BAD CALLS in Pool ... FOULS that Weren't Called

FYI, I just posted a new video that demonstrates how to detect common fouls in pool and shows examples from pro matches where bad calls were made. Check it out:


Contents:
0:00 - Intro
0:54 - Detecting Fouls
---- 1:00 - no rail
---- 1:11 - double hits
---- 2:52 - wrong-ball first
3:52 - Double Hit Bad Calls
7:05 - Wrong Ball First Bad Calls
8:40 - No Rail Bad Calls
9:35 - Wrap Up

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!
Nice video. I doubt you can find one with me in it. Maybe had one or two controversies in nearly forty years officiating. That said I find the "double hit" rule an interesting one to discuss. On the one hand it's a foul if the cue ball follows the same path as the object ball, but not always! HELLO! If the cue ball is frozen to the object ball you can now shoot straight threw it and the cue ball follows right behind the object ball. My opinion is this should NOT be allowed and is a bad rule to allow this. We did not allow this shot in any pocket game until maybe 20-25 years ago (or less) when some wise guys decided to change this. They do not have my undying respect for this aberration of the rules.
 
Interesting commentary accompanies this uncalled foul.


Thank you for posting this. I just added it to the long list of bad call examples here:


These balls were clearly not frozen (not declared frozen, and clear from the sound) and the double hit was obvious (from the motion of the CB). Although, some tournaments might have allowed such things in 1992.
 
Nice video.

Thanks Jay. FYI, I have a lot more examples of bad calls here:


I doubt you can find one with me in it.

I am pretty sure I remember you commentating on at least one of the examples linked on the page linked above, but I can't be sure without watching all of them again (which you can do if you are interested).


... I find the "double hit" rule an interesting one to discuss. On the one hand it's a foul if the cue ball follows the same path as the object ball, but not always!

It is an illegal shot only if it is a "double hit" (e.g., if there is a gap between the balls), a "push shot" (e.g., if the tip is touched to the CB first), an intentional miscue, or any other foul.


If the cue ball is frozen to the object ball you can now shoot straight threw it and the cue ball follows right behind the object ball. My opinion is this should NOT be allowed and is a bad rule to allow this. We did not allow this shot in any pocket game until maybe 20-25 years ago (or less) when some wise guys decided to change this. They do not have my undying respect for this aberration of the rules.

Since hitting into a frozen CB with a normal stroke involves a single clean hit with no push, there is nothing to make the shot illegal, unless there is a "special rule" that prohibits frozen-CB shots (which is not the case currently). Was that the case in the past? Was there a rule that explicitly prohibited frozen-CB shots?

For explanations (including super slow motion video) for why frozen CB shots are allowed, see the videos and info here:

 
Thanks Jay. FYI, I have a lot more examples of bad calls here:




I am pretty sure I remember you commentating on at least one of the examples linked on the page linked above, but I can't be sure without watching all of them again (which you can do if you are interested).




It is an illegal shot only if it is a "double hit" (e.g., if there is a gap between the balls), a "push shot" (e.g., if the tip is touched to the CB first), an intentional miscue, or any other foul.




Since hitting into a frozen CB with a normal stroke involves a single clean hit with no push, there is nothing to make the shot illegal, unless there is a "special rule" that prohibits frozen-CB shots (which is not the case currently). Was that the case in the past? Was there a rule that explicitly prohibited frozen-CB shots?

For explanations (including super slow motion video) for why frozen CB shots are allowed, see the videos and info here:

Let's just say that in the 1960's, 70's and into the 80's, we didn't play by the BCA rules and they were not the governing body of most of our pro tournaments. They were a governing body for the amateur leagues and a few pro tournaments like the U.S. Open Straight Pool. Promoters of events in that era made their own rules for 9-Ball and we were in agreement for the most part about allowing players to shoot directly through balls, and it simply wasn't allowed.
 
FYI, I just posted a new video that demonstrates how to detect common fouls in pool and shows examples from pro matches where bad calls were made. Check it out:


Contents:
0:00 - Intro
0:54 - Detecting Fouls
---- 1:00 - no rail
---- 1:11 - double hits
---- 2:52 - wrong-ball first
3:52 - Double Hit Bad Calls
7:05 - Wrong Ball First Bad Calls
8:40 - No Rail Bad Calls
9:35 - Wrap Up

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!
Dave, I'm proud of the fact that in all my years of officiating they were very few controversies over the application of the rules. Maybe only one or two in that time. I made many difficult calls and rarely got one wrong. I liked to say that in an entire tournament if I made one bad call (out of hundreds), it was only an average performance. I wanted to get them all right!

If I felt like I missed a call (it did happen), it really bothered me afterward. And I ran into many strange situations along the way, some of them not covered by any rule written or unwritten. In those cases I relied on using my judgement in the interest of fair play, and on those occasions the players agreed with how I handled it.
 
Strange! That eliminates most double hits. Still, if that is the rule, that is the rule.
I've always understood that if you can't tell then you can't tell, and that a good tournament director tells refs that if a ball is hit "at speed" that they should err on the side of the shooter. In televised tournaments a good ref should not be shy of stopping the clock and using the evidence that is available, but even then if you can't tell you can't tell.

Anyway, according to the laws of physics every single pool shot that has ever been played is a push shot because instantaneous contact is a physical impossibility.
 
Dave, I'm proud of the fact that in all my years of officiating they were very few controversies over the application of the rules. Maybe only one or two in that time. I made many difficult calls and rarely got one wrong. I liked to say that in an entire tournament if I made one bad call (out of hundreds), it was only an average performance. I wanted to get them all right!

