PDA

View Full Version : a.p.a. rail definition?



04-14-2002, 08:47 PM
in this months b.d. "you make the call" they take up the old "ball jumps out of pocket so it didn't hit rail" stuff but says that by apa rules that is, repeat is a foul. they note at the end that bca is different but do not explain. i suspect that whoever wrote that is out to lunch.

the key in bca is that the table has 4 rails and six cushions with the pockets considered part of the rails.

is apa really different on defining rails & cushions??

dan

Wally_in_Cincy
04-15-2002, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: houstondan:</font><hr> in this months b.d. "you make the call" they take up the old "ball jumps out of pocket so it didn't hit rail" stuff but says that by apa rules that is, repeat is a foul. they note at the end that bca is different but do not explain. i suspect that whoever wrote that is out to lunch.

the key in bca is that the table has 4 rails and six cushions with the pockets considered part of the rails.

is apa really different on defining rails &amp; cushions??

dan <hr></blockquote>

I read that. I'm not sure if the APA rule book addresses that specific situation. I've seen it happen plenty of times and I've never seen a foul called. If the opponent did call a foul believe me all hell would break loose. Either the game would be played over or someone would end up in the hoosegow. I'll check the book tonight.

04-15-2002, 12:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr>
I read that. I'm not sure if the APA rule book addresses that specific situation. I've seen it happen plenty of times and I've never seen a foul called. If the opponent did call a foul believe me all hell would break loose. Either the game would be played over or someone would end up in the hoosegow. I'll check the book tonight. <hr></blockquote>


since they quote the rule about a ball coming out of a pocket not being "pocketed", i strongly suspect they don't understand the importance of the terms rail vs cushion in this matter.

dan...let me know what you find out. i'll bet a.p.a. has the same definitions.

WaltVA
04-15-2002, 01:13 PM
Unfortunately, the APA rule book does not define rails. The only applicable references I can find are under "Pocketed Balls" - "If a ball goes in a pocket, but bounces back onto the playing surface, it is not considered pocketed;" and Fouls [9(b)]- "Failure to hit a rail after contact....A pocketed ball counts as a rail."

Apparently the BD writer put the two together and extrapolated the foul call, but I've never heard of it being called, and agree it doesn't make any sense.

Walt in VA

04-15-2002, 02:31 PM
it won't be a rail definition as such. take a look where it defines a legal shot. s/b something like "after impact a ball must be pocketed or a ball (ob or cb) must contact a rail". that's the fun part. there are only 4 rails and the pockets are part of the rail. hitting a pocket is hitting a rail.

dan

WaltVA
04-15-2002, 03:54 PM
dan - only section covering "ball-to-rail" is under Fouls - Sec.9-C, which reads in full,"Failure to hit a rail after contact. A rail must be hit by either the cue ball or any other ball after the cue ball and object ball contact. A pocketed ball counts as a rail. A sentence that should answer many questions is: ANY ball must go to a rail AFTER LEGAL contact."

I agree 100% that a rebounding ball from a pocket has hit a rail (why else would it be rebounding?), but apparently the "You Make the Call" writer was doing some hair-splitting with the idea that a rebounding ball was not legally pocketed, and only a pocketed ball counts as a rail. Wally is right - this one would never get enforced in a match without a helluva brouhaha.

Walt in VA