PDA

View Full Version : Rule Inquiry



recoveryjones
12-29-2003, 07:11 PM
Yesterday day a contoversy erupted in our local 9 ball tourney.A player was hooked about an 1 1/2 behind the 9 ball with the 7 and 8 still on the table.He jacked up his cue and brilliantly did a masse shot around the nine with a large curve hitting the seven. On his follow through well after the cue ball was on its way his pool cue and (not the cue ball) moved the nine ball causing an arguement as to whether this was a foul or not.The nine ball only move an inch or two. Was this a foul or should the nine ball have been replaced (other players option) where it originally was. Thanks RJ

houstondan
12-29-2003, 07:21 PM
foul. whacking another ball (o.b.) with the stick isn't a foul UNLESS you do it while attempting a jump or masse.

dan

recoveryjones
12-29-2003, 08:54 PM
Thanks Dan, Funny enough that this arguement happened between two pros and there were only 3 pros at the tourney.You'd think both pros would know.One asked me for my opinion and I didn't know. Now I do.Having said that, that was one very pretty masse.RJ

woody_968
12-29-2003, 11:03 PM
Dan, its been a while since I ran tournaments, but isnt it also a foul if you move an object ball while using a crutch? I mean if the cue ball is close to another object ball and you have to use a crutch to shoot the shot, I thought I remembered it being a foul if that object ball was moved during the shot.

houstondan
12-29-2003, 11:36 PM
i asume we're talking about just bca rules here. the only references i can think of say "inadvertant" o.b. moves are not a foul and the inadvertant mover should give the offended, non-shooting player an immediate opportunity to restore at their discretion. the only other references that come to mind are where it is a foul if you touch an ob with the cb whilst you have it in hand "foul by placment" or somesuch and the jump or masse rule. i suppose you could get into an unsportsmanlike ruling if the guy is just raking balls all over the place or more likely, a ref might call for a rerack if it's just unrestorable and someones upset about it. can't think of a mention of the bridge.

dan

Tom_In_Cincy
12-30-2003, 01:00 AM
HDJ,

TheTexas Express Rules (http://www.texasexpress.com/rules_sec1.htm)
(used more often than the BCA rules, IMO) state:

6.10: Miscue: A miscue is a foul (on any shot) if any part of the cue stick other than the chalked tip comes into contact with the cue ball. If determined to be a foul, opponent receives cue ball-in-hand.

And for moving balls:

6.17: Touching or Moving Numbered Balls During the Shot;
Moving a single numbered ball during a shot, causing the numbered ball to interfere with a legally struck numbered ball or cue ball results in a foul. If the general area vacated by the moved numbered ball may have affected a shot (by a legally struck numbered ball, the cue ball, or the path of either or both), a foul results. The opponent has the option to replace the moved numbered ball to its original position or leave in the moved position (leave lie). If two or more numbered balls are moved during the shot (or if the single numbered ball that was moved contacts another numbered ball), a foul results. The opponent has the option to reposition only the moved balls to their original places, or leave in the moved position (leave lie). The balls may never be replaced by the shooter without permission from the opponent, or a foul results. If a foul occurs, opponent receives cue ball-in-hand.

I've been running tournaments with the Texas Express Rules now for awhile.

Seems the BCA rules have too much room for interpretation.

c.holtz009
12-30-2003, 08:44 AM
I thought it would depend on if you were playing cue ball fouls only, or fouls on all balls. In any case, I think this should be stated at the beginning of the tourney so there are no arguments.

Rod
12-30-2003, 09:38 AM
Texas Express,

6.24: Masse or Jump Shot Interference

If a player executes a jump or masse shot to avoid hitting any numbered ball that obstructs the path to the lowest numbered ball, and as a result moves any numbered ball due to the follow-through of the shot, a foul occurs. The penalty is cue ball-in-hand for the opponent.


BCA,

5.12 JUMP AND MASSÉ SHOT FOUL
If a match is not refereed, it will be considered a cue ball foul if during an attempt to jump, curve or massé the cue ball over or around an impeding numbered ball, the impeding ball moves (regardless of whether it was moved by a hand, cue stick follow-through or bridge).



If these guys are pros then they should know what set of rules they are using. Do you know what ruling body was in effect? Either way the answer should be there.

