PDA

View Full Version : What is your ruling?


selftaut
09-01-2007, 06:31 AM
On occasion I get called to make a ruling in one of the 14.1 leagues, sometimes its a no brainer that the players should know and sometimes its not. Here is one that came up last night.

Player A has player B on 2 fouls, the second foul by player B was a scratch. Player A has ball in hand behind the headstring and puts the cue ball inside the one of the corner pockets behind the headstring and rolls the cb lightly to freeze in the jaws so player B has to shoot from behind the point. Player B asks for a ruling , does player A with cb in hand behind the headstring HAVE to shoot so that the cb crosses the headstring or not?

Whats your ruling?

3andstop
09-01-2007, 08:05 AM
Yes or its a scratch itself.

Double-Dave
09-01-2007, 08:33 AM
Yes he has to cross the line in order for the shot to be valid, just placing the cueball in the corner pocket is not allowed.

gr. Dave

3andstop
09-01-2007, 08:50 AM
Yes as Dave said its not allowed. To elaborate the way we've always played it. The players inning is not over until the cue ball crosses the headstring, but touching the cue ball with the cue tip is in and of itself a foul.

I was told once that the action constitutes and intentional unsportsmanlike conduct foul of 15 + 1 points but I've never played that way as a house rule.

nick serdula
09-01-2007, 09:35 AM
I saw Gary Penkowski as a joke set the rock in the corner pocket and push it into the shim-freeze. It was funny if you were with Gary because he laughed so loud. He said "I think I pushed it." The other guy was furious. Gary said "That's a foul ain't it?"
"You can't do that"!
"Well if I push it I take a foul?"
k you Gary.
They were friends. Gary was still laughing when he took his shot.
"You didn't have to get so mad, it was funny".
Nick :)

Pushout
09-01-2007, 10:52 AM
I saw Gary Penkowski as a joke set the rock in the corner pocket and push it into the shim-freeze.

Good grief! Your story about Pinkowski got the smoke coming out of my ears. Did you, at one time, go by the nickname of "Onions"??

nick serdula
09-01-2007, 04:42 PM
Show nuff!
Nick :)

CreeDo
09-02-2007, 04:29 PM
I think this is just a regular foul for -1 point, not an intentional for -16.

Players will routinely get into a safety battle where they intentionally foul, and it's just -1. I don't see why doing this very mean trick with the point (rather than an object ball) should make it any different. If it happened by good luck on the part of a fouling player, he doesn't get any special penalties.

3andstop
09-02-2007, 05:57 PM
I think this is just a regular foul for -1 point, not an intentional for -16.

Players will routinely get into a safety battle where they intentionally foul, and it's just -1. I don't see why doing this very mean trick with the point (rather than an object ball) should make it any different. If it happened by good luck on the part of a fouling player, he doesn't get any special penalties.

I agree with you, that one foul is proper. The important thing however, is that the inning for the player is not over until the cue ball crosses the headstring line. So corner hooking the opponent who is on a scratch or two is a moot point, he must shoot over the headstring for the game to continue. If he miscues again without crossing the headstring HE is on two ... and so on. :)

Or .. the most common way of course is no foul at all for the person who is attempting the corner hook, simply tell them, forget about that and cross the headstring.

Bob Jewett
09-02-2007, 06:13 PM
... Whats your ruling?
It's a foul and the cue ball remains in hand for his opponent. I'd have to check the new proposed WSR, but they might have an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for that move.

In any case, you have to shoot the cue ball over the line when you have ball in hand. If you take a shot that does not do that, it will remain in hand for your opponent. Some say, "the shot doesn't start until the cue ball crosses the line." They're wrong, including for the break shot. The shot starts when the tip hits the cue ball.

poolshark52
09-02-2007, 08:54 PM
i think the only way he could shoot the cue ball behind the line directly leagelly is to put it on the head spot to shoot. just like leaveing the cue ball in the rack with a ball behind the spot after racking the balls at the end of a rack. other wise the cue must go over the head spot . i think it would be and unsportsman like penalty of 15 balls...but i have never seen this move i my 45yrs. of strait pool! very interesting!!!!

nick serdula
09-05-2007, 12:28 AM
This was a shark test. No one passed. It works like this. You are playing a hot head for big beans. He is a monster player but is known to dog when he is angry.
Many top players have this weakness.
Gary was playing mind games. He knew if the guy got hot it didn't matter how good he played when he was level headed because he was a big dog when his temper flaired up!
It was a no shot. He took a scratch. The guy gets up there and fires at a break shot from behind the string and well missed by a mile. Big suprise!
Gary beat him but the table had nothing to do with it. It was like he beat his brains out with a hammer!!
Because Gary was laughing the whole time the guy couldn't stay mad at him. Hard to get mad stay mad at a good natured fellow. Especially when he has all your beans,looks you dead in the kisser and says hay how bout I buy you a nice steak!! Where is the best steak house around here? I thought you had me.
Sound familiar?
I have to admit this memory has me smiling.
Nick :)

OneArmed
09-14-2007, 11:56 AM
this just came up 2 nights ago for me...

