PDA

View Full Version : Cue ball foul ??? (nine ball)



recoveryjones
08-23-2004, 07:27 PM
Yesterday at our local Sunday 9 ball tourney an arguement erupted over a 9 ball rule.At this tourney we play cue ball only fouls and all balls that are accidently moved can either be left where they are or replaced to where they orginally were by my oponent,at his choice.

Anyways here's what happened:

Player A was bridging over a ball that was frozen in front of the cueball. To make the shot even more difficult, he was using a rest.Despite the difficult shot Player A still made the pot but was called by player B on a foul.

Player B claimed that player A's cue grazed the object ball(that he was bridging over)during the stroke, henceforth moving the object ball that was impeding the cue ball. Player B (a pro) said that when ever the cue glances an impeding ball during the stroke that it effects what type of hit(english)is applied to the cue ball and therefore it's a foul.Seems reasonable to me, however, I'm not 100% sure on this one.The pro said that if he made the pot cleanly and then moved the impeding ball when he pulled his cue in a backwards motion, that that wouldn't be a foul.It's only a foul in the forward motion,according to him.If his opponent would have moved the ball when picking the rest up(or cue) off of the table, that, that wouldn't be a foul either.In that case the impeding object ball that was moved would either be left where its new location was or replaced by the choice of the opponent.

There were some heated disagreements over this one.If anyone knows the ruling on this one, please post to let me know.RJ

ps.The player that supposedly did the infraction said he did it in a backwards motion and the pro said no you moved it in a forward motion.......ahhhh but pool players....LOL, they can sure be an argumentive bunch at times...LOL. Stay tuned at your local pool hall, because there are more arguments to come.

Rod
08-23-2004, 08:31 PM
Well I could look to see if anything is written, but I ain't going to. www.bca-pool has the rules unless it's texas express. I doubt there is a foul since it's c/b fouls as stated. I doubt it says anywhere it's a foul on a forward motion but not back. That's why it's called c/b fouls.

If it was a jump or masse it would be different. Now a disclamer, if the ball path come back across where the ball was moved then it would be a foul. It's all in the rules, probably worded better than this short explanation.

Rod

recoveryjones
08-23-2004, 08:43 PM
Thanks Rod, everyone in our pool hall sees it your way except for the pro. The pro in question has played in TV tourneys many times, so when he said it was a foul it got me wondering.RJ

Chris Cass
08-23-2004, 10:56 PM
Hi RJ,

It's not a foul. The reason it isn't is because the opponent had the option to have the shot called by the TD and failed to do so. Therefore, the shot goes to the shooter. The opponent being the pro should have already known that when the balls are that close within a chalk distance apart should have called someone to watch the shot.

I also don't believe the shot would have been a foul to begin with front of back motion. The rule is cb only. If anything the shot wouldn't have been made after contact. Sounds like a move to me.

Regards,

C.C.

JohnnyP
08-24-2004, 05:13 AM
Wayne Norcross (straight pool champ and TD at Danny K's) called a foul on me the same way.

I was shooting a three rail kick from over a ball, and the seven ball was about an inch to the right of the cueball.

I spun it with low right, but the tip deflected into the seven ball and moved it a few inches.

I made the kick, but it was called a foul because the seven ball interfered with the execution of my stroke.

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 06:18 AM
Hi Johnny,

Wow, haven't seen you post in awhile. Good to see you back man. Texas Express rules are the toughest rules I know of besides 14.1 but we're talking 9 ball so, it's the rules in place for the tourney that really counts. Like bar rules, we're at the mercy of that particular tourney.

I haven't played TE rules for quite sometime now. Yrs, to say the least. Seems to me, it would be fair to say that the execution of a clean stroke without interfierence should be always #1. However, when someone adds to the mix of cb fouls only. It leaves much to be concidered.

I've had people foul on the ball when jacked trying to execute a shot and I've never called it. Usually it's prior to the actual striking of the cb. I simply move the ball back or let them leave it where it lyes(lies)(lays). I don't get tooth and nail about this stuff, even in tournament. I suppose I should but I don't. Now, if my opponent moves more than one ball during this execution? Then, I will call the foul. I'd think if they made the ob after such a bad hit so to say. That the ball was going anyway. They hit it that good to begin with.

