So, if the ball is slightly out of the rack, and you have a ref with the shakes, he's supposed to tell you it's in the rack?
While likely no longer relevant, this issue has nonetheless inspired a rereading (and interpretation) of the old rulebook (mental masturbation?) and some reflection/musing:
Apparently, the current rules dictate that when a close breakball’s location is designated/decided as outside of the drawn rack lines, it’s position is then marked, and replaced after the balls are racked. That decision is obviously final, since the ball has been marked/moved.
Back in the day (when drawing lines on the table was not always common or permitted), you COULD ask the referee for a definite decision (the rules stated that the referee MUST be ‘responsive’), but if in error, that decision was NOT final. If he then discovered that it was NOT ‘possible’ to rack without disturbing it, the ball then went to the headspot. If he was clumsy and moved it, he then replaced it to the best of his ability. Much as players are not allowed to lay their cue on the table as a guide, but must maintain a grip, the rulebook ‘implied’ (not specifically stated) that the triangle could only be hovered over the rack area to determine whether the last ball was ‘out’.
I believe the game was thus more interesting then since more judgment was required in breakball determination. You never really knew for sure if that ball was in the rack area until the actual racking was attempted!
P.S. While ‘rereading’, I discovered a rule I had never encountered before. Namely, that when spotting a ball behind the foot spot where the CB interferes, it CONNOT be frozen to it!
Learning something new everyday.