So why did you cue the 9 ball instead of the cue ball ? Then you have the audacity to come to this forum and defend your action and resulting rules interpretation.
Please more political satire.
Intentional hit on 9 ball with no attempt to touch cue ball
- Thread starter jchance
- Start date
Please more political satire.
this is nonsense. it's the same thing as taking a foul and tying up a ball. if I take away your easy 9-ball combo, too bad for you. run the f-ck out.
As long as you tie it up by shooting at whitey, otherwise a foul and restore the position of the 9. Or just forfeit the guy the f out.
I get why you say unsportsmanlike , but in the shooters head, he might be
just thinking it was strategic. I've played a guy in a tournament that knocked a
cluster of balls with his arm and went all over the place.
The TD director told me I could put them back to where they were but I didn't
know exactly the setup.
Now I thought he did it on purpose because being cueball fouls only he got to
continue shooting after that.
Being it was a tournament I couldnt believe this wasnt loss of shot.
We could start with the interpretation of "Unsportsmanlike"
Perhaps you didn't read all the posts.
I haven't mainly focused on rule interpretation but rather....Rule Application!
I seem to have been the only one who suggested the rules may have been modified.
And having done so the Op stated the French rules didn't address this situation.
I've only had the audacity to look deeper into the situation to recognize that just because it's an American game doesn't necessarily mean it's always played by American rules.
If indeed the French or any American tournament director choose to modify the rules, then by changing them, they too have chosen to " interpret" the situation differently.
APA only allows cue ball fouls but this is actually contrary to the original rules. They narrow the "Interpretation" of the rule to accommodate the novice players.
Far too many people jump to the conclusion that because I question the application of a rule I must be against the rules. This is not at all true. I'm a firm advocate of the rules that are spelled out and not subject to interpretation but we can't simply limit our focus to the rules you're familiar with when there are so many playing by different rules.
Last edited:
That misfired.
It's still early though, here in the lower 48.
I suspect the target was just too small to hit.....broaden your horizons.
Last edited:
You dont like the easy combo, you gotta bust it up somehow.... or tie up some lower numbered balls.
I like what someone said early, about treating this like an object ball foul. If the specific rule set didn't say otherwise, I like that answer best.
I know the poster speaks and writes better than I do, and I also feel for him.
But I'm still thinking, how would the Great Cones of Remulack rule this one?
I like what someone said early, about treating this like an object ball foul. If the specific rule set didn't say otherwise, I like that answer best.
I know the poster speaks and writes better than I do, and I also feel for him.
But I'm still thinking, how would the Great Cones of Remulack rule this one?
wwjdwithca
Registered
Pretty amazing there are still people arguing that this move was not unsportmanlike conduct. Here's the WPA rule:
"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."
This list is not exhaustive and is intended only to provide guidance as to what "Unsportmanlke Conduct" looks like, and clearly, I mean CLEARLY what this player did fits into these guidelines. Loss of game or ejection is really the only question (loss of rack IMO), unless of course the tournament had a separate set of rules.
Pool has to the funniest sport in that there are large groups of players that don't want to play by any real set of rules, just made-up, undocumented, and illogical ones.
"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."
This list is not exhaustive and is intended only to provide guidance as to what "Unsportmanlke Conduct" looks like, and clearly, I mean CLEARLY what this player did fits into these guidelines. Loss of game or ejection is really the only question (loss of rack IMO), unless of course the tournament had a separate set of rules.
Pool has to the funniest sport in that there are large groups of players that don't want to play by any real set of rules, just made-up, undocumented, and illogical ones.
Would you please tell me which of the 8 items listed "clearly" fits the situation?
100% agree!
He should have shot another object to pocket the 9 which will result in 9 ball spot and ball in hand for his opponent. Anytime you deliberately touch an object ball to better your circumstance I feel that it's a loss of game. Players can get around this by asking the referee to clean the ball hoping when the ref puts the cue ball back in place it'll be in a slightly favorable position.
