PDA

View Full Version : Mechanical Bridge "Foul?"


SKUNKBOY
03-12-2010, 09:22 AM
This situation has actually came up twice in the last week and I can't find the answer. Once playing under VNEA rules and once playing under WPA rules.

Situation: while using a mechanical brige to cue over an object ball, the interfering object ball was touched/moved by the brige/cue during the shot. The moved object ball did not come into play after the shot was executed and did not interfere with the shot.

My question...since you are using the brige to get over the object ball, is it a foul to make any contact with the interfering object ball? I seem to recall this being the case and it was addressed by the rules a few years ago but I cannot find it in the current rules. I know it is a foul to touch or move an interfering object ball that you are attempting to jump (and that is covered in the rules) but I was thinking this is a similar situation and had a similar rule.

Thanks in advance for all of the interesting answers to come.

L8R...Ken

Neil
03-12-2010, 09:33 AM
...........

Andrew Manning
03-12-2010, 09:34 AM
This situation has actually came up twice in the last week and I can't find the answer. Once playing under VNEA rules and once playing under WPA rules.

Situation: while using a mechanical brige to cue over an object ball, the interfering object ball was touched/moved by the brige/cue during the shot. The moved object ball did not come into play after the shot was executed and did not interfere with the shot.

My question...since you are using the brige to get over the object ball, is it a foul to make any contact with the interfering object ball? I seem to recall this being the case and it was addressed by the rules a few years ago but I cannot find it in the current rules. I know it is a foul to touch or move an interfering object ball that you are attempting to jump (and that is covered in the rules) but I was thinking this is a similar situation and had a similar rule.

Thanks in advance for all of the interesting answers to come.

L8R...Ken

Not a foul; this is no different than accidentally bumping a ball with your bridge hand during a normal shot. It is replaced by the referee or the non-shooter, and play continues as if the ball had not been touched.

-Andrew

Andrew Manning
03-12-2010, 09:36 AM
It's a foul under WPA rules.


6.6 Touched Ball
It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of any object ball except by the normal ball-to-ball contacts during shots. It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of the cue ball except when it is in hand or by the normal tip-to-ball forward stroke contact of a shot. The shooter is responsible for the equipment he controls at the table, such as chalk, bridges, clothing, his hair, parts of his body, and the cue ball when it is in hand, that may be involved in such fouls. If such a foul is accidental, it is a standard foul, but if it is intentional, it is 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct.

This is assuming they're playing all ball fouls, which I don't think they were (otherwise it's not even a question). If they're playing CB fouls only, then my post above would apply, I believe.

-Andrew

KoolKat9Lives
03-12-2010, 09:41 AM
Not a foul; this is no different than accidentally bumping a ball with your bridge hand during a normal shot. It is replaced by the referee or the non-shooter, and play continues as if the ball had not been touched.

-Andrew

How many rulebooks are there? It can be frustrating!

This rule, covered by the umbrella terms of "cue ball fouls only" or "all ball fouls", flip flops from venue to venue about as much as any rule. But as Neil posted, WPA addresses it. And I'm sure APA, BCA, WPBA, NRA, CIA and ASPCA have it covered too. :rolleyes:

Neil
03-12-2010, 09:43 AM
............

pulzcul
03-12-2010, 09:43 AM
Is there some confusion here on what you are calling the object ball? Not the ball you were shooting at, but the ball you were bridging over? If thats the case it would depend on what rules you are using. Cue ball fouls or touch fouls. In a cue ball foul format the ball you moved with your hand,bridge or cue would not be a foul but would be moved back to its original position at the discretion of your opponent. Obviously in "touch fouls" it would be.

jimmyg
03-12-2010, 09:47 AM
A little off topic....Why do they call it a "mechanical" bridge if it doesn't do anything mechanically? Isn't it really a "manual' bridge? :confused:

Just askin'.

Jim

SKUNKBOY
03-12-2010, 10:10 AM
OK, let me add:

We are talking CB fouls only.

(pulzcul)...fouling the OB you are bridging over.

I can understand the 'not a foul' arguement. I guess my question is based on the fact that you are using a 'mechanical bridge' rather than your hand to bridge over a ball and extra care should be exersized to avoid touching the interfering OB. I thought at one time, it was ruled specifically that when using a 'mechanical bridge' it was a foul to touch the interfering OB...I was just looking to see if that rule is still in existance (because I can't find it).

(jimmyg)...I think anything other than your body would be considered mechanical...motorized or not. Mechanizim would be the base of the definition...I think. The cue would actually be a 'mechanizim' used in pool.

