BCA Rules 9 Ball

[JoeyA]

I'm not real familiar with BCA rules. Is there a foul in the following two scenarios?

Shooter contact cue ball, cue ball contacts object ball, object ball contacts rail, another ball rolls around on the table and shooter leaves cue stick laying on the table and the other ball hits the cue stick. Foul or no foul?

Scenario 2. Shooter contacts cue ball, cue ball contacts object ball, object ball contacts rail, but during the stroke and after the cue stick contacts the object ball, the cue ball barely touches a different ball to the right of where the cue ball once stood. Foul or no foul?

JoeyA

 

[hang-the-9]

I'm not real familiar with BCA rules. Is there a foul in the following two scenarios?

Shooter contact cue ball, cue ball contacts object ball, object ball contacts rail, another ball rolls around on the table and shooter leaves cue stick laying on the table and the other ball hits the cue stick. Foul or no foul?

Scenario 2. Shooter contacts cue ball, cue ball contacts object ball, object ball contacts rail, but during the stroke and after the cue stick contacts the object ball, the cue ball barely touches a different ball to the right of where the cue ball once stood. Foul or no foul?

JoeyA

In the first one, I'd call a foul. If the guy was holding the cue and did not have time to snatch it out of the way, and the path of the balls do not affect the shot or the cueball path, that may be OK. Leaving the cue on the table sounds like a deliberate way of getting in the way of the shot.

The second one, sounds almost like the first unless you left out the part that any of the balls traveled near the path where the other moved object ball was.

 

[JoeyA]

In the first one, I'd call a foul. If the guy was holding the cue and did not have time to snatch it out of the way, and the path of the balls do not affect the shot or the cueball path, that may be OK. Leaving the cue on the table sounds like a deliberate way of getting in the way of the shot.

The second one, sounds almost like the first unless you left out the part that any of the balls traveled near the path where the other moved object ball was.

Don't hurt yourself straddling that fence. :wink: j/k. Thanks for the reply.

The shooter just wasn't paying attention to his cue stick which he was still holding in his hand when the object ball came around the table and nudged his cue.

JoeyA

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Joey, the way I read the BCAPL rules (1-33) for disturbed balls both scenarios are fouls.

In the first scenario, the player's cue made contact with a moving ball. Under rule 1-33 (7d) it is a foul if: You disturb a ball that is in motion.

In the second situation I'm assuming it's the same as #1 only with the added fact that the CB happened to touch another ball. If I read it correctly, it is a penalty for the same reason as the first scenario. The fact the cue ball happened to contact another ball is irrelevant at that point. If I don't have the situation correct, please clarify. But if a ball in motion is disturbed or a disturbed ball contacts another ball (1-33 7c), it is a foul.


In any event, all the no-foul scenarios under the disturb ball rules pertain to disturbing a single stationary ball only.

The rule is on page 29 HERE

 

[Monk Slayer]

Another reason to develop the habit of wearing a tucked in, short sleeve shirt. That and not touching any ball until they all stop rolling. You just never know what your opponent will do. He might think it's cool, or not. Better to play it safe.

 

[TurdFerguson]

The first scenario is famous. Ask Johnny Archer. Can't remember the event, but he laid his stick down and let go. Should have seen his face.

BAM. That is a foul...using an aiming device.

Also a foul when the ball hits it, but foul before that, as soon as the player leaves his stick on the table.

Second one is a foul because you have interrupted balls in play, so even with cue ball only fouls it is foul.