Drop yes or no?

There is a sign in front of the tree.
The ball cannot actually be played onto the green or to the flag in this position. See picture.

The player (right-handed) now claims a free drop in front of the immovable obstruction (green sign, but not closer to the flag. Reason. The player indicated that he wanted to play the ball onto the green with his pitch set on the toe like a left-handed player, but that the immovable obstruction prevented him from having an unobstructed stance or being able to swing accordingly.

On a par 3, the ball is played to the left of the green just in front of a tree. See picture

Answer:

1) Basically, the position of the ball is due to a bad shot, the player has put himself in this unsuccessful position.
2. it is difficult for me to determine from the pictures whether the ball can be played right-handed even if it is obstructed by the tree.
3. would it be possible to remove this shield if it is only in sleeves and not permanently mounted in the ground? (Movable obstacle)
4. is this shot played to the left actually the sensible shot for the player, it is not said that the player can/must play towards the green or flag due to the poor position?
5. the question is whether this left-footed shot would be the sensible shot or whether the player is trying to free himself from his predicament with this action and is clearly choosing an unreasonable shot.

There are also two interpretations:

16.1a(3)/1 - Impediment affecting unusual blow does not preclude player from claiming relief
In some situations, a player may be forced to adapt to the situation with an unusual swing, stance or direction when playing his ball. If this unusual stroke is not clearly unreasonable in the circumstances, the player may claim relief without penalty under Rule 16.1.
Example: The ball of a right-handed player lies so close to a marker on the left-hand side of the fairway of a hole that the player must play left-handed in order to be able to play towards the hole. When executing the left-handed shot, the player's backswing is obstructed by an immovable obstacle.
The player is entitled to relief from this immovable obstruction as a left-handed stroke is not clearly unreasonable in these circumstances.
After completing the relief procedure for the left-handed swing, the player can then make a normal right-handed swing for the next shot.
If the impediment then impedes the right-handed swing, the player may claim relief for that right-handed swing in accordance with Rule 16.1b or play the ball as it lies.

16.1a(3)/2 - A player may not use a clearly unreasonable swing to claim relief from a circumstance
A player may not use a clearly unreasonable stroke to claim relief from unusual course conditions. If a player's stroke is clearly unreasonable in the circumstances, relief under Rule 16.1 is not permitted and the player must either play the ball as it lies or claim relief for an unplayable ball.

Example: The ball of a right-handed player is in a bad position in the terrain. An immovable obstruction near the ball would not hinder a normal right-handed shot by the player, but would hinder a left-handed shot. The player explains that he wants to make his next stroke left-handed and that, as the obstacle is obstructing this stroke, relief under Rule 16.1b would be justified.

Since the player only wants to use the left-handed stroke to get out of a bad situation with the relief, the use of this unusual stroke is clearly unreasonable and the player is not entitled to relief under Rule 16.1b (Rule 16.1a (3)).
The same principles would apply to the use of a clearly unreasonable stance, direction or choice of club.

If I as a referee were called to such a situation, the player would have to give me very good arguments for me to give him this drop.

In the meantime, if you would like to know more about the Rules of Golf, please contact me directly at hans.kienesberger@golf.at.