S0o this situation came up last night...

I

i need somethin

i SeEn It... hE nEeDs It
Silver Member

CueTable Help



s0o heres the situation...

double hill playing an 8 ball tournament where its only cue ball fouls only a guy is jacked up over the ball shooting at the 8 ball. now as hes going down to sh0ot, in the middle of his stroking, he nudges the one ball back and i guess with all the nerves at bay he fires at the 8 ball and makes it.

Now i do understand that its cue ball fouls only, but doesnt the player sitting down have the option of putting the one ball back where it lays?

If thats the case then isnt it a loss of game since he shot the 8 ball, and made it??
 
I think you have to move the one ball back before the shot. If the shot is taken, I don't think that would be a loss of game because there are no object ball fouls. An honest player would probably have moved the ball back and asked his opponent if the placement was acceptable.
 
The player striking the 1 ball with his cue did not foul by hitting it. He did foul by not stopping and letting you make the decision of putting it back or leaving it where it wound up.

Since it was the act of hitting the cue ball which was the foul, then he should have lost the game because he fouled while making the 8 Ball.

He may have done this deliberately, but he may not. As you say, there was lots of pressure and it happened so quickly that when he realized what he'd done it was over. He gets the benefit of the doubt about his intentions, but you still win the game.

I do agree with Neil that if he had hit the one before the cue ball while he was stroking into the cue ball, that that would be a foul. It too would be loss of game for him.
 
I don't think it would be loss of game unless it appeared that the path of the cueball was altered by the 1-ball being moved. If there's a chance that the cueball could have scratched off of the 1-ball after pocketing the 8, then I think you could make the loss of game argument, but otherwise probably not.

The option to move the ob back to it's original position is just to ensure that play can continue as if the ball had not been moved. If the game is over, however, then the point is moot, IMO.

Aaron
 
The option to move the ob back to it's original position is just to ensure that play can continue as if the ball had not been moved. If the game is over, however, then the point is moot, IMO.

The game is only over BECAUSE of the foul, so it isn't moot. If the player were allowed to win in this situation, what's to prevent every player in this situation from doing this deliberately? Cue ball foul only rules are there to keep the game playable for non-pros; they are not there to facilitate cheating.
 
Since the position of the OB was material to the shot, I think it should be a foul to move it, or at least a foul to take the shot without replacing it. I don't know if there's a specific rule for this, but there are rules about moving OBs that would be material to the shot in other ways, like if they're in the path of balls moved by the shot.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Since the position of the OB was material to the shot, I think it should be a foul to move it, or at least a foul to take the shot without replacing it. I don't know if there's a specific rule for this, but there are rules about moving OBs that would be material to the shot in other ways, like if they're in the path of balls moved by the shot.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I think PJ is right here. The impeding ball was material to the shot. He was tree-topped over it. By moving the ball on the back stroke, he gave himself a clear shot on the CB.

Ehhh... if it were me, and I was gambling, I wouldn't let someone get away with that move. I think it's a foul (along the same lines of moving the next ball in rotation in 9-ball). At the very least, I'd replace the balls and put the impeding ball flat against the CB this time since it was my option. If he'd b1tch...well.... "don't move balls around" is my response. But, I think it was a foul the moment he shot it.
 
Last edited:
John Biddle said:
The option to move the ob back to it's original position is just to ensure that play can continue as if the ball had not been moved. If the game is over, however, then the point is moot, IMO.

The game is only over BECAUSE of the foul, so it isn't moot. If the player were allowed to win in this situation, what's to prevent every player in this situation from doing this deliberately? Cue ball foul only rules are there to keep the game playable for non-pros; they are not there to facilitate cheating.
Click to expand...

Another well-said post.
 
John Biddle said:
The game is only over BECAUSE of the foul, so it isn't moot. If the player were allowed to win in this situation, what's to prevent every player in this situation from doing this deliberately? Cue ball foul only rules are there to keep the game playable for non-pros; they are not there to facilitate cheating.
Click to expand...