Here's a link to a similar situation.
http://forums.easypooltutor.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10059
Intentionally touching other balls besides the cue ball isn't strategy. I see it has cheating and unsportsmanlike. As long as you hit the cue ball first then anything goes.
Here's a link to a similar situation.
http://forums.easypooltutor.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10059
Last edited:
Maybe you didn't get this far down the list...?
(b) changing the position of the balls in play other than by a shot
The same one that was quoted earlier.
pj <- pretty clear to me
chgo
I had a ball frozen against the cue ball in the middle of the table and my opponent had to jack up with a steep approach to strike the cue ball. He grazed my ball first before contacting the cue ball and it was ruled a legal shot under BCA.
I think it was a bad call but If its OK to do it unintentionally, then why not intentionally? The penalty should be the same.....not because it's right or wrong but because the rules define the appropriate penalty for an action and if the rules allow you to intentionally strike a ball other than the cue ball with only a penalty of BIH to your opponent, then by all means..... use the rules strategically to your advantage.
Last edited:
What you're talking about is this:
6.25: Numbered Balls Struck by the Cue Stick
Striking a numbered ball with the chalked area of tip of the cue stick prior to or at the same time as striking the cue ball constitutes a foul. It is possible to strike the cue ball and have the ferrule or shaft contact a numbered ball at the same time and not result in a foul (for instance, when a player must elevate the cue by hand or bridge over a numbered ball in order to strike the cue ball). If a single numbered ball is moved in this manner and has no outcome on the shot, it may be placed in the original position by the opponent or leave lie.
What had happened is this:
7.4: Flagrant Fouls
If a player moves or pockets any balls illegally by any means such as slapping the table, throwing balls or equipment, pushing on the cloth, striking the balls with the cue or other object illegally, impeding the path of balls, or any action deemed unsuitable by the tournament director, the player loses the game and/or match. A severe and/or second violation may cause the tournament director to impose a suspension and/or expulsion from the tournament. The decision of the tournament director is final.
6.25: Numbered Balls Struck by the Cue Stick
Striking a numbered ball with the chalked area of tip of the cue stick prior to or at the same time as striking the cue ball constitutes a foul. It is possible to strike the cue ball and have the ferrule or shaft contact a numbered ball at the same time and not result in a foul (for instance, when a player must elevate the cue by hand or bridge over a numbered ball in order to strike the cue ball). If a single numbered ball is moved in this manner and has no outcome on the shot, it may be placed in the original position by the opponent or leave lie.
What had happened is this:
7.4: Flagrant Fouls
If a player moves or pockets any balls illegally by any means such as slapping the table, throwing balls or equipment, pushing on the cloth, striking the balls with the cue or other object illegally, impeding the path of balls, or any action deemed unsuitable by the tournament director, the player loses the game and/or match. A severe and/or second violation may cause the tournament director to impose a suspension and/or expulsion from the tournament. The decision of the tournament director is final.
Last edited:
wwjdwithca
Registered
I didn't say "clearly fits the situation", but clearly meets these guidelines, because they are indeed guidelines.
The writers of the code did not intend to write every possible scenario because there's really no way to know everything that can happen, or ways in which people will manipulate the rules, so the idea is to understand the spirit of the rules.
When the rules say, "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."
To me clearly, the act:
1. Disrupted the game
2. Brought disrepute (this thread alone proves that)
3. Was not fair (I'm pretty sure if you played the safety you would not have thought it to be fair)
To me, what the guy did met all three and rules say it only needs to meet one, so this was a clear unsportsmanlike conduct violation.
Again, the only serious interpretation (for those who are not just be argumentative) is what is the resultant of the misconduct.
wwjdwithca
Registered
I would agree with the assessment as well, that it was NOT a foul. Your point about being intentional or not is valid, and is frustrating when these things go against you in the heat of a match. Sportsmanship however would dictate that it should be based on intent, and if the player tried to do it, he should admit to it, and it would have been a foul.
in the example that started this thread, the player even admitted that he did the act in question on purpose, yet the official deemed it was not unsportsmanlike, which I think all but the most contrarian individuals agree that it was.