Thanks for the responses so far...looking forward to the next round.

L8R...Ken

cuesblues
03-12-2010, 10:39 AM
How many rulebooks are there? It can be frustrating!

This rule, covered by the umbrella terms of "cue ball fouls only" or "all ball fouls", flip flops from venue to venue about as much as any rule. But as Neil posted, WPA addresses it. And I'm sure APA, BCA, WPBA, NRA, CIA and ASPCA have it covered too. :rolleyes:

You forgot to mention the ARRA.
American Recovery Act rules for added stimulus money.

Andrew Manning
03-12-2010, 02:13 PM
OK, let me add:

We are talking CB fouls only.

Thanks for clarifying.



I can understand the 'not a foul' arguement. I guess my question is based on the fact that you are using a 'mechanical bridge' rather than your hand to bridge over a ball and extra care should be exersized to avoid touching the interfering OB.

I'm not aware of any rule that makes a distinction between the player's body, clothing, or equipment (bridge included) when it comes to untintentionally touching a ball. I believe that under all current widely-used written rules, it makes no difference if it's the mechanical bridge or just your clumsy hand.

-Andrew

tatcat2000
03-12-2010, 07:07 PM
Your specific references for BCAPL and WSR:

In BCAPL play Rule 1.33.1 applies:

"It is not a foul if you accidentally touch or disturb a single object ball with any part of your body, clothing or equipment, unless the disturbed ball has an effect on the outcome of the shot." (emphasis added)

The mechanical bridge is "equipment" as referred to in the rule.

Under WSR, Regulation 20 applies:

20. Cue ball fouls only If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only. That is, touching or moving any ball other than the cue ball would not be a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot..."

While there is no direct mention of equipment, there is also no exception for it, thereby allowing it as a logical inclusion. Maybe more to the point, the effect of Regulation 20 is to essentially suspend Rule 6.6 for accidental touches, and Rule 6.6 does make specific reference to "the equipment he controls at the table, such as chalk, bridges, clothing,...".
:smile:

Buddy Eick
BCAPL National Head Referee
BCAPL Director of Referee Training
Technical Editor, BCAPL Rule Book
bcapl_referee@cox.net

Find the Official Rules of the BCA Pool League here:

http://www.playbca.com/Downloads/Rulebook/CompleteRulebook/tabid/372/Default.aspx

* The contents of this post refer to BCA Pool League (BCAPL) Rules only. The BCAPL National Office has authorized me to act in an official capacity regarding questions about BCAPL Rules matters in public forums.
* Neither I nor any BCAPL referee make any policy decisions regarding BCAPL Rules. Any and all decisions, interpretations, or Applied Rulings are made by the BCAPL National Office and are solely their responsibility. BCAPL referees are enforcers of rules, not legislators. BCAPL Rules 9.5.3 and 9.5.4 apply.
* No reference to, inference concerning, or comment on any other set of rules (WPA, APA, VNEA, TAP, or any other set of rules, public or private) is intended or should be derived from this post unless specifically stated.
* For General Rules, 8-Ball, 9-Ball, 10-Ball, and 14.1 Continuous: there is no such thing as "BCA Rules" other than in the sense that the Billiard Congress of America (BCA) publishes various rules, including the World Pool-Billiard Association's "World Standardized Rules" for those games. The BCA does not edit, nor is responsible for the content of, the World Standardized Rules. The Official Rules of the BCAPL is a separate and independent set of rules and, to avoid confusion, should not be referred to as "BCA Rules".
* Since 2004, there is no such thing as a "BCA Referee". The BCA no longer has any program to train, certify or sanction billiards referees or officials.
* The BCAPL has no association with the Billiard Congress of America other than in their capacity as a member of the BCA.
* The BCAPL has not addressed every imaginable rules issue, nor will it ever likely be able to, as evidenced by the seemingly endless situations that people dream up or that (more frequently) actually happen. If I do not have the answer to a question I will tell you so, then I will get a ruling from the BCAPL National Office and get back to you as soon as I can. If deemed necessary, the BCAPL will then add the ruling to the "Applied Rulings" section of The Official Rules of the BCA Pool League.

DogsPlayingPool
03-12-2010, 07:14 PM
A little off topic....Why do they call it a "mechanical" bridge if it doesn't do anything mechanically? Isn't it really a "manual' bridge? :confused:

Just askin'.

Jim

I would think that a manual bridge, if anything, would be bridging with your hand. Isn't that what manual sort of means i.e. "by hand".?

How about artificial bridge? :grin: