watched a game yesterday - player at table, missed a shot and showing disgust and dropped his cue on table - it rolled down table and moved all remaining balls (10) to end of table - what is the ruling??? The 2 players are friends, but they were playing 100 points for 100.00 dollars.
Rules question
- Thread starter JMB
- Start date
Wow this is an interesting one, never heard of this happening.
the only thing i can think of is that unless you have photographic memory is, Re-Rack and the person that caused the foul has to shoot the opening break. i dont know if there would be a scoring deduction, especialy if you were playing cue ball fouls only.
Cant wait to see what the powers that be say what the ruling is ... (Lipsky,Jewitt,Blackjack,Etc Etc)
Steve
the only thing i can think of is that unless you have photographic memory is, Re-Rack and the person that caused the foul has to shoot the opening break. i dont know if there would be a scoring deduction, especialy if you were playing cue ball fouls only.
Cant wait to see what the powers that be say what the ruling is ... (Lipsky,Jewitt,Blackjack,Etc Etc)
Steve
I would guess that the miscreant had conceded.
Dave Nelson
Dave Nelson
Foul
It feels like a concession to me. It's like when someone rakes the balls when he misses a shot.
The fact that they are friends or that it is for $100 should not change whatever the correct ruling is.
I hope Bob Jewett will weigh in.
By the way, that was quite a "drop" that resulted in going all the way down the table and moving all 10 balls.
It feels like a concession to me. It's like when someone rakes the balls when he misses a shot.
The fact that they are friends or that it is for $100 should not change whatever the correct ruling is.
I hope Bob Jewett will weigh in.
By the way, that was quite a "drop" that resulted in going all the way down the table and moving all 10 balls.
Until a better authority chimes in, here's my interpretation of the rules (WPA World-Standardized Rules) for this.
It's a Touched Ball foul (6.6). If the disturbance was accidental, it's a standard foul, which carries a one-point penalty. And I guess you'd try to restore the table to the original position as well as possible.
If the disturbance was intentional, it would be Unsportsmanlike Conduct (6.16). "For 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct, the referee will choose a penalty depending on the nature of the offense."
In the situation described by the OP, it sounds like the dropping of the cue was intentional (done in disgust), but the subsequent messing up of the balls may have been accidental. And it most likely was not a refereed match.
I'd say the best thing to do, unless the perpetrator just concedes the money, is to view it as a one-point foul, and you try to restore the table to whatever degree possible.
It's a Touched Ball foul (6.6). If the disturbance was accidental, it's a standard foul, which carries a one-point penalty. And I guess you'd try to restore the table to the original position as well as possible.
If the disturbance was intentional, it would be Unsportsmanlike Conduct (6.16). "For 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct, the referee will choose a penalty depending on the nature of the offense."
In the situation described by the OP, it sounds like the dropping of the cue was intentional (done in disgust), but the subsequent messing up of the balls may have been accidental. And it most likely was not a refereed match.
I'd say the best thing to do, unless the perpetrator just concedes the money, is to view it as a one-point foul, and you try to restore the table to whatever degree possible.
Well, I don't gamble with friends. Especially for a hundred bucks, but ... I'm sure any of the friends I play with would concede to a 15 point foul and re-break even if the actual hitting of the balls was by accident, it was the direct effect of dropping the stick on the table.
If it were one or two balls moved that could be replaced, I'm also sure that replacing the balls is the way we'd play it. But unable to re-set the balls as they were, I don't see any other fair way especially if the incoming player had open balls to shoot at.
If it were one or two balls moved that could be replaced, I'm also sure that replacing the balls is the way we'd play it. But unable to re-set the balls as they were, I don't see any other fair way especially if the incoming player had open balls to shoot at.
I'd say the game is over.
Bob -- if it's being played under WPA rules, what's your interpretation of what the rules require?
You rake the balls, you lost the game, very simple.
Doesn't matter if you rake them by holding the cue or by slapping/rolling/whatever. I'm a cue-dropper too but I'm never going to 'accidentally' ruin the placement of ten balls. And if I do, I'm apologizing and giving the guy his money.
The idea of replacing ten balls to original placement is ridiculous. The game is hopelessly tainted at that point. We all know it's a game of inches... even millimeters. Replacing them from memory would not be playing the same game, not even close. It's time to get out your wallet if you're the stick dropper, unless you want to invoke their friendship and start again at even.
Doesn't matter if you rake them by holding the cue or by slapping/rolling/whatever. I'm a cue-dropper too but I'm never going to 'accidentally' ruin the placement of ten balls. And if I do, I'm apologizing and giving the guy his money.
The idea of replacing ten balls to original placement is ridiculous. The game is hopelessly tainted at that point. We all know it's a game of inches... even millimeters. Replacing them from memory would not be playing the same game, not even close. It's time to get out your wallet if you're the stick dropper, unless you want to invoke their friendship and start again at even.
In general, if the actions of a player make it impossible to play the game fairly according to the rules, it is unsportsmanlike conduct. If a player moves all the balls intentionally, you can't play the game. If a player drops his stick out of clumsiness, and moves balls, that's one thing. In the OP's scenario, the perp had control of his stick but not his mind. If I'm the referee, I give the game to the opponent. Among other problems, it is no fair for the opponent to have to worry about what might set off the guy with the short fuse.
I understand.
Second scenario -- suppose it's obviously not intentional. Example -- the player is shooting a forceful shot in 14.1 and the cue flies out of his hands into the balls. All the remaining 10 balls are moved. You're the ref. What do you call?
Last edited:
I think there is presently a hole in the rules for this situation. I have seen one situation in which all the balls on the table (about ten) were moved, and they were all restored (mostly by the player at the table). In general it will be really hard to restore a lot of balls, so the rules probably need to specify some other way to continue the game.
Currently, I think only Regulations 11 and 25 apply, and they don't really say what to do. I'd offer the incoming player the choice of taking the balls in position or accepting my restoration.
Sounds like it has all of the components of a concession. IMHO, of course.
I still read the question in the context of "TWO FRIENDS PLAYING" 100 points for 100 dollars.
While the strict interpretation of the rules may be read as loss of game I wonder if it mentions loss of friendship too? I still think in situations like this where friends are playing the solution would be re-rack and 15point foul.
Tournament play is an entirely different animal and not how the question was posed IMO.
Yeah, the question was rather sloppily posed.
He wanted a "ruling" but then he's asking about 2 friends and the fact that they are playing for money.
I'd say if it was me and a friend we would probably try to put humpty dumpty back together again or say the hell with it. I wouldn't just try to take his $100.
Yes. That should have been "24. Act of God."
sausage
Banned
agreed. he just lost $100.00.
in my life, if i only lost $100.00 from angry outbursts, i'd consider myself fortunate.
Maybe they need a 24.b. Act of Devil.