Whether or not the player did it intentionally is impossible to debate. I just would be leery of ruling to take a game away from someone in a case where the foul, if it had been committed in the middle of the game rather than at the end, would not have resulted in BIH, or even loss of turn. If, however, it was a foul that would have resulted in BIH (or at least loss of turn), then I could understand the loss of game argument. At the very least, I would support Spidey's suggestion of replacing the balls and having him shoot the shot over.

I certainly don't condone applying rules in a way that encourages cheating, but I guess I just didn't see it as the game being over because of the foul. My reading comprehension is highly suspect at times, but it sounded to me like the guy was in his final stroke and caught the OB on the backswing (OP doesn't say if it was his hand or his cue that nudged the ball). If anything, I would have expected that to disrupt the shot and make it even harder to pocket the ball. Now, if he had moved the ball on a practice stroke, took a couple more practice strokes, then fired in the 8, I could certainly get behind a loss of game argument, because he clearly made the shot easier by moving the obstruction. But as it was described, it sounds similar to a situation where a player is bridging with his hand very close to an OB and happens to touch the OB on his final stroke. In that case, the foul is not one that would have resulted in BIH (at least, as I understand "cue ball fouls only" rules), so I don't see how it could result in loss of game?

I guess without being there and seeing it firsthand, though, it would be hard to judge if it was intentional or not. I'd be interested to hear how a TD would handle such a situation. I'd hate to have to make that call myself; taking a game away from someone for a foul that would normally not even have resulted in loss of turn is pretty harsh, IMO.

I must admit that I'm a bit biased on this topic anyway, however, as I've never agreed with the rule that a foul on the 8-ball is loss of game. Seems too harsh a penalty when most people are playing BIH rules at 8-ball anyway.

As always, JMHO,
Aaron
 
its not a loss of game but it is a foul if the cue ballrolls in the path of the object ball he moved after shooting the shot but the game is over u dident say anything b4 it happen to fast an it would only be ball in hand
 
You lose... he wins... end of discussion.

No "replace the balls" since he did it with his stroke while in the process of shooting.
No BIH... CB fouls only... rediculous to even consider this.
Gain some experience and you won't even ask questions like this.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
At the very least, I'd replace the balls and put the impeding ball flat against the CB this time since it was my option. If he'd b1tch...well.... "don't move balls around" is my response.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Spidey, but that would be flat out cheating. It's your option to replace the ball where you honestly believe it was, not to put it where ever want.

If you put it where ever you want and you both know that you positioned it inaccurately on purpose to screw him, you're basically breaking down the understanding you guys have between you not to pull BS moves on each other. Any trust to ref yourself, acknowledge your own fouls, etc. has been lost.

If you insist on doing that, then his next move could be to aim his stick directly at the 8-ball, pocket it, and say, "What do you mean I didn't use the cue ball? You should have called someone to watch the hit. Doubt goes to the shooter, so I win." :grin-square:
 
Shortside K said:
You lose... he wins... end of discussion.

No "replace the balls" since he did it with his stroke while in the process of shooting.
No BIH... CB fouls only... rediculous to even consider this.
Gain some experience and you won't even ask questions like this.
Click to expand...

Well, I think you're right under World Standardized Rules. The guy basically stumbled through a loophole in the rules to make his shot easier than it should have been.

I think the Seminole Pro 10-Ball Rules include a decent way to handle this:

When shooting over an object ball or passed an object ball to get to the cue ball and the cue ball is as close as 1 ½ inches or closer; they must not move the object ball in any way or it is a foul.​

I guess they should probably add a clause saying that the opponent must declare the object ball as being 1 ½ inches or closer prior to the shooter getting down on his shot. :lol:
 
Aaron_S said:
Whether or not the player did it intentionally is impossible to debate.
Click to expand...