I like to leave that stuff up to the shot caller myself. I could see if it was in the path of the shot or maybe, the next shot. Say it was nicked and it moved the ob just enough to clear his next. That would be a problem even with cb fouls only.

In your case I would have asked him if the senerio was, that someone bumped you in the middle of executing and you made the ball still, without interfiering with any other balls. Would he call that a foul? Better yet, if someomeone bumped you shooting the 9 ball in the hole on a cleared table and missed. Would he nlet you shoot it again or call that a foul?

Regards,

C.C.~~seems to me you earned that shot. I would have let you shoot again.

Sid_Vicious
08-24-2004, 07:22 AM
Chris,,,my take on the original event in his post is that the hit upon the bridged-over-ball was made on the backswing, and evidently the stroke through the shot was made(in the same stroke), without any opportunity to reset it. Just wanting to be clear, "Is that still a non foul with the shot being completed as-if the "tic" of that obstructing ball hadn't occured?" It just seems to me that it ought to be a foul, regardless of whether it is not today...sid

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 07:55 AM
Hi Sid,

I'm far from the shot caller guru here. How I see it is that if he did hit or graze the ob first. It's clearly a cb foul as the balls were froze. That means the reaction of the ob would have rolled forward. In essence he would have hit the ob first forcing the cb to leave first and then hitting the cb again.

On the backswing unless the ob was interfiering with the next shot or the path of, it wouldn't be concidered a cb foul. Heck, I don't know? lol I know I wouldn't call it merely because the rules set were cb fouls only and it would be my bad because I failed to do my job and get someone to call it. Especially, being the balls where frozen and to top it off with the guy using a bridge and all. Seems the wrong guy paid. imho

Regards,

C.C.~~ /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

pooltchr
08-24-2004, 08:23 AM
Good point, Chris. If the balls were frozen, any forward motion would cause the cb to move prior to contact with the tip of the cue. That would have to be a cb foul. Contact after the shot would not be a cb foul. However, as a general rule, unless the players call an observer to watch, then the call goes in favor of the shooter.
Steve

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 09:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote recoveryjones:</font><hr>Player A was bridging over a ball that was frozen in front of the cueball. To make the shot even more difficult, he was using a rest.Despite the difficult shot Player A still made the pot but was called by player B on a foul. (when the obstructing ball moved as part of the shot)...<hr /></blockquote>

I was playing straight pool once, and my opponent was jacked up over a ball as above. On his final back stroke, he pulled the object ball back with his stick a couple of inches, clearing the path to the cue ball, and then stroked forward. "Cue ball fouls only!" was his response to my complaint. The third time he did it in that same game got called. He was quite good at this cheating technique, and I'm sure he had practiced it. And I'm sure he is not the only person to use it.

So, some people make a special exception to "cue ball fouls only" for moving a blocking ball with your stick on the backstroke. It is assumed to be intentional, and if it's intentional, it isn't exempted under "cue ball fouls only."

This is another example of why you should play "all fouls."

woody_968
08-24-2004, 09:52 AM
Thats exactly what I thought CC, if the balls were frozen any contact with the ob on the forward swing would move the cueball and be a foul. But as already mentioned, player B should have had someone watch the shot.

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 09:58 AM
Hi Bob,

In straight pool there is no cb foul only rule. I can't imagine who would ever think such a thing nor make that part of a tournament rule. jmho

As far as cheating goes. That would require way more skill to do intentionally than even a card mechanic could pull off. Myself would have jump up the minute or the second my opponent could even think of trying that crap on me.

Regards,

C.C.

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 10:14 AM
Hi Woody,

You know being a bar table player and coming up from the pool halls I seem to let a lot slide knowing these bar players do make many mistakes, rule wise. I've learned to roll with some of it but if the guy simple is out shooting you then I tend to give the guy credit.

