I would have to disagree based on one being clearly against the rules while the other was a "you may be able to do that where you're from but you cant do that here even though there is not a rule against it" judgement call.
Another Bizarre Dennis Moment vs Shane
- Thread starter Cornerman
- Start date
I would have to disagree based on one being clearly against the rules while the other was a "you may be able to do that where you're from but you cant do that here even though there is not a rule against it" judgement call.
It looks like 6.16h is the only applicable rule if you are playing some form of "cue ball fouls only". Under the "touched ball" rule, touching any object ball is a foul. In/out of play is not specified.
I don't know whether they were using WPA rules at DCC or not. So far as I know, they have never used the WPA rules.
Last edited:
If he can't understand the rules maybe he should stay the hell home. Dennis didn't know if he could shoot the ball through that space. After he took another ball and measured, he knew if t would pass or not. Shane would have had BIH if he hit the wrong ball first.
What Ronnie called on Shane was so APA, but in the end there are rules. Would be nice to have the exact same rules in every tournament. WPA has a set of rules for every game...just have every player and promoter follow them. Not everyone will like whatever rules are played. I blame the promoters for not ALL having the same set of rules for every game. Just the 1,435 thing wrong with pool. No biggie. Johnnyt
I think this fall under a standardize rule for pool that has been mentioned here several times. We see this with 10 ball, call all and pass back, can't pass back etc.
this situation i feel falls under the 14.1 you can't use the rack to see if a ball is in or out protocol. As a professional and given the stakes I believe most were raised to "as when you don't know something", Dennis should of done that.
this situation i feel falls under the 14.1 you can't use the rack to see if a ball is in or out protocol. As a professional and given the stakes I believe most were raised to "as when you don't know something", Dennis should of done that.
At 14.1 the table is required by the rules to be properly marked including a line around the outside of the triangle. If that rule was ignored, it is perfectly reasonable to use a triangle to try to figure out whether a ball is in the rack or not.
What? No 20 pages on how that's a cheap way to win and how only sissies call fouls like that?
Gee. I wonder why.
because it was svb who called out on Dennis and not the other way around?
Exactly. Thank you for clarifying what I thought should have been obvious.
As someone else guessed, I also think he was just trying to pull a move on Shane to see if he could get away with it.
I can't find anything specific in the BCA rules either. The closest two rules are 6.6 and 6.16.h. pointed out by several above and the following rule from the WPBA rules section on Fouls. I'd love to see them address this more specifically in the rules. Even 6.6 I think refers to balls in play.
"6.6 Touched Ball
It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of any object ball except by the normal ball-to-ball contacts during shots. It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of the cue ball except when it is in hand or by the normal tip-to-ball forward stroke contact of a shot. The shooter is responsible for the equipment he controls at the table, such as chalk, bridges, clothing, his hair, parts of his body, and the cue ball when it is in hand, that may be involved in such fouls. If such a foul is accidental, it is a standard foul, but if it is intentional, it is 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct
The normal penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct is the same as for a serious foul, but the referee may impose a penalty depending on his judgment of the conduct. Among other penalties possible are a warning; a standard-foul penalty, which will count as part of a three-foul sequence if applicable; a serious-foul penalty; loss of a rack, set or match; ejection from the competition possibly with forfeiture of all prizes, trophies and standings points.
Unsportsmanlike conduct is any intentional behavior that brings disrepute to the sport or which disrupts or changes the game to the extent that it cannot be played fairly. It includes
(a) distracting the opponent; (b) changing the position of the balls in play other than by a shot;
(c) playing a shot by intentionally miscuing; (d) continuing to play after a foul has been called or play has been suspended; (e) practicing during a match; (f) marking the table; (g) delay of the game; and
(h) using equipment inappropriately."
Last edited:
Bob,
Was there once a rule that specified that you could not use an out of play ball to measure whether the cue ball passed? I was certain that there was such a rule in the WPA rules, but it clearly isn't there. Is this false memory syndrome or was the rule changed?
Gideon
I'm pretty sure it's in the snooker rule book.
But you can't put every possibility into a rule book....Who could carry it?