True enough, but in this case it doesn't matter much, because he would lose the game either way. If he didn't do it intentionally then it's just a foul. But in this instance, since he pocketed the 8 Ball, that fould makes it a loss. If he did it intentionally it would be unsportsmanlike conduct and he should lose the game, maybe more.

Aaron_S said:
I just would be leery of ruling to take a game away from someone in a case where the foul, if it had been committed in the middle of the game rather than at the end, would not have resulted in BIH, or even loss of turn. If, however, it was a foul that would have resulted in BIH (or at least loss of turn), then I could understand the loss of game argument. At the very least, I would support Spidey's suggestion of replacing the balls and having him shoot the shot over.
Click to expand...

But his action was a foul, and a foul would have resulted in BIH any other time. Many players, myself included, would overlook this in just for fun games, though I'd mention it for educational purposes. But in a tournament or league game why would you?

I could live with giving this player another shot at the 8 after the balls were replaced, if it was my choice to make, but I'd be resentful of a ref who gave my game away because he didn't know the rules.

Aaron_S said:
I certainly don't condone applying rules in a way that encourages cheating, but I guess I just didn't see it as the game being over because of the foul. My reading comprehension is highly suspect at times, but it sounded to me like the guy was in his final stroke and caught the OB on the backswing (OP doesn't say if it was his hand or his cue that nudged the ball). If anything, I would have expected that to disrupt the shot and make it even harder to pocket the ball. Now, if he had moved the ball on a practice stroke, took a couple more practice strokes, then fired in the 8, I could certainly get behind a loss of game argument, because he clearly made the shot easier by moving the obstruction. But as it was described, it sounds similar to a situation where a player is bridging with his hand very close to an OB and happens to touch the OB on his final stroke. In that case, the foul is not one that would have resulted in BIH (at least, as I understand "cue ball fouls only" rules), so I don't see how it could result in loss of game?
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply that you did condone this behavior, I was just using it to help explain why that interpretation of the rules was problematic. Sorry if I caused any unintended offense.

I agree with you that it read like the 1 ball was moved on the last backswing before hitting the ball. But what difference does that make? He moved an object ball but NOT while shooting forward toward the cueball. He is required to stop, tell you, and ask what you want to do, leave it as is or move it back. Since he didn't do that, it's a foul. Since he sunk the 8 Ball it's a loss. If he had missed the 8 Ball it would be BIH (BCA rules at least I don't know about APA).

From the VCA website - from the World Standardized Rules - General Rules of Play:

1.16.1 CUE BALL FOULS ONLY
When a referee is presiding over a match, it is a foul for a player to touch any ball (cue ball or object ball) with the cue, clothing, body, mechanical bridge or chalk, before, during or after a shot. However, when a referee is not presiding over a game, it is not a foul to accidentally touch stationary balls located between the cue ball and the shooter while in the act of shooting. If such an accident occurs, the player should allow the Tournament Director to restore the object balls to their correct positions. If the player does not allow such a restoration, and a ball set in motion as a normal part of the shot touches such an unrestored ball, or passes partly into a region originally occupied by a disturbed ball, the shot is a foul. In short, if the accident has any effect on the outcome of the shot, it is a foul. In any case, the Tournament Director must be called upon to restore the positions of the disturbed balls as soon as possible, but not during the shot. It is a foul to play another shot before the Tournament Director has restored any accidentally moved balls. At the non-shooting player’s option, the disturbed balls will be left in their new positions. In this case, the balls are considered restored, and subsequent contact on them is not a foul. It is still a foul to make any contact with the cue ball whatsoever while it is in play, except for the normal tip-to-ball contact during a shot.

Aaron_S said:
I guess without being there and seeing it firsthand, though, it would be hard to judge if it was intentional or not. I'd be interested to hear how a TD would handle such a situation. I'd hate to have to make that call myself; taking a game away from someone for a foul that would normally not even have resulted in loss of turn is pretty harsh, IMO.