If I felt like I missed a call (it did happen), it really bothered me afterward. And I ran into many strange situations along the way, some of them not covered by any rule written or unwritten. In those cases I relied on using my judgement in the interest of fair play, and on those occasions the players agreed with how I handled it.

Being a ref is a tough job and I respect anybody who has done it, especially long term.

Today's refs have it easier with fairly well established rules and instant replay with high quality video often available in high profile matches.

I'd be curious to hear about (or see, if online videos are available) some of the situations you mention not covered by any rules.

Thank you for the posts, and best regards,
Dave
 
What's the ruling on frozen cue ball frozen to another ball? Is it or is it not contact?
In local league 8 ball a player on the 8 but hooked and frozen to a ball is allowed to ignore the obstruction and attempt the 8.
In 9 ball though, if the shooter is "froze hooked", common sense seems to indicate the shooter must avoid the frozen obstacle to make legal contact.
 
… according to the laws of physics every single pool shot that has ever been played is a push shot because instantaneous contact is a physical impossibility.

Nowhere do the WPA rules specify “instantaneous contact.” Such a thing is not possible; although, tip contact time with a normal stroke is extremely small, unlike with a push shot where the contact time is an eternity in comparison.
 
What's the ruling on frozen cue ball frozen to another ball? Is it or is it not contact?
In local league 8 ball a player on the 8 but hooked and frozen to a ball is allowed to ignore the obstruction and attempt the 8.
In 9 ball though, if the shooter is "froze hooked", common sense seems to indicate the shooter must avoid the frozen obstacle to make legal contact.

See the explanations, rules, and demonstrations on the frozen CB resource page. The page covers everything and answers your questions.
 
See the explanations, rules, and demonstrations on the frozen CB resource page. The page covers everything and answers your questions.
Let me pose a situation. In league 8 ball here, a ball frozen to the cueball is considered non existent. Generally, legality is based on the first ball the cue ball collides with. So,
in 9 ball, shouldn't it be legal to escape a frozen lockup by shooting through the obstacle?
 
Being a ref is a tough job and I respect anybody who has done it, especially long term.

Today's refs have it easier with fairly well established rules and instant replay with high quality video often available in high profile matches.

I'd be curious to hear about (or see, if online videos are available) some of the situations you mention not covered by any rules.

Thank you for the posts, and best regards,
Dave
Doubtful there is a video of any of these things. Here is one of them. During a tight match between two top players the cue ball froze to the next object ball. I was busy announcing matches so one of the event promoters went down on his own to try to explain the shooters option. I felt uneasy about this and watched from above. In the course of explaining what the shooter could do the promoter then decided to show him what he couldn't do, and proceeded to take the cue off the table and shoot directly through the ball, scattering balls all over the table! Disaster!

What could I do now? I ran down there and was confronted with everyone talking (and yelling) at once. It was total chaos. We could never place the balls back in their original positions. That would have been total guesswork. What to do, what to do! First thing was to tell everyone to stop talking and then I will make a ruling. They slowly quieted down. What would you do?

Here was my ruling. I asked who had broken the balls that game. After I got the answer I said rack the balls and start the game again with the same breaker. My ruling was met with silence and then acceptance by both players. I was done here and went back to the podium and the tournament continued.
 
... During a tight match between two top players the cue ball froze to the next object ball. I was busy announcing matches so one of the event promoters went down on his own to try to explain the shooters option. I felt uneasy about this and watched from above. In the course of explaining what the shooter could do the promoter then decided to show him what he couldn't do, and proceeded to take the cue off the table and shoot directly through the ball, scattering balls all over the table! Disaster! ...

I can see why you felt "uneasy" with someone capable of exhibiting such poor judgement. Wow!
 
See the explanations, rules, and demonstrations on the frozen CB resource page. The page covers everything and answers your questions.
Let me pose a situation. In league 8 ball here, a ball frozen to the cueball is considered non existent. Generally, legality is based on the first ball the cue ball collides with.

Under the WPA official rules of pool, if the CB is frozen to an OB and the CB is hit into the OB, causing it to move, that collision is considered contact.

Here's the specific rule (from Section 6.7):
If the cue ball is touching an object ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if the object ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue ball.


So, in 9 ball, shouldn't it be legal to escape a frozen lockup by shooting through the obstacle?

No, because hitting the CB into a frozen OB, causing it to move, is considered "contact."
 
Under the WPA official rules of pool, if the CB is frozen to an OB and the CB is hit into the OB, causing it to move, that collision is considered contact.

Here's the specific rule (from Section 6.7):
If the cue ball is touching an object ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if the object ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue ball.




No, because hitting the CB into a frozen OB, causing it to move, is considered "contact."
That clears up the official 9 ball rule. Thanks. Do they cover making the 8 in ball from a frozen safety?
 
I can see why you felt "uneasy" with someone capable of exhibiting such poor judgement. Wow!
I never expected anything like that, just maybe an improper decision if he watched the shot. What happened was a total brain fart.
 
I'm not sure what you mean. Is the CB frozen to the 8, a legal OB, or an opponent ball?

PS: Lots of info and videos concerning rules, and links to official rules documents, can be found here: pool rules resource page.
The shooter is on the 8 ball. He is frozen to an obstructing ball. In the league here, he is allowed to shoot through per the frozen ball rule and further allowed to pocket the 8 for the win or at least make legal contact on that shot. The logic being the frozen obstruction is a non entity.
 
Back
Top