Jeffrey I never said a player who hits a ball into Abnormal Ground Conditions should return to the tee. What I said is a player or group of players who hit a ball into the rough cannot decide to designate that area abnormal ground condition because they think it should have been mowed shorter or because they do not like where the course chose to start or end a fairway.
The USGA defines Abnormal Ground Conditions as;
An animal hole, ground under repair, an immovable obstruction or temporary water.
The USGA does not designate unmown rough or thick rough as ground under repair anywhere in their rules, decisions or definitions, so I fail to see how you think unmown or thick rough meets the criteria for abnormal ground condition. It is what it is, rough.
For your information, I am quite comfortable with my knowledge of the rules. I am concerned with someone who claims to know the rules and then claims a normally unmown area, also called the rough, lies outside of the fairway, where most players find unmown grass or rough can be arbitrarily designated as abnormal ground conditions by a single group of players.
The USGA does not define what an acceptable length is for rough; the course has ignored it, it has not been announced before play.
I REPEAT, the USGA does not define it, the course has ignored it and it has not been addressed before play starts, but you believe you have the right to arbitrarily designate rough you think is too long as abnormal ground conditions? Can I claim a bunker has too much sand in it as abnormal ground conditions? Do you really believe one group of players are allowed to designate an area as abnormal ground conditions, and another group designating a different area, and a third group designating another area, because they don’t like the length of the rough or where it is located.
Sorry Jeffrey but your argument makes no sense at all. The course always has the option of marking it or designating it but absent of the course designating it, a player does not have the right to.