with each other and/or bringing in the TD when it happened.
I agree except for what I am interpreting as an implecation they should not have played on part. P4 has every right to take over control of that ball in play to not lose progress in their game state. If they want to play, go ahead play on. If they happen to come to a point where they have the ball trapped and in control, then talk to a TD.
IMO it’s one of those “anyone/everyone is responsible” . . . typically the motivation in getting a TD involved comes from the player who is getting screwed in the situation.
If nobody asks for a ruling, then there’s no ruling, and it’s “PLAY ON”. If there’s a player in that group that doesn’t think “PLAY ON” is an acceptable solution, then I’m guessing that player might be motivated to ask for a ruling.
Absolutely. And P4 takes the risk of once they start flipping at their ball plunged by P3, they now get no compensation ball for P3’s mistake. But P4 quickly stepping up and playing does not nullify P4’s ability to get a ruling for P3’s interference, even after P4’s ball has drained. While P4’s ball 3 drain represents the end of the game, because it was the most recent ball, I’d say that asking for a ruling (of P3’s DQ for the game – not any compensation for P4) is still appropriate.
If P4 “walks away” from the completed game and he/she, nor anyone else in the group asks for a ruling, then see the @pinwizj’s video above.