Now, the other day I was playing a $10. entry tourney and my opponent was nervous playing me. He knows me and I do have a good rep for making balls. It was merely a race to 3 8ball game. I've got the guy 2-0 and he breaks and makes a ball. The table is wide open.

The guy notices his shoes untied and like I said, he was really nervous because he knew he had to run out. The guy lays the cue on the table and bends over to tie his shoe. I turned to him and told him. I want to tell you for future refernce that that's a foul.

We were playing BCA rules. He turned to me and said in shock, "It's a foul to tie your shoe?" I said, "no, but laying your cue down on the table, during the game is." He's played BCA league pool for already two yrs that I know of and mainly plays at a place called Larry Bobs Due drop inn. (Kato remembers the pics. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif) Yep, he's a redneck. lol

He then turns to me and says, "Well, you gonna call it?" I said, " No, it's for future reference and a $10. tourney. Now, for a $100. tourney, you bet." /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

That's me. lol BTW, I think I did more harm than good. You know he couldn't get out to save his life after that. (Guilt Complex)

Regards,

C.C.

woody_968
08-24-2004, 10:25 AM
I know what ya mean CC, when I played in league I didnt try to call all the push and double hit fouls that the lower players seem to make, just didnt want to have the arguments.

I also will mention a foul for future ref with out calling it. Was playing 14.1 with a friend the other day (for fun) and he tapped the cueball with the side of his stick. No need to call the foul, but always good to bring it up incase he is in a match with someone that would call it. If we had been gambling that could have been another story /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif But I would have needed more than the 15 balls that would have given me /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Sid_Vicious
08-24-2004, 11:13 AM
That has been discussed on this board before, and someone stated the verbage that the words "as an intentional aiming device" took away the automatic ability to call an instant foul. I don't know the exact rule, but I do believe that maybe RandyG was involved in the ennlightenment over it not necessarily being a cut and dried foul to simply lay your cue down on the table, something to do with the action if intent of aiming. Everytime I thing the BCA has nailed down a controversial rule with something definitive, they add some grey area to wiggle with...sid

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 12:46 PM
Hi Sid,

Tom just told me that it was a foul if Intent was used in using it for a aimming device and not just laying it down. Like I told Tom, I thought the rule was just laying the thing down. I stand corrected.

I look at these rule for the weak imho. I could care less about any of them unless there's intent to draw the line to the pocket or use any means that I wouldn't to win a game. For yrs I've had players scratching the cloth of where to hit the ob in the right spot to aim. I see that as a weakness. I don't like that stuff and if they need that to win? Then, so be it. I feel good about myself not having to use anything to shoot but that doesn't mean I'll make everything. Just feel good that I don't need a crutch. Personal issue.

Regards,

C.C.

Sid_Vicious
08-24-2004, 12:59 PM
Many of these rules frustrate me, especially when I toss an iron clad foul onto someone, to only be corrected by rule interpretation. Take the rule of having the CB closer than a chalks width and not shooting off angle, that was seemingly ALWAYS a double hit regardless of a player's true finesse if shot directly on. As you maybe were involved back at the time I posted the occurrence that I was shot down by a certified BCA Nationals referee when my opponent shot through, the CB rolled across the spot the OB was laying, and the call was good, supposedly there was discretionary range built into the ref's ruling. I've played years understanding that rule as automatic for a foul when hit forward. I wish the BCA could simply nail a rule into place without the fudge factoring, sounds too much like a flavor of bar rules decisions to leave so many thing open with variables(IMO)..sid

Rod
08-24-2004, 01:17 PM
I look at as a weakness also CC. You know you still have to hit that imaginary spot to make it. All you need to do is look at the angle, using a spot takes away from the mental vision of the angle. I don't see anyone doing their games any good in the long run by just focusing on a spot.

Rod

woody_968
08-24-2004, 01:22 PM
Sid, I was under the impression that when the CB and OB were less than a chaulk width apart and was shot forward, if the CB went farther forward than half the width of where the OB was it was to be called a foul. Did this change?