Rod

pooltchr
12-30-2003, 09:50 AM
Looks like in this case, even if you are playing "cue ball fouls only", these rules would apply.

woody_968
12-30-2003, 10:04 AM
I got currious so I started looking on the BCA website, below is a quote from that site and although it does mention the bridge I understand it to be directly talking about jump and masse shots only. It may have been texas express rules that I was thinking of so I will look further.

From bca site: 5.12 JUMP AND MASSÉ SHOT FOUL
If a match is not refereed, it will be considered a cue ball foul if during an attempt to jump, curve or massé the cue ball over or around an impeding numbered ball, the impeding ball moves (regardless of whether it was moved by a hand, cue stick follow-through or bridge).

houstondan
12-30-2003, 10:06 AM
hey tom...you're right about a lot of tournies being run under txex rules. my argument is simply that any rules have holes, no matter what and i hate to have to learn a whole nother set of differences. clearly, i'm outnumbered here.

on the miscue. i sorta agree with bca in not making it a foul cause it's so hard to define/prove without high speed photography. as td, will you call a miscue-foul on sound alone?? lots of draw shots look clean but you can hear the ferrule hitting. sure, some of them are obvious but lots aren't.

dan

woody_968
12-30-2003, 10:11 AM
While reading the texas express rules, one of the rules makes me think that the original posters question may not have been a foul if playing texas express rules.

From texas express site:
6.25: Numbered Balls Struck by the Cue Stick

Striking a numbered ball with the chalked area of tip of the cue stick prior to or at the same time as striking the cue ball constitutes a foul. It is possible to strike the cue ball and have the ferrule or shaft contact a numbered ball at the same time and not result in a foul (for instance, when a player must elevate the cue by hand or bridge over a numbered ball in order to strike the cue ball). If a single numbered ball is moved in this manner and has no outcome on the shot, it may be placed in the original position by the opponent or leave lie.

In the original post he stated clearly that the cueball was long gone before the contact was made. So if I am reading this correctly as long as the moved object ball would not have affected any of the moving balls it would not have been a foul.

Am I missing something here?

Qtec
12-30-2003, 10:27 AM
OMG. This drives me crazy. How can you play one game with different sets of rules? Its rediculous.

This question comes up on a regular basis and we/you are still argueing.

The fact is, with one set of rules its a foul, and with the other[ Texas, which is played over here] its a foul!


Why not make it simple.

If you touch another ball, before ,during or after making a legal shot,its a foul,whether the ball touched moves or not.


Q

Rod
12-30-2003, 10:32 AM
[ QUOTE ]
This question comes up on a regular basis and we/you are still argueing.
<hr /></blockquote>

I'm not argueing. It was a question and I have no clue what takes place at their pool room or if the description was completely accurate. They could be playing by a set of modified rules, who knows? All I did was supply an answer. Don't tar a feather me just yet for trying to be a nice guy.

Rod

Sid_Vicious
12-30-2003, 11:43 AM
I'd have thought this to be the case too since the obstructing ball moved, but the fact that the CB was well on it's way and clear of the obstructing ball when the move was made, did pose something questionable. The easiest ruling is to adhere to it being a foul no matter how the obstructing ball is dislodged, which apparently was clearly stated in your post Rod. Masse amd jump shots have to have these built-in, solid rulings, otherwise the game could get really "loose and contestable" sid

Troy
12-30-2003, 12:01 PM
Relax Q, don't get your shorts in a dither. One game played with different rules is extremely common -- Football, Baseball, Baskeball all come to mind. How anyone can play by the rules if they don't know and/or understand them is beyond me.

Troy
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> How can you play one game with different sets of rules?
Q <hr /></blockquote>

Tom_In_Cincy
12-30-2003, 03:25 PM
HDJ,

I agree, lot's of holes.. and the BCA seems (to me anyway) to have the largest amount of HOLES.

When the local, regional and national tournaments start playing with the same RULES (i.e. BCA, Texas Express or even a version of the Pro Express) maybe learning the rules will be easier for ANYONE.

Qtec
12-30-2003, 10:40 PM
Rod , I wasnt picking on you or criticizing you , so dont get so defensive. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
The fact that this type of question comes up so often and still recieves different answers says that the rule book needs an overhaul, thats all I,m saying.


