PDA

View Full Version : Foul, or just a miscue?



phil in sofla
10-04-2002, 06:57 PM
The other day, double hill, I'm shooting a shot with top, and for whatever reason, I miscue pretty badly.

The cue tip glanced off the cue ball, and then the ferrule or just lower than that on the shaft ran over the top of the cue ball, making an audible tink sound.

My opponent questioned whether that wasn't a foul, and I thought not, as the tip hadn't hit the cue ball a second time. He argued 'click-click, click-click,' meaning he'd heard the second hit on the cue ball, from whatever caused it. After a slight bit of thinking, I told him yes, I agreed it was probably a foul, and advised him to go ahead with ball in hand (which he declined).

Was that a foul, or just a miscue, as I originally thought?

Tom_In_Cincy
10-04-2002, 07:07 PM
I have always thought a misscue should be considered a foul because of the obvious multiple hits. Clearly this is/should be a foul, but it seems to be an accepted practice to not be called a foul.. I guess that would be adding insult to injury..

10-05-2002, 08:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: phil in sofla:</font><hr> The other day, double hill, I'm shooting a shot with top, and for whatever reason, I miscue pretty badly.

The cue tip glanced off the cue ball, and then the ferrule or just lower than that on the shaft ran over the top of the cue ball, making an audible tink sound.

My opponent questioned whether that wasn't a foul, and I thought not, as the tip hadn't hit the cue ball a second time. He argued 'click-click, click-click,' meaning he'd heard the second hit on the cue ball, from whatever caused it. After a slight bit of thinking, I told him yes, I agreed it was probably a foul, and advised him to go ahead with ball in hand (which he declined).

Was that a foul, or just a miscue, as I originally thought? <hr></blockquote>

I believe the rule says something to the effect of: "the only part of the stick to touch the cueball must be the tip.. not the ferrule or any other part.."

In that instance, I imagine such a hit as yours would be considered a foul.

Barbara
10-05-2002, 08:47 AM
Tom,

Bob Jewett proved that a miscue is actually a foul and the horrible sound you hear is the CB hitting the ferrule. This was proved in his "Jacksonville Experiment" with the use of a super-high speed camera that they rented for the experiment.

However, the human eye cannot see this event so it is generally not considered a foul.

But I would have to say that if it was pretty blatant that the side of the cue, or whatever other part of the cue moved the CB, the shooter should call it a foul.

Barbara

10-05-2002, 08:51 AM
Why would the cue ball hitting the ferrule be a foul?

10-05-2002, 09:04 AM
I have that tape and if you study it, almost everything is a foul. You double hit the cue call on many follow shots, draw shots, when you break and so on.

Tom_In_Cincy
10-05-2002, 09:07 AM
When it is your turn a the table, you can only hit the cue ball once during your shot.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>From the Billiards Congress of America website. under PLAY and General Rules

http://www.bca-pool.com/play/

3.3 STRIKING CUE BALL
Legal shots require that the cue ball be struck only with the cue tip. Failure to meet this requirement is a foul.
<hr></blockquote>

10-05-2002, 10:44 AM
However, the ferrule touching the cue ball on a draw shot is legal, right?

Tom_In_Cincy
10-05-2002, 10:51 AM
your being funny now.. right?

10-05-2002, 10:58 AM
Not at all. Didn't you ever hear the ferrule clearly hit the cue ball on a draw shot? It's so obvious and a foul is never called.

10-05-2002, 09:34 PM
if the cueball draws back and hits the ferrule, or if on low draw shot the cue continues forward and the cb hits the ferrule, it is a foul. in the first instance, it is a double hit, in the second, a push, because the cue has had more than momentary contact- you have maintained contact and forced the cue below the cb and it rides back along the ferrule.

Ludba
10-05-2002, 10:11 PM
Let's not forget the point of the foul rule. The idea is that a player is only supposed to stroke the cue ball once on his turn and after that there should be no further interference with the shot until all the balls come to a stop. If you stroke the cue ball, it hits an object ball, and then hits your cue tip, you have impeded the direction it would have taken without hitting twice.

It doesn't make any sense to call a miscue a foul, since the direction of the cue ball is not interrupted, because the stroke and the miscue are one in the same. The difference may be a fine line, but it is distinguishable.

10-06-2002, 01:10 AM
That's not what I was referring to. I was referring to a single stroke through the ball where the cue tip is so low that the ferrule actually touches the cue ball during the follow thorough. It sounds something like a miscue but it is never called a foul.