I learned that I shouldn't scratch for a 2nd foul, my opponent did this to me (we are friends). I shot out of the jaws and made a good hit thankfully. I guess it does have to cross the headstring and I should have gotten BIH. oh well.

and to summarize...

If a player has BIH behind the headstring, if it does not cross the head string and has struck the ball with his/her tip, the incoming player has BIH behind the headstring? (regardless of being on 2 fouls or not)?

selftaut
09-14-2007, 12:25 PM
and to summarize...

If a player has BIH behind the headstring, if it does not cross the head string and has struck the ball with his/her tip, the incoming player has BIH behind the headstring? (regardless of being on 2 fouls or not)?

Nope, the player that attempted the move and touched the cb without crossing the headstring took a foul by touching the cb with his tip and now has to shoot again with BIH until he crosses the headstring or commits 3 fouls.

OneArmed
09-14-2007, 12:26 PM
Nope, the player that attempted the move and touched the cb without crossing the headstring took a foul by touching the cb with his tip and now has to shoot again with BIH until he crosses the headstring.

ahh ok, thanks for the clairification.

jwpretd
09-14-2007, 11:42 PM
In any case, you have to shoot the cue ball over the line when you have ball in hand.

Just to be picky (and complete), if the cue ball contacts a legal object ball, the cue ball does not have to cross the head string. (Ref: WPA rule 3.10, last sentence)

-- jwp

Mike_Mason
09-15-2007, 08:04 AM
The cue ball must pass over the head string in order to complete a legal shot.

According to some posters here...and apparently according to WPA Rule 3.10...the player with ball in hand does not have to make the cue ball pass the head string.

I don't know if there is a BCA 14.1 Rule Book anymore but I would like to see it there. The quoted WPA rule is among many rules that apply to many games.

I'm going by memory here...but it seems to me that nothing is in play until the cue ball crosses the head string...except possibly unsportsmanlike conduct.

I can see a table position where a player with ball in hand behind the string might want to deliberately foul twice in a row in order to force his opponent to take the first shot over the head string.

For instance, the player might have ball in hand but an almost complete rack...maybe a few balls near the foot rail...and a hanger in each of the pockets behind the head string.

By taking two deliberate scratches, he will be forcing his opponent to take the first shot over the head string because he will be the first player on two scratches.

I don't know really...just seems to me that nothing happens until the cue ball passes the head string...at least that's my BCA memory from way back...

Mike

jwpretd
09-15-2007, 07:54 PM
Mike,

As far as I can tell, the BCA no longer has an independent set of rules; the WPA rules now govern pool (to the extent that anybody pays attention to them).

Rule 3.10 applies in the case under discussion because the 14.1-specific rules do not address it. This is true in the current WPA rules, and in a 2001 version of the BCA rule book. In the latter, it is also Rule 3.10 and the last sentence of the last paragraph says explicitly

Additionally, if the shot fails to contact a legal object ball or fails to drive the cue ball over the head string, the shot is a foul ....

Consider this case:

You have cue ball in hand above the head string. There is an object ball with its base (where it contacts the table) below the head string, but it is near enough to the head string that part of the ball hangs over the head string. By definition, this object ball is legal to shoot. Suppose you choose to shoot this object ball with a stop shot, and you pocket it. Is that a foul because the cue ball didn't cross the head string? I don't think that's the intent of the rule.

-- jwp
A patriot must always stand ready to defend his country from its government. -- Edward Abbey

OneArmed
09-17-2007, 09:27 AM
Mike,

As far as I can tell, the BCA no longer has an independent set of rules; the WPA rules now govern pool (to the extent that anybody pays attention to them).

Rule 3.10 applies in the case under discussion because the 14.1-specific rules do not address it. This is true in the current WPA rules, and in a 2001 version of the BCA rule book. In the latter, it is also Rule 3.10 and the last sentence of the last paragraph says explicitly

Additionally, if the shot fails to contact a legal object ball or fails to drive the cue ball over the head string, the shot is a foul ....