Fred Agnir
08-24-2004, 01:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> Sid, I was under the impression that when the CB and OB were less than a chaulk width apart and was shot forward, if the CB went farther forward than half the width of where the OB was it was to be called a foul. Did this change? <hr /></blockquote>To my knowledge, this has never been an automatic foul. The rule is expressed as a guideline for referees. This is answered every time this is brought up as such.

Fred

Rod
08-24-2004, 01:28 PM
Sid,

That rule is for the refs discression. You can easily not foul by shooting straight on. Also depending on the shot whitey can travel a rather large distance past where the o/b was and not be a foul.

You can't have it automatic since it's all possible. I also think that rule was intended more towards league players to help stop disputes. I think overall it helped but all league players are not created equal.

Rod

SPetty
08-24-2004, 01:30 PM
The cue ball and object ball separated by a chalk's width rule is a guideline. It is possible to hit a good hit without hitting at an angle or jacked up, and cause the cue ball to move forward of where the object ball was. However, there are many, many people who think it's a rule, and, unless you're properly referee'd by a referee that knows what they're doing, you should make the angle adjustment or expect a foul call.

P.S. Not all referees know what they're doing. I had the occasion to be on a team in Vegas, where the referee made a bad call. He was newly trained, and used the guideline as a rule.

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 01:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> ... Take the rule of having the CB closer than a chalks width and not shooting off angle, that was seemingly ALWAYS a double hit regardless of a player's true finesse if shot directly on.<hr /></blockquote>
Actually, 2.21 (or whatever the number is now) was just a guideline for inexperienced referees. The real rule is that you're not allowed to hit the cue ball twice, or if the cue ball is slightly separated from the object ball, the tip is not allowed to still be on the cue ball when it contacts the object ball. It is possible to play straight at a ball only 1/4 inch from the cue ball and get the cue ball to follow with a legal hit. Most players (and maybe even most referees) are unaware that such legal shots are possible. And most players seem to think that jacking up the cue stick automatically gets them out of a foul on a close ball but usually it doesn't.

For more on close ball shots, including practice to improve your technique, see this article (http://www.onthebreaknews.com/October03-08.htm) which unfortunately is in another publication, since BD doesn't have back issues on-line. If you happen to have copies of BD, see the June, August and October issues of 1993 for more on techniques and rules for close-ball situations.

Rod
08-24-2004, 01:36 PM
I no doubt agree with Fred. It is more than possible to follow the c/b through some distance and not be a foul. Its up to the player whether they think they can do such and not foul. Some can some can't. A foul is fairly obvious in most cases. Not just saying call it a foul simply because of a rule guideline. For those that believe such you need to do more homework. LOL

Rod

woody_968
08-24-2004, 01:54 PM
What would be the best thing to look for to tell the difference between a good and bad hit? I would think it to be an obvious foul if the object ball and cueball went forward at the same time with the same speed? Am I wrong on this? Anything else good to judge on? Thanks for any suggestions.

Sid_Vicious
08-24-2004, 02:01 PM
"Its up to the player whether they think they can do such and not foul. Some can some can't"

Some can, most can't, is a better statement, and that's where a more simplistic rule of accepting it as a foul to shoot directly into the CB is best, in my opinion, at least at the local league level. I had a guy once tell me how he always shot these close calls, he said he as quickly as possible whammo'd the stroke through the balls and the ref's almost always gave him the good call. The analogy is that by shooting so swiftly, you basically overwhelmed his human ability to discern any telltale signs of a double hit and his timid side usually gave the good hit signal. Heck with the vagueness in how this rule is presented, I might utilize that routine sometime(naa, no win's that important), especially if it really means winning or losing big. Hey, leave a rule iffy and see how many people will abuse it, it just doesn't make the best sense to me to allow all this scrutiny at the ref's level, to darn may are not proficient as it is(AIMHO)

I concede to those players with abilities to cleanly hit this stroke, but have another problem situation for y'all. The situation with the frozen cue ball and shooting through, why exactly is this urgent attention to the solid, frozen feature even mentioned if you can still get a foul called for stroking through? It's a big deal to announce that they are frozen and yet now it seems that a foul still awaits under some scrutinous eyes. A good ref sure would be required to disect a lot of these rules beyond the black and white print, I'll tell ya...sid

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 02:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> "Its up to the player whether they think they can do such and not foul. Some can some can't"

Some can, most can't, is a better statement, and that's where a more simplistic rule of accepting it as a foul to shoot directly into the CB is best, in my opinion, at least at the local league level.<hr /></blockquote>
I think it's better to have a trusted referee who knows what he's doing. Why penalize the better player? How far apart do the balls have to be before you can't shoot straight at the ball?

