Push shot foul?

Wierd rule. Some things are bit off here.
How can you shoot towards or partialy into the ball and NOT to move the ball?

I think this rule is covering a different situation, because it defines what counts as a contact. If you shoot cueball towards the rail for example its legal only if ob moved, otherwise its a foul. Initial frozen contact does not counts as a contact if ob haven't moved.
The wording is slightly awkward. You are required to contact an object ball on the shot. Normally, that is when the cue ball comes into contact with a ball. For a frozen ball, the cue ball starts in contact. Requiring movement just keeps that initial contact from counting.

Push shot foul?

... and even though legal no reason it should be allowed in pool. ...
If it is not allowed, then how do you handle the case in nine ball when you are frozen to the target ball? Get ball in hand? Shoot away like at snooker? Jack up and all is OK?

Actually, ball in hand would be pretty interesting. It would change 14.1 and one pocket a lot -- you frequently get frozen to a ball during safety battles.

Push shot foul?

because it's very rare to shoot it like that and probably most ref's never had to rule on such shot so if it was me, before shooting, I would make sure that the ref knows the rule

As far as I know, most refs are trained such that they can’t explain a rule or tell you what the outcome is before the shot. So you can’t ask “great, you’ve said it’s frozen. So that means I can shoot straight into them with a normal stoke?” Plus a properly trained ref would be insulted I think if you were making sure they knew the rule.

Push shot foul?

I played one session of VNEA pool over 20 years ago and I got called on the “you have to jack up even if it’s frozen” rule. At that time I didn’t know enough to know that BCA/WPA rules didn’t apply everywhere. Lesson learned.
Yes. There is also an advantage to having a clear rule that is easy to judge or ref. I don’t think it is the right rule, but… the clarity avoids some problems.

Like the tush push rule in the NFL. I like the old rule and interpretation, I don’t like the current rule. There is now opposition to the new rule, but maybe not enough to change it back. What might fix the problem is not substance or safety, but the fact false starts and such can’t be reffed well. Not the right approach to me, but being able to officiate a given rule accurately and consistently is a consideration.

Push shot foul?

However, if the cue-ball is touching an object-ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if the object-ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue-ball.

Wierd rule. Some things are bit off here.
How can you shoot towards or partialy into the ball and NOT to move the ball?

I think this rule is covering a different situation, because it defines what counts as a contact. If you shoot cueball towards the rail for example its legal only if ob moved, otherwise its a foul. Initial frozen contact does not counts as a contact if ob haven't moved.

Filter

Back
Top