Consider this case:

You have cue ball in hand above the head string. There is an object ball with its base (where it contacts the table) below the head string, but it is near enough to the head string that part of the ball hangs over the head string. By definition, this object ball is legal to shoot. Suppose you choose to shoot this object ball with a stop shot, and you pocket it. Is that a foul because the cue ball didn't cross the head string? I don't think that's the intent of the rule.

-- jwp
A patriot must always stand ready to defend his country from its government. -- Edward Abbey


it would still be a legal shot by definition as it contacted a legal object ball. There is an "if" clause so either a legal ball has to be hit or cueball must pass the head string. At least that's how I read it.

Bob Jewett
09-17-2007, 11:33 AM
Nope, the player that attempted the move and touched the cb without crossing the headstring took a foul by touching the cb with his tip and now has to shoot again with BIH until he crosses the headstring or commits 3 fouls.
This is false. There is no such rule. (Or if there is, there has been a misprint in the rule book.)

selftaut
09-17-2007, 01:19 PM
It's a foul and the cue ball remains in hand for his opponent. I'd have to check the new proposed WSR, but they might have an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for that move.

In any case, you have to shoot the cue ball over the line when you have ball in hand. If you take a shot that does not do that, it will remain in hand for your opponent..

OK Bob, what you are saying here is not the same as what I said? The cb remains with the shooter until it crosses the headstring? obviously if he gets to 3 consecutive fouls on that move then it creates another situation all together.

WesleyW
09-17-2007, 01:32 PM
OK Bob, what you are saying here is not the same as what I said? The cb remains with the shooter until it crosses the headstring? obviously if he gets to 3 consecutive fouls on that move then it creates another situation all together.

I think Bob is saying: Player 1 committed a scratch. Player 2 place the ball in the corner behind the kitchen and makes a foul. Player 1 get the ball in hand behind the kitchen.

selftaut
09-17-2007, 02:08 PM
I think Bob is saying: Player 1 committed a scratch. Player 2 place the ball in the corner behind the kitchen and makes a foul. Player 1 get the ball in hand behind the kitchen.

Hi Wesley, yes I see it could be interpreted that way now., and thats probably what he is saying.

Refering to the BCA rulebook I am looking at it states under general rules :

#6. When the cue ball is in hand behind the string , it remains in hand (not in play) until the player drives the cue ball out of the kitchen by striking it with his cue tip, OR in the referees judgement touches it with any part of the cue in an obvious attempt to perform a shot. The cue ball may be adjusted by the players hand, cue ,etc,,so long as it remains in hand. Once the cue ball is in play per above, it may not be impeded in any way by the player, to do so is to commit a foul.

So I guess I could be just not reading into it far enough, I interpreted this rule that the player is still shooting until he gets the cb out of the kitchen and in play., but fouled with his tip by touching the cb , as it was obvious he was NOT performing a attempted shot so the second part of the rule did not apply.

Oh well.

WesleyW
09-17-2007, 03:29 PM
Hi Wesley, yes I see it could be interpreted that way now., and thats probably what he is saying.

Refering to the BCA rulebook I am looking at it states under general rules :

#6. When the cue ball is in hand behind the string , it remains in hand (not in play) until the player drives the cue ball out of the kitchen by striking it with his cue tip, OR in the referees judgement touches it with any part of the cue in an obvious attempt to perform a shot. The cue ball may be adjusted by the players hand, cue ,etc,,so long as it remains in hand. Once the cue ball is in play per above, it may not be impeded in any way by the player, to do so is to commit a foul.

So I guess I could be just not reading into it far enough, I interpreted this rule that the player is still shooting until he gets the cb out of the kitchen and in play., but fouled with his tip by touching the cb , as it was obvious he was NOT performing a attempted shot so the second part of the rule did not apply.

Oh well.

The funniest part of the question is, two weeks ago a friend of mine was telling me the same story. Himself is a referee. Someone did the same trick in a tournament, so they asked him what the ruling is. He thought it's ball in hand for the opponent, but he wasn't sure. So he asked some other referees. All the other referees are saying, it's a foul, the opponent have to shoot, but no ball in hand. They are saying that there is no such a rule that the opponent will get ball in hand (what Bob mention). After the scratch, the shooter should shoot the CB from the kitchen, but he makes a foul. The next shot will be a totally new shot, the CB is in game, the opponent should take the shot from the point where the CB is left behind (no ball in hand).

I'm new with this kind of game, so I don't know. He was just telling me this story.

dave sutton
10-07-2007, 11:28 PM
player a was on 2 fouls already. he froze the cb to taake 3 consecd fouls. by freezing the cb it almost forces player b to also commit 3 fouls and/or kick leaving a wide open shot

legal and smart i think.

a foul is a foul is a foul

you cant stop a player from committing a foul.

ill ask jose garcia and allen hopkins next time i see them

selftaut
10-08-2007, 12:39 AM
wow some of you guys cant read. lol

player a was on 2 fouls already. he froze the cb to taake 3 consecd fouls. by freezing the cb it almost forces player b to also commit 3 fouls and/or kick leaving a wide open shot

legal and smart i think.

a foul is a foul is a foul

you cant stop a player from committing a foul.

ill ask jose garcia and allen hopkins next time i see them

Dave, all kinds of perspectives came up on this one for sure. But you read it wrong, player A was not on 2 fouls, player B was on 2 fouls. The question is does player A have this option or does he have to cross the headstring with the cb before he leaves the table.

dave sutton
10-08-2007, 12:56 AM
Dave, all kinds of perspectives came up on this one for sure. But you read it wrong, player A was not on 2 fouls, player B was on 2 fouls. The question is does player A have this option or does he have to cross the headstring with the cb before he leaves the table.

LOL. I SEE NOW. WORDING WAS A LITTLE TRICKY. I THOUGH OTHERS MIS READ BUT IM THE ONE. SRY

I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES HE HAS TO SHOOT UP TABLE BUT I CANT SEE HOW YOU CAN FORCE A GUY NOT TO TAKE A FOUL.

WHAT IF HE MISCUES AND THE BALL ENDS UP SOMEHOW IN THE SAME PLACE. DOES HE GET THE SHOT OVER . NO

pdcue
10-08-2007, 04:09 AM
LOL. I SEE NOW. WORDING WAS A LITTLE TRICKY. I THOUGH OTHERS MIS READ BUT IM THE ONE. SRY

I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES HE HAS TO SHOOT UP TABLE BUT I CANT SEE HOW YOU CAN FORCE A GUY NOT TO TAKE A FOUL.

WHAT IF HE MISCUES AND THE BALL ENDS UP SOMEHOW IN THE SAME PLACE. DOES HE GET THE SHOT OVER . NO

The rule isn't that you can't take a foul, the rule is that
you MUST shoot the CB out of baulk. IMHO - the most simple
ruling is the best. The corner hook move is unsport conduct.

But, I also think it's OK for the ref to explain that to the
shooter before he commits.

Dale

dave sutton
10-08-2007, 06:39 AM
The rule isn't that you can't take a foul, the rule is that
you MUST shoot the CB out of baulk. IMHO - the most simple
ruling is the best. The corner hook move is unsport conduct.

But, I also think it's OK for the ref to explain that to the
shooter before he commits.

Dale

i understand that. i guess if the player argued enough and refused to take thye shot over the ref could award the other player ball in hand behind the line due to shot clock violation or something.

pdcue
10-11-2007, 08:09 AM
i understand that. i guess if the player argued enough and refused to take thye shot over the ref could award the other player ball in hand behind the line due to shot clock violation or something.

Have you ever played in a tournament?
Arguing with the ref doesn't change the rules.

It's un-sports-man-like conduct. The end.

Dale

dave sutton
10-11-2007, 08:23 AM
Have you ever played in a tournament?
Arguing with the ref doesn't change the rules.

It's un-sports-man-like conduct. The end.

Dale

ive honestly never played pool before in my life.

in my experiences refs dont hold your hand through every shot.

i scenerio is the guy already took the shot and stuck it in the pocket.

now does he retake the shot? and if he does. what if he miscues and ends up in the same exact spot somehow and never passes the line.

does he now get the shot over now???

pdcue
10-11-2007, 10:15 PM
ive honestly never played pool before in my life.

in my experiences refs dont hold your hand through every shot.

i scenerio is the guy already took the shot and stuck it in the pocket.

now does he retake the shot? and if he does. what if he miscues and ends up in the same exact spot somehow and never passes the line.

does he now get the shot over now???

No do-overs.

If the shot has been completed, it is non-sports-man...
and prolly there shouldn't be a warning. I was relating my opinion
that if the ref saw my opponent apeared to not know the rule,
I would not mind if he explained the rule to him.

Where do they have 14.1 refs that don't watch every shot?

Would you care to illustrate exactly how you could miscue the ball in that way?

Dale