Common sense should always rule the day.
This makes great sense to me - I wonder why the same great sense isn't used to eliminate rules about measuring with balls, etc. In fact, didn't at least one rule set recently eliminate the prohibition on taking your hand off your cue?
I don't think estimating the size of a gap precisely should be a required pool skill (on top of all the other ones).
pj
chgo
For some reason, the wording that explicitly forbids using out-of-play balls to measure distance isn't copied/pasted into the WPA rulebook. But the BCA ruleset (which is where the WPA ruleset originally was copy and pasted) still has it:
http://bca-pool.com/general/custom.asp?page=55
1.3 USE OF EQUIPMENT
Players may not use equipment or accessory items for purposes or in a manner other than those for which the items were intended (refer to rules 3.42 and 3.43). For example, powder containers, chalk cubes, etc., may not be used to prop up a mechanical bridge (or natural hand bridge); no more than two mechanical bridges may be used at one time, nor may they be used to support anything other than the cue shaft. Extra or out-of-play balls may not be used by players to check clearance or for any other reason (except to lag for break); the triangle may be employed to ascertain whether a ball is in the rack when a match is unofficiated and the table has not been pencil marked around the triangle area. (Also see Rule 2.3)
2.15 INAPPROPRIATE USE OF EQUIPMENT
The referee should be alert for a player using equipment or accessory items for purposes or in a manner other than those for which they were intended, or for the use of illegal equipment, as defined under “equipment specification”. Generally no penalty is applied. However, should a player persist in such activity or use of such equipment, after having been advised that such activity or use is not permissible, the referee or other tournament official may take action as appropriate under the provisions of “Unsportsmanlike Conduct” (Also see Rule 1.3 and Rule 1.4)
---------------------
Reading these both, it reads as if a warning should have been given, not a foul.
It's still bizarre for Dennis, but it looks like he go the worst of it.
Last edited:
You can't use any equipment to measure distance or gaps, aside from your judgement and hand, and you better not move the balls while doing that or I know I would call a foul even if it's cueball fouls only as you are not moving a ball accidentally during a shot but by trying to measure the space.
Not balls, not your cue, not chalk, not the bridge, not on a fox not in a box.
So...bih you cant use the cueball to measure?
Correct.
Where it gets funky is if you want to drop the cueball into a location. You clearly would be using the cueball measure if it can't be dropped in that position.
But, you can't use the cueball with ball-in-hand to see if it passes by a ball. IMO, this is a goofy rule.
Freddie <~~~ goofy is what goofy does
Last edited:
Thank you, Freddie. I knew I remembered reading that rule somewhere! I remember it from the days that the BCA rules were the standard before the WPA stole most of them.
What is interesting is that when the WPA adopted the BCA rules generally, their version of rule 1.3 (also #1.3) deleted the reference to out of play balls. Was the thought that it was surplus wording or was it a deliberate change to allow it?
I have a vague recollection that Bob Jewett was involved in a revision to the rules - maybe he was involved in this.
Gideon<-----This is the kind of stuff we lawyers fight over
I think those BCA rules are old and out of date. My understanding is the BCA essentially did away with their own rule set and adopted the WPA rules in their entirety. If you go to the BCA home page and get to the rules through there, all of them are straight from the WPA and are actually on WPA letterhead.
But clearly at one point in time the BCA rules did specifically address this situation.
I imagine they simply wrote a sentence ("The equipment must be used only for the purpose or in the manner that the equipment was intended.") that they felt covered any such misuse of equipment without having to try to identify all such things individually.
Next folks will be pulling out protractors, straight edges, and measuring tapes. 
Remember the whole rule...
In cue ball fouls only, moving one ball accidentally is not a foul, UNLESS the balls when struck enter the path of the moved balls. If you accidentally move the object ball to be struck, that will be a foul because the balls will travel in the path of the moved ball. No way to avoid it.
Jaden
In cue ball fouls only, moving one ball accidentally is not a foul, UNLESS the balls when struck enter the path of the moved balls. If you accidentally move the object ball to be struck, that will be a foul because the balls will travel in the path of the moved ball. No way to avoid it.
Jaden