As for judging, I think you need to learn how to play the close shots yourself. That's why there is a practice drill in the article I mentioned before. Usually you have to judge the shot by where the cue ball goes and how fast.

Rod
08-24-2004, 02:23 PM
Well I'm not going to defend the rule book. LOL God knows it needs help.

If follow is used you are correct, most can't. But using draw to stop the c/b should be within a better than average players limits.

Now about that deal with slamming the ball. A ref would have to be brand new or on drugs not to call a bad hit. Well for that matter almost any experienced player. I had a guy in a local tourney try that, it didn't work. LOL I think it was intentional but who knows either way it was a big a$$ foul. Once they know you can explain why, there is no back talk. So do you feel lucky? LOL

Rod

SPetty
08-24-2004, 02:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> How far apart do the balls have to be before you can't shoot straight at the ball?<hr /></blockquote>Are you not paying attention, Bob? Everyone knows that it's "a chalk's width". Geez, gotta explain everything... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

woody_968
08-24-2004, 02:44 PM
A referee of course would be the best option, but even with that there is still some room for error. I was watching a 14.1 match the other night, and the foul was obvious, balls went everywhere /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif The commentators also said it should have been called a foul, but nothing was called.

Please understand I am in no way trying to put down the refs, I think they did a great job and got very little "thank you's" for what they do. Its like a ref in any sport, sometimes people agree with the call and sometimes they dont.

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 02:49 PM
Hi Bob,

I think it's best to have both players agree from the start that whatever the ref calls is the call and no buts about it.

Scott Lee is very good at teaching how to shoot a shot of this type and highly recommend that whenever someone gets a lesson from him should bring this very thing up.

I also don't doubt Sid knows how to shoot this shot too. As I find that people who study the movements of these shots and the balls involved along with sounds can tell instantly. It's not really that hard a shot.

Regards,

C.C.

woody_968
08-24-2004, 03:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chris Cass:</font><hr> I think it's best to have both players agree from the start that whatever the ref calls is the call and no buts about it.


C.C. <hr /></blockquote>

This is something that should always be understood, not only with a ref but whenever someone is asked to watch a hit.

One of our locals (that is known for calling hits wrong) asked me to call a hit Sunday. I looked at the shot (you could have driven a truck through the space) and told him to go ahead with the shot. I called it good and was imediatly told I was wrong /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif After a few exchanges of words I told him to never ask me to watch a hit for him again /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

When ever I have someone watch the hit I try to not even look at them untill after the call is made. I have seen people change the call do to looks or comments made afterwords and always want to ask why they even bothered having someone call it if they were going to argue the point if it was called against them.

