Turning Stone - Archer Forfeit vs SVB?

JohnnyOzone

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Bingo! It's just not fair to use the rule in an unofficiated match.

I think the "shirt touch" foul is the equivalent of an occurrence that's quite frequent in golf. Even on the PGA tour, if one accidentally knocks the ball a few inches off a wooden/plastic tee, there is no penalty. Golf understands that players will try their best to avoid doing this, but also recognizes that penalizing a player for such a minuscule infraction would compromise the game as well as introduce an unwanted element of luck.

Pool needs to wise up and recognize that similar reasoning should apply to the "shirt touch" foul. If no ball is moved, penalizing a player is, in my view, just plain silly and randomizes the results.

As far as the golf rule goes - it's a bit different, but I get your point. In golf the ball is not "in play" until it has been intentionally swung at. (kinda like the break shot in pool - each hole starts anew with putting the ball "in play") So, in golf, if you were to swing and whiff on your tee shot, that ball is now "in play" and you were to then accidentally knock it off its tee, you would incur a penalty.
So, to compare golf to pool, when Johnny accidentally touched the cue ball with his shirt, the cue ball was already in play (being in the middle of a game) so he would be penalized.
Personally, I have never agreed that something touching the cue ball should be a foul. I think the cue ball should have to actually be moved for there to be a foul. But I don't make the rules.
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
Personally, I have never agreed that something touching the cue ball should be a foul. I think the cue ball should have to actually be moved for there to be a foul. But I don't make the rules.

Seems we see this about the same way.
 

SBC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A lot of misinformation and misunderstanding here.

Zuglan's rule is cue ball fouls only until you actively shoot. So if setting up on a shot you hit a object ball with your shirt you turn to the opponent, tell them you touched it and permit them to replace it. If you shoot and touch another ball it is a foul.

This is a very good rule for non referred matches. ALL RULES can be manipulated. The move here is to wait and call the foul once the shot is made.

In central NY we all play these rules. The best thing is to call a neutral party on any shot that has a high potential for a foul. Most of the time I call someone to watch and th as t puts the opponent at ease and removes us both from any controversy. Several times I had impromptu referees make bad calls...you live with it.

I'm sure Johnny felt Shane waited until he shot to call the foul, which was the "chickenshit" part.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A lot of misinformation and misunderstanding here.

Zuglan's rule is cue ball fouls only until you actively shoot. So if setting up on a shot you hit a object ball with your shirt you turn to the opponent, tell them you touched it and permit them to replace it. If you shoot and touch another ball it is a foul.

This is a very good rule for non referred matches. ALL RULES can be manipulated. The move here is to wait and call the foul once the shot is made.

In central NY we all play these rules. The best thing is to call a neutral party on any shot that has a high potential for a foul. Most of the time I call someone to watch and th as t puts the opponent at ease and removes us both from any controversy. Several times I had impromptu referees make bad calls...you live with it.

I'm sure Johnny felt Shane waited until he shot to call the foul, which was the "chickenshit" part.


So if it's cue ball fouls only.

Why did Shane call a foul, and why did Johnny accept?
 

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So if it's cue ball fouls only.

Why did Shane call a foul, and why did Johnny accept?

Did you not finish reading? Up until the cue ball is struck, no foul could be called. Since in the process of the shot hitting the cue ball, Johnny moved the 7. That’s where the foul is.
 

misterpoole

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A lot of misinformation and misunderstanding here.

Zuglan's rule is cue ball fouls only until you actively shoot. So if setting up on a shot you hit a object ball with your shirt you turn to the opponent, tell them you touched it and permit them to replace it. If you shoot and touch another ball it is a foul.

This is a very good rule for non referred matches. ALL RULES can be manipulated. The move here is to wait and call the foul once the shot is made.

In central NY we all play these rules. The best thing is to call a neutral party on any shot that has a high potential for a foul. Most of the time I call someone to watch and th as t puts the opponent at ease and removes us both from any controversy. Several times I had impromptu referees make bad calls...you live with it.

I'm sure Johnny felt Shane waited until he shot to call the foul, which was the "chickenshit" part.

Thanks for the explanation. Would you ever warn your opponent before they make the shot, if its obvious they dont realise their clothing is touching? A single warning only.
 

fish110

New member
arch.jpg


:grin-square::grin-square::grin-square::grin-square:
 

Tin Man

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Movement

Johnny's sleeve grazing the 7 ball had zero effect on the shot.
.

Thank you for the reply. Question for all of you "it didn't move, shouldn't have been called" people:

Suppose SVB tapped the cue ball with his tip on a warm up shot and it wiggled but never moved. Is that not a foul because the cue ball didn't move? Or is it a foul because you illegally hit the cue ball?