I must admit that I'm a bit biased on this topic anyway, however, as I've never agreed with the rule that a foul on the 8-ball is loss of game. Seems too harsh a penalty when most people are playing BIH rules at 8-ball anyway.

As always, JMHO,
Aaron
Click to expand...

Since he pocketed the 8 Ball and fouled it's a loss. If he had not pocketed the 8 ball it would be BIH. If he had done this attempting to shoot any other ball besides the 8 Ball, it would have still been a foul and you'd get BIH.

This is from the World Standardized Rules of 8 Ball from the BCA website:

4.20 LOSS OF GAME
A player loses the game by committing any of the following infractions:

  1. Fouls when pocketing the 8-ball (exception: see 8-Ball Pocketed On The Break).
  2. Pockets the 8-ball on the same stroke as the last of his group of balls.
  3. Jumps the 8-ball off the table at any time.
  4. Pockets the 8-ball in a pocket other than the one designated.
  5. Pockets the 8-ball when it is not the legal object ball.
 
Cuebacca said:
Sorry, Spidey, but that would be flat out cheating. It's your option to replace the ball where you honestly believe it was, not to put it where ever want.

If you put it where ever you want and you both know that you positioned it inaccurately on purpose to screw him, you're basically breaking down the understanding you guys have between you not to pull BS moves on each other. Any trust to ref yourself, acknowledge your own fouls, etc. has been lost.

If you insist on doing that, then his next move could be to aim his stick directly at the 8-ball, pocket it, and say, "What do you mean I didn't use the cue ball? You should have called someone to watch the hit. Doubt goes to the shooter, so I win." :grin-square:
Click to expand...

Yeah, but he cheated first ;) It's for this reason alone why pros play foul on all balls. Leaving words like "intending" or "intention" into the rules and leaving gray areas leaves this up to debate.

It's not as easy to say CB fouls only when an impeding ball tree-tops your stroke on the CB. Heck.... whenever someone has me jacked up... I'd pull the same move and just win without fear of missing.

I think PJ had a key point when he said the impeding ball was material to the shot. The shooter likely hit the CB in a way that was geometrically impossible with the impeding ball in front of it (because he moved it). It altered the outcome of the shot - therefore a foul. The angle of the cue changed into the CB. The difficulty went from a 6 to a 2.

I'm gonna watch this thread with interest and see the outcome. I think it's a foul but I'm usually wrong with this type of stuff. John made a long post above mine so I need to read what he quoted.

EDIT: Just read John's post. Moving the impeding ball altered the shot 1000% - so it's a foul. Based on world standardized rules... it's a loss of game.
 
Last edited:
John Biddle said:
He is required to stop, tell you, and ask what you want to do, leave it as is or move it back. Since he didn't do that, it's a foul. Since he sunk the 8 Ball it's a loss. If he had missed the 8 Ball it would be BIH (BCA rules at least I don't know about APA).

From the VCA website - from the World Standardized Rules - General Rules of Play:

1.16.1 CUE BALL FOULS ONLY
When a referee is presiding over a match, it is a foul for a player to touch any ball (cue ball or object ball) with the cue, clothing, body, mechanical bridge or chalk, before, during or after a shot. However, when a referee is not presiding over a game, it is not a foul to accidentally touch stationary balls located between the cue ball and the shooter while in the act of shooting. If such an accident occurs, the player should allow the Tournament Director to restore the object balls to their correct positions. If the player does not allow such a restoration, and a ball set in motion as a normal part of the shot touches such an unrestored ball, or passes partly into a region originally occupied by a disturbed ball, the shot is a foul. In short, if the accident has any effect on the outcome of the shot, it is a foul. In any case, the Tournament Director must be called upon to restore the positions of the disturbed balls as soon as possible, but not during the shot. It is a foul to play another shot before the Tournament Director has restored any accidentally moved balls. At the non-shooting player’s option, the disturbed balls will be left in their new positions. In this case, the balls are considered restored, and subsequent contact on them is not a foul. It is still a foul to make any contact with the cue ball whatsoever while it is in play, except for the normal tip-to-ball contact during a shot.
Click to expand...

