Rule Question

kaznj

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You finished a rack. The 15th ball is in the kitchen. The cue ball is in the rack. The cue ball is placed on the head spot. Can you shoot at the ball in the kitchen or must you shoot across the head line?
 

acousticsguru

player/instructor
Silver Member
You finished a rack. The 15th ball is in the kitchen. The cue ball is in the rack. The cue ball is placed on the head spot. Can you shoot at the ball in the kitchen or must you shoot across the head line?

That's the one situation in which the player can shoot "backwards", that is, yes, you may shoot the object ball in the kitchen.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
That's the one situation in which the player can shoot "backwards", that is, yes, you may shoot the object ball in the kitchen.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

Just to be clear, there is never a restriction on which ball may be played after the re-rack. In any of the special racking situations that come up the shooter may play any ball as the first shot of the new rack.
 

acousticsguru

player/instructor
Silver Member
Just to be clear, there is never a restriction on which ball may be played after the re-rack. In any of the special racking situations that come up the shooter may play any ball as the first shot of the new rack.

Forgot to mention, thanks! Of course, that's why I said "can" and "may" - as always in Straight Pool, there is no ball "on", as the Brits would say, i.e. it's up to the player to decide which object ball he or she wants to call, if any, as well as contact first.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 

nashville14:1

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
rules question, intentional foul after opponent scratches

you have ball in hand after opponent scratches. you decide to take an intentional foul and leave him as close as possible to the head rail. in a big tournament match i just saw this done and was surprised that the player shot it like an opening lag, he ended not very close to the head rail. is there any reason you could not place the cueball near the head rail and roll it a short distance and never leave the balk area. after all you are shooting a foul anyway by not hitting a ball. what would happen. you are now both on a fouls but your opponent is now in a tough position with cb right by the headrail. if he answers with the same shot he will soon be getting to 3 fouls, loss of 14 and having to break over. is this interesting situation specifically covered in the rules? i bet someone on the 14.1 forum knows about this.
just wondering
jr
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
you have ball in hand after opponent scratches. you decide to take an intentional foul and leave him as close as possible to the head rail. in a big tournament match i just saw this done and was surprised that the player shot it like an opening lag, he ended not very close to the head rail. is there any reason you could not place the cueball near the head rail and roll it a short distance and never leave the balk area. after all you are shooting a foul anyway by not hitting a ball. what would happen. you are now both on a fouls but your opponent is now in a tough position with cb right by the headrail. if he answers with the same shot he will soon be getting to 3 fouls, loss of 14 and having to break over. is this interesting situation specifically covered in the rules? i bet someone on the 14.1 forum knows about this.
just wondering
jr

The reason he played it that way is that your suggestion constitutes a bad play from behind the head string. And if done intentionally, under certain circumstances could constitute unsportsmanlike conduct.

In any event, the minimum penalty for a bad play from behind the head string is BIH for your opponent. So you wouldn't be leaving him with the cue ball against the head rail anyway. You have a much better chance of leaving him worse off by playing the lag foul than giving him BIH anywhere in the kitchen.

Here's the appropriate section from the World Rules:

6.11 Bad Play from Behind the Head String

When the cue ball is in hand behind the head string, and the first ball the cue ball contacts is also behind the head string, the shot is a foul unless the cue ball crosses the head string before that contact. If such a shot is intentional, it is unsportsmanlike conduct.

The cue ball must either cross the head string or contact a ball in front of or on the head string or the shot is a foul, and the cue ball is in hand for the following player according to the rules of the specific game.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:

nashville14:1

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
ball in hand for foul with cb still on table

thanks. that clears this up! is this the only ball in hand foul where the fouling shooter does not end his shot with the cb off the table. ie in the pocket or on the floor. i can not think of another one.
maybe there are other ball in hand fouls i just do not know about yet.
thanks,
jr
 

nashville14:1

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
intentional foul & unsportsmanlike behavior

come to think of it, why don't they (rules establishers) see all intentional fouls as unsportsmanlike.. what's the difference between 2 types of intentional fouls. i just don't see it.
of course it is easier to reach the headrail without going out of balk. it is also easier in many situations to get safe without hitting a ball and making a rail after. i guess we should have a big argument about this huh. well, i agree to accept a 15 point penalty for so many posts about an unimportant point.
thanks
jr
 

John Novak

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You finished a rack. The 15th ball is in the kitchen. The cue ball is in the rack. The cue ball is placed on the head spot. Can you shoot at the ball in the kitchen or must you shoot across the head line?