Pros don't foul and then vote on how big of a foul it was.
 

croscoe

Retired
Silver Member
He made contact with a ball while cue ball in motion. Nothing states contact ball must move. Shirt was in contact with the seven as he hit the cue ball. If a ref was watching it would have been called a foul so why not just because one isn’t there.
Yes Archer could have contested. likely been able to continue shooting unless they went to video for an official decision.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thank you for the reply. Question for all of you "it didn't move, shouldn't have been called" people:

Suppose SVB tapped the cue ball with his tip on a warm up shot and it wiggled but never moved. Is that not a foul because the cue ball didn't move? Or is it a foul because you illegally hit the cue ball?

Pros don't foul and then vote on how big of a foul it was.

If he just taps his tip against the cue ball, that's considered taking a shot.

The foul would be not pocketing a ball / hitting a rail.


I'm not saying Johnnie didn't commit a foul if his shirt actually touched the 7 (still hard to tell from the video). I'm just saying I wouldn't have called it, but I wouldn't fault anyone if they did.
 

wayne

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Did you not finish reading? Up until the cue ball is struck, no foul could be called. Since in the process of the shot hitting the cue ball, Johnny moved the 7. That’s where the foul is.

How did you determine that Johnny moved the 7. That seems highly doubtful. Is there video evidence?
 

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
accurate and concise

He made contact with a ball while cue ball in motion. Nothing states contact ball must move. Shirt was in contact with the seven as he hit the cue ball. If a ref was watching it would have been called a foul so why not just because one isn’t there.
Yes Archer could have contested. likely been able to continue shooting unless they went to video for an official decision.



Accurately and concisely explained. Johnny's shirt touching wasn't a foul until the cue ball was hit with the shirt still in contact.

Hu
 

Poolmanis

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He made contact with a ball while cue ball in motion. Nothing states contact ball must move. Shirt was in contact with the seven as he hit the cue ball. If a ref was watching it would have been called a foul so why not just because one isn’t there.
Yes Archer could have contested. likely been able to continue shooting unless they went to video for an official decision.

How do you know that shirt was contact if ball does not move? That is the point!
 

JazzyJeff87

AzB Plutonium Member
Silver Member
How do you know that shirt was contact if ball does not move? That is the point!

It seems like Shane was sitting with a side view, presumably staring at Johnny’s sleeve resting on the 7, he watched until Johnny took the shot...shirt still touching, at which point a foul had occurred.

I can’t say what I’d have done in Shane’s spot because like tin man mentioned I’m not a pro in a tournament trying to make a living. In a local tourney or match I’d probably tell them their sleeve was resting on the ball before they shot. It definitely sucks though and I think Johnny was probably more pissed at himself than at Shane but Shane was the messenger.

WOW....Pulpul, biggest a**hole in history. Calling it is bad enough, but to act that way, man, what a douchebag!

Jesus...I’d have been livid watching that guy hop around like that lol. His heart must’ve been racing as he realized biado wasn’t going to call that 10 at hill/hill and then his excitement just boiled over.

To make matters worse the ref then picked up the cue ball as if to give Pulpul ball in hand and Biado must’ve been in a nightmare like wtf is happening.
 

SBC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thanks for the explanation. Would you ever warn your opponent before they make the shot, if its obvious they dont realise their clothing is touching? A single warning only.

Yes
And we do all the time.
Mike's rule is good because it lends itself to sportsmanship.
 

Tin Man

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
SVB did nothing wrong

SVB did nothing wrong. People keep circling the same arguments or coming up with even further far fetched objections. I'm trying to consolidate all of the objections in one post. If you guys have any more I'll add them to the list. So far we have:

1. This is a ridiculous foul to call. The TD put rules in place at the player's meeting and specified an alternative rule set to those traditionally enforced. As a result the traditional etiquette of what is a foul changes. If you don't like the rules, create a thread about the your distaste for all ball foul variants in play during non-refereed matches.

2. The 7 ball didn't move. The 7 ball isn't required to move for it to be a foul. If the 7 ball is touched by the shooting player during the shot then it is a foul.

3. How do we know the 7 ball was touched? Where is the video evidence? We know because SVB called a foul, and he wouldn't call foul if the 7 ball wasn't touched. Unless you are suggesting that SVB fabricated a foul which no one here has had the audacity to suggest, thankfully. Video evidence has never been a requirement of a player to call a foul.

What's really going on here is that normally what Johnny did wouldn't be a foul so in essentially all other tournaments a player would never call foul here people, so it creates the perception that SVB breached etiquette. As a result people are reacting emotionally and rationalizing a series of weak arguments to justify their outrage.
 
Top