Q

Qtec
12-30-2003, 10:59 PM
[ QUOTE ]
One game played with different rules is extremely common -- Football, Baseball, Baskeball all come to mind <hr /></blockquote>

Troy, so far as I know , all WORLD sports,Tennis,Golf, Soccer,Rugby etc all play by the same rules. Its an absolute must.
Q

recoveryjones
12-31-2003, 12:35 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> Looks like in this case, even if you are playing "cue ball fouls only", these rules would apply. <hr /></blockquote>

In our tournament (In Vancouver, B.C, Canada) we play cue ball fouls only.Any ball moved accidently is replaced or can be left where it is to the option of the player who didn't move it. In this case the cue ball definitly didn't hit the nine ball it was hooked behind and it was the players cue on the follow through.

recoveryjones
12-31-2003, 12:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> Texas Express,

If these guys are pros then they should know what set of rules they are using. Do you know what ruling body was in effect? Either way the answer should be there.

Rod
<hr /></blockquote>

In our tournaments we have players rated Pro-plus and Pro as well as A+, A, B+ etc. The two players who argued were both Pro. John Horsfsall our Pro Plus Player (who won the A side) wasn't there at the time of the controvery. It's to bad because he organizes tourneys and would have known for sure.I'm pretty sure we play under BCA rules and having said that it's a foul.Putting masse and jump shots in a different catergory than normal shots is what caused the confusion for one of our pros.When I see both pros again, I'll tell them what I now know.What an awesome game we play. I'm finding that I'm learning new stuff all the time. Thanks everyone, RJ

thecardman
12-31-2003, 03:27 PM
In my view, the "Cue Ball Fouls Only" rule should be dropped forever. Simply put, it would stop any arguments of this kind. Some of you reading this may ask how it could be implemented in matches where there is no referee. Well we have been playing this rule here in the UK forever - certainly as long as I have been playing - due to the major influence that snooker has on players over here.

Most tournaments at a pub, club or local tour level here in the UK are not refereed, yet the all balls foul rules are still enforced. Amongst other things, it makes players a lot more careful about what they are doing around the table.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Oh, and can I take this opportunity to wish everyone on the Billiards Digest Forum a very Happy New Year and all the best for 2004.

thecardman
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

houstondan
12-31-2003, 04:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote thecardman:</font><hr> In my view, the "Cue Ball Fouls Only" rule should be dropped forever. Simply put, it would stop any arguments of this kind. thecardman
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>

i think this rule was put in place to cut down on the number of knife-fights. what do y'all do if someone is leaning over the table for a shot and their shirt touches an o.b.?? your opponent can call that on you all day and you have no idea since you can't see it. didn't move the ball but you touched it.

dan

recoveryjones
01-01-2004, 02:10 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote houstondan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote thecardman:</font><hr> In my view, the "Cue Ball Fouls Only" rule should be dropped forever. Simply put, it would stop any arguments of this kind. thecardman
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>



I think this rule was put in place to cut down on the number of knife-fights. what do y'all do if someone is leaning over the table for a shot and their shirt touches an o.b.?? your opponent can call that on you all day and you have no idea since you can't see it. didn't move the ball but you touched it.

dan <hr /></blockquote>

I agree 100% with Dan on his quote above as without a ref there would just simply be a way to many arguements.That's another reason why flukes are permissable in pool and snooker.Can you imagine someone lining up a 3 or 4 ball combo kiss of another ball shot and then hit it so hard that the naked eye couldn't see it go in as called......more arguments,more cues smashed over heads etc etc.Rules like cue ball fouls and flukes were implemented to cut down on the arguements. Having said that the one problem that still has some controvery is split shots.Good players can use throw and pot a ball without splitting them.Some people shoot them hard and its impossible to tell. A pro or a good A player can tell however in some cases by where the object balls each hit the rail, however I still see the odd arguement over split situations. RJ
ps.There is a situation where we call a foul for moving a ball in our pool hall. Here'a a for instance. If I'm in the process of potting the 3 ball (in nine ball) and I move the 4 ball (the next ball on )with my cue or body....this is a foul in our pool hall amongst certain friends. I'm not saying it's a BCA rule it's just a rule some of us use.Moving your next ball on even 1/2 inch could dramatically influence the game. I kind of like this rule. RJ