Wow, good catch! Looks like the shooter should have lost for what he did. FYI, I think the BCA website no longer stays current on the World Standardized Rules, so the most up-to-date World Standardized Rule (which also supports your position) can be viewed here:

http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules#20

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 by either touching another ball or having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball. If this does not happen, then the opposing player must be given the option of either leaving the ball where it lies or replacing the ball as near as possible to its original position to the agreement of both players. If a player shoots without giving his opponent the option to replace, it will be a foul resulting in cue ball in hand for the opponent.​

I wonder how this would be ruled in the BCA Pool League. Seems like it should be covered under "1.33 Disturbed Balls (Cue Ball Fouls Only)", but unfortunately it doesn't appear to be mentioned explicitly. Tatcat, are you reading this? :grin:
 
Well stated, John. I actually don't think you and I are too far apart on this one. I completely agree that it would be a foul if the movement of an object ball changed the outcome of the shot, and I do understand (even if I don't completely agree with the rule itself) that a foul on the 8-ball results in loss of game. I also think, however, that there is a bit of a gray area at times when trying to determine if the movement of an object ball did or did not, in fact, change the outcome of the shot, and it sounds like this instance may fall somewhere in that gray area. It's really impossible to say without seeing it firsthand, and even then, two different TD's might give two different calls. My guess is that if we could see a video of the shot, though, you and I would probably agree on what the proper penalty (if any) should be.

With regard to the question of backswing or forward swing, for some players (Allen Hopkins) there is very little time between the two for recognizing that they inadvertently moved a ball. With a punching-style motion (which many players, especially amateurs, use when jacked up) it may be hard to halt the stroke before pulling the trigger. Whether or not this would play into the referee's call, I can't say, but it may be worth considering.

This is probably one of those calls where the only thing a ref can be sure of is that 50% of the people involved are going to hate him afterward. :-)

Rep to you for your well reasoned and well stated addition to this debate.

Aaron
 
Last edited:
SpiderWebComm said:
Yeah, but he cheated first ;) It's for this reason alone why pros play foul on all balls. Leaving words like "intending" or "intention" into the rules and leaving gray areas leaves this up to debate.
Click to expand...

Well, we were talking about if the opponent had stopped and asked you if you want to replace the ball or leave it there. If he had done that, then it's unlikely that he had done anything dishonest.

Sure, he shouldn't expect you to restore it to an easier position than it was at... go ahead and error on the side of making it harder... I think that's the gray area you're talking about; but if you both know the cue ball was 2 inches from the object ball and then you freeze it up and look the guy in the eye and tell him "that's where I thought it was", or "tough luck pal, it's my option", then you've blown right past the gray area into black and white land. That's when my opponent becomes bad action, IMO.

I see your point about all ball fouls. The only problem I have with all ball fouls is that without a ref at the table, all ball fouls can also cause arguments when the shooter didn't notice that he touched a ball, such as with a shirt foul.
 
Cuebacca said:
Well, we were talking about if the opponent had stopped and asked you if you want to replace the ball or leave it there. If he had done that, then it's unlikely that he had done anything dishonest.

Sure, he shouldn't expect you to restore it to an easier position than it was at... go ahead and error on the side of making it harder... I think that's the gray area you're talking about; but if you both know the cue ball was 2 inches from the object ball and then you freeze it up and look the guy in the eye and tell him "that's where I thought it was", or "tough luck pal, it's my option", then you've blown right past the gray area into black and white land. That's when my opponent becomes bad action, IMO.

I see your point about all ball fouls. The only problem I have with all ball fouls is that without a ref at the table, all ball fouls can also cause arguments when the shooter didn't notice that he touched a ball, such as with a shirt foul.
Click to expand...

I was totally kidding earlier with that btw :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top