Rod
08-24-2004, 03:38 PM
I made a bad call once, I think. It was questionable but prob should have gone to the shooter. I remember it well but alas I'll wait till I go to pool heaven to see if the call was right. They'd better let me pass through the gate. If not I'll throw a measled cue ball at em. LOL

~~~ rod, hoping that was the only one

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 03:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr>... Its like a ref in any sport, sometimes people agree with the call and sometimes they dont. <hr /></blockquote>
But also sometimes the ref just misses the call by all objective measures, perhaps because they don't understand the rule. Considering how many top players don't know the rules -- Efren Reyes in the 2000 BCA Open 14.1 springs to mind -- it's kind of hard to expect the average beginning referee to know.

Did anyone else notice the recent comment from a (former) top player in BD about how if you have a big rep as a player you can commit fouls and get away with them by intimidation? I hope he was kidding, but I suspect not.

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 04:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chris Cass:</font><hr> It's not really that hard a shot. <hr /></blockquote>
But how about this shot: put the object ball just over the line (headstring). Put the cue ball just behind the line, 1/4 inch from the object ball, and with the two balls pointed straight up the middle of the table. Shoot more or less straight at the object ball with a level stick and make it hit the far cushion two times without the cue ball going over the line.
(Usually you want to draw the cue ball back to the head cushion.)
Mike Massey and the other trick shot players know this shot -- Mike shoots this kind of shot all the time in his exhibitions -- but there are world champions who don't.

Rod
08-24-2004, 04:21 PM
Same sinero but draw the ball around the table. Doesn't look possible but with the cue in the right hands it is. Your right about the world champions. A couple of people here suggested some time back it wasn't possible. I doubt they like trick shot magic either. Every shot serves a purpose if you learn something from it. If you know why then a variable of that shot could come in handy.

Rod

Stretch
08-24-2004, 04:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chris Cass:</font><hr> I think it's best to have both players agree from the start that whatever the ref calls is the call and no buts about it.


C.C. <hr /></blockquote>

This is something that should always be understood, not only with a ref but whenever someone is asked to watch a hit.

One of our locals (that is known for calling hits wrong) asked me to call a hit Sunday. I looked at the shot (you could have driven a truck through the space) and told him to go ahead with the shot. I called it good and was imediatly told I was wrong /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif After a few exchanges of words I told him to never ask me to watch a hit for him again /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

When ever I have someone watch the hit I try to not even look at them untill after the call is made. I have seen people change the call do to looks or comments made afterwords and always want to ask why they even bothered having someone call it if they were going to argue the point if it was called against them. <hr /></blockquote>

Hi Woody. I see better players taking advantage of the rules all the time when playing less esperienced players. One rule i see good players cheat on all the time is in 9 ball where the object ball is froze to the rail or nearly so. They'll take some rinky-dink little tap shot if the pockets not on before the other guy even gets a chance to call for a frozen ball ruleing or not, but by then of caurse it's too late. Most of the time they don't even question what just happened because the requirements for a frozen ball hit is something i find not to many players even know.....except the more advanced players......It's still cheating though, but i see this call missed all the time.

Another manouver is to hit split shots hard. As i understand it a split shot goes to the shooter right? But even if it looks maybe at best a real hard shot will render the call inconclusive and thus in favour of the shooter. There's still a lot of hocus-pocus going on. St

Sid_Vicious
08-24-2004, 05:06 PM
"I had a guy once tell me how he always shot these close calls, he said he as quickly as possible whammo'd the stroke through the balls and the ref's almost always gave him the good call."

I meant the balls he was shooting at was a ref'd situation to see if the wrong suit was hit first(a split attempt), the situation which goes to the shooter when the balls are hit simultaneously. That's the shot this guy shot really fast and got the calls most all the time, not the topic of CB/OB near one another. Sorry..sid

Bob_Jewett
08-24-2004, 06:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Stretch:</font><hr>Another manouver is to hit split shots hard. As i understand it a split shot goes to the shooter right? But even if it looks maybe at best a real hard shot will render the call inconclusive and thus in favour of the shooter. There's still a lot of hocus-pocus going on. St

<hr /></blockquote>
There are very few split-hit situations in which you can't tell which ball was struck first, even if the shooter slams it. You usually tell by the path of the cue ball. Most players don't understand enough about caroms to make the call with confidence, but it's nearly always very simple.

almer
08-24-2004, 06:38 PM
I had a situation happen in Vegas this year.My player breaks the balls,eight ball is going to fall in the corner pocket,he picks it up to save calling a ref to open the table.Would you call this a foul,bca rules?

Chris Cass
08-24-2004, 11:24 PM
That's easy Bob,

Mike Massey is crazy. LOL Whenever any player has a shot with a slight thought in their mind of a bad hit or a double hit will or should know another way of dealing with it. Whether it would be to bring out the jump cue or shooting off the other direction.

If I'm in a money game or tournament. I'll always think of the worse case senerio before making the decision to shoot the ball. Anything short of that? Then, you don't know enough about your abilities and should be called out on a foul. imho

Regards,

C.C.~~feels honored to have Bob answer him. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

pooltchr
08-25-2004, 06:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> You usually tell by the path of the cue ball. Most players don't understand enough about caroms to make the call with confidence, but it's nearly always very simple. <hr /></blockquote>

Great point. I usually watch the path of the object ball(s)in cases like that, but it's the same principle.

Chris Cass
08-25-2004, 07:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Stretch:</font><hr>Another manouver is to hit split shots hard. As i understand it a split shot goes to the shooter right? But even if it looks maybe at best a real hard shot will render the call inconclusive and thus in favour of the shooter. There's still a lot of hocus-pocus going on. St

<hr /></blockquote>
There are very few split-hit situations in which you can't tell which ball was struck first, even if the shooter slams it. You usually tell by the path of the cue ball. Most players don't understand enough about caroms to make the call with confidence, but it's nearly always very simple. <hr /></blockquote>

If I may add, the speed of the ob' are also an indicator. We do need these rules though. It's odvious that when making a split hit at an extremely small area of the ball it's vurtually impossible, to hit both at the same time in reality. Ah, that's pool though. Not perfect but we're not either. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Kind of like the way I spell. hahaha

Regards,

C.C.

Chris Cass
08-25-2004, 07:19 AM
Hi Almer,

That is blatently a foul. Matter of fact if the player even puts his or her hand in the pocket before it falls in and the ball hits the rail facings and doesn't go in? Most bar players will say they touched the ball and IMHO they'd be right in saying the ball was hung up by the shooters hand. There's some stuff you just shouldn't do and if you do? It's on you.

Lol,

C.C.~~plus trying to catch the cb before the pocket eats it? You could very well break your dang hand. everyone that's ever played has done that atleast once. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

almer
08-25-2004, 07:09 PM
This was originally ruled a foul,we ended up winning 10-6,about 15 mins later the ref that made the call,another ref working the same area,and the head came to our match.The head ref says to stop the match for a minute he wants to talk to our captain,He says the original ref made the wrong call,this is not a foul,he wants us to play the game over.Our captain said it was over,we were the team that was wronged,we did not want to play it over.The ref says we have no choice,my player breaks,runs to the 8,gets funny on it makes it,scratches,we lose 10-7.We lost all our momentome after the 20 min delay,lose by 8 balls in the 25 game in the 17-24 round in vegas.Our position was the ref makes a caall in a big game he should stand by it.What does anyone else think?

ras314
08-25-2004, 07:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>Did anyone else notice the recent comment from a (former) top player in BD about how if you have a big rep as a player you can commit fouls and get away with them by intimidation? I hope he was kidding, but I suspect not. <hr /></blockquote>
Yeah. Several of his articles have looked a bit off color to me. After all he can get away with it because of who he is? Well maybe he is just telling it like it is.

Rod
08-25-2004, 07:36 PM
Well I think it sucks, however the TD can overrule a refs decision. You said head ref maybe he was the TD, I don't know. It happens and will continue to happen if the refs are not well trained.

Rod

Chris Cass
08-25-2004, 09:16 PM
Hi Almer,

You'll need a higher power to address this issue. I'm a mere pawn in the game of rules. Myself, I would think that the ref calling the shot would have to stand by what he called. If he didn't know the right call then, he should have did all the consulting prior to the call if possible.

Yes, that was an important match. That's why the head ref got involved. It was brought by another ref that knew the score or rather was more experienced. It sounds like it was unfortunate for your team and I do have smpathy but the system did work. That's why the head ref is the final call. You may not have liked the call but as I see it. Your teammate could have made the 8 for the win but in turn lost his main goal. That's to shoot one ball at a time and the last ball, before the money, is the most important. 3 things that win tournaments. Great shots, great draws and luck. jmho

My advice to you? Bury this as a good experience and let it turn to dust. 17-24 is very strong. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Regards,

C.C.

Bob_Jewett
08-25-2004, 09:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote almer:</font><hr> My player breaks the balls,eight ball is going to fall in the corner pocket,he picks it up to save calling a ref to open the table.Would you call this a foul,bca rules? <hr /></blockquote>
Sigh. Never, ever, in any way touch a moving ball in play. If your opponent wants to call a foul, he can. If you wait for the ball to fall into the pocket, and then grab it before it completely disappears, you have a good argument for it not being a foul.

It would have been nice if the opposing player had said, "grab it if you want," to allow the game to proceed. Maybe Diamond could figure out how to return the eight ball if it's pocketed in the first ten seconds of play. Yet another alternative is to carry an extra eight ball.

As for your match being interrupted later to replay that game.... This violates a fundamental rule of all cue sports. You must decide the ruling on a shot before the next shot is taken. If one player feels he's being fleeced by a bad call, he must ask for a review (by the TD or head ref or St. Sebastian) at that time. Decide the shot and move on.

Sid_Vicious
08-25-2004, 09:54 PM
"As for your match being interrupted later to replay that game.... This violates a fundamental rule of all cue sports"

Ditto, I never heard of such as this as appropriate, and am surprised that some here already accepted this as casually, and I am not being uppity, I just figured the innings played past the call set the call as concrete...sid

almer
08-26-2004, 08:30 PM
The part i did not understand was when there were only 24 teams left we had a ref for only every 8 teams,each ref had on a headset,why did he not call the head ref for a final decision before he made the call.The ref is from my city and i talked to him when we got home,he explained what happened.He mentioned it to another ref for future reference and he took it to the head ref.the head ref decided to change the call.I talked to him after and he said he just wanted to do the right thing.I fully figure it should at least have been our choice since we were the team wronged.We talked to our league operator at the time as he was there and he did not support us.The long delay hurt us most and helped the other team as im sure they never ever had a game 2 rounds ago reversed.We played the same team on the A side and we won in 4th rd 2nd game.League starts on sept 6 here and we have decided to go with a different operator,same dual sanctioned leagues because of this lack of support.He also told us we should voluteer to ref it we were not happy.We told him for the money he makes he should train and pay expenses for refs to go to Vegas.

Chris Cass
08-26-2004, 11:02 PM
Geez Almer,

You need to let this go. It's not the league operators fault. It's water under the bridge. I would have said, the same thing. Only I would have offered you a tissue.

You even approached the ref after he got back home? What your going to end up doing is ruining your mental state of mind over something that should have never ended up there to begin with. It's clear your team shouldn't have been at that point anyway. You should have been ahead and won. You weren't and stuff happens.

It's like the shooter that asks for a call then, doesn't like it. Afterwards, they'll discuss it with everyone possible till they find someone to agree. That's insane. You need to look at this as a learning experience. You guys dropped the ball. Just accept it.

Doing 17-24 is fantastic. Why take away from the win of your team by blaming others for the reasons you feel you've lost? That's the real issue. Making excuses and I know. I wrote the book. They won't help you. Try making excuses for your wins.

BTW, the league operators don't make all that kind of money. The organization takes most of yours. The purchasing of Drink(alcohol), food and table time is where the league operator benifits. Your league operator does back you. They make sure your money gets turned in and your standings stay corrected and make sure your team is recognized and paid for what they earn. What more can you ask for the average $7.00 you eat and drink with for 3-5 games of pool that one night?

Your totally right about the refs being short handed. They do deserve to be governed by themselves and should they do this? Then, who do you think will be paying more money for them to work the events? It's got to come from somewhere. Don't tell me they should get it out of the $7.00 in food and $3.00 in table time.

Regards,

C.C.~~sheesh /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

almer
08-27-2004, 08:31 AM
chris i didnt approach the ref with malice,i see him every week at tourny,i just asked him what happened,so i could understand.when you say we shouldnt have been at this point anyway when this happened we were ahead,coming off 3 eros.In vegas i played 4 hill matches for our team.It is pretty common to have hill matches in team play.It all just came back to light as we ar starting to play league soon,its not like we thought about it every day since june.The league operators do make money,we have 3 ,they each have 3 or 4 full time employees who handle leagues and look after bar tables.All the bars here have to pay a fee to the league or they can not have a team.Getting over it