You are correct...... Cue ball must cross the head string in order to shoot the ball in the kitchen.If not, its a foul.

6.11 Bad Play from Behind the Head String
When the cue ball is in hand behind the head string, and the first ball the cue ball contacts is also behind the head string, the shot is a foul unless the cue ball crosses the head string before that contact. If such a shot is intentional, it is unsportsmanlike conduct.
The cue ball must either cross the head string or contact a ball in front of or on the head string or the shot is a foul, and the cue ball is in hand for the following player according to the rules of the specific game.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
You finished a rack. The 15th ball is in the kitchen. The cue ball is in the rack. The cue ball is placed on the head spot. Can you shoot at the ball in the kitchen or must you shoot across the head line?

Yes, when the cue ball placement is forced (not "in hand") you may play at any ball, even the ball behind the headstring. It's probably a good idea to go over the actual rules from time to time or at least have them ready if something comes up. Here is the relevant section: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/the_rules_of_play#4.8

In particular, notice the statement:

In any case, there is no restriction on which object ball the shooter may play as the first shot of the new rack.​
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
You finished a rack. The 15th ball is in the kitchen. The cue ball is in the rack. The cue ball is placed on the head spot. Can you shoot at the ball in the kitchen or must you shoot across the head line?

You are correct...... Cue ball must cross the head string in order to shoot the ball in the kitchen.If not, its a foul.

6.11 Bad Play from Behind the Head String
When the cue ball is in hand behind the head string, and the first ball the cue ball contacts is also behind the head string, the shot is a foul unless the cue ball crosses the head string before that contact. If such a shot is intentional, it is unsportsmanlike conduct.
The cue ball must either cross the head string or contact a ball in front of or on the head string or the shot is a foul, and the cue ball is in hand for the following player according to the rules of the specific game.

This is incorrect, John. The situation the OP is discussing has the cue ball placed on the head spot - not ball in hand. Rule 6.11 applies to ball in hand only.

Rule 6.11 would not come up in a breaking situation because there are no special racking situations which give the shooter ball in hand where the object ball is in the kitchen. If the OB is in the kitchen the CB must be placed on the head spot unless the OB already occupies the head spot, in which case the CB is placed on the center spot.
 
Last edited:

nashville14:1

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
did not make myself clear

still wondering why rulemakers have singled out 1 type of intentional foul for ball in hand and stigma of unsportsmanlike behavior. why not ball in hand, hard looks, no christmas cards for anyone making any intentional foul. After all you are just trying to put the hurt on opponent with any of these shots.

my question from before was:
you have ball in hand after opponent scratches. you decide to take an intentional foul and leave him as close as possible to the head rail. in a big tournament match i just saw this done and was surprised that the player shot it like an opening lag, he ended not very close to the head rail. is there any reason you could not place the cueball near the head rail and roll it a short distance and never leave the balk area. after all you are shooting a foul anyway by not hitting a ball. what would happen. you are now both on a fouls but your opponent is now in a tough position with cb right by the headrail. if he answers with the same shot he will soon be getting to 3 fouls, loss of 14 and having to break over. is this interesting situation specifically covered in the rules? i bet someone on the 14.1 forum knows about this.
just wondering
jr
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
still wondering why rulemakers have singled out 1 type of intentional foul for ball in hand and stigma of unsportsmanlike behavior. why not ball in hand, hard looks, no christmas cards for anyone making any intentional foul. After all you are just trying to put the hurt on opponent with any of these shots.

my question from before was:
you have ball in hand after opponent scratches. you decide to take an intentional foul and leave him as close as possible to the head rail. in a big tournament match i just saw this done and was surprised that the player shot it like an opening lag, he ended not very close to the head rail. is there any reason you could not place the cueball near the head rail and roll it a short distance and never leave the balk area. after all you are shooting a foul anyway by not hitting a ball. what would happen. you are now both on a fouls but your opponent is now in a tough position with cb right by the headrail. if he answers with the same shot he will soon be getting to 3 fouls, loss of 14 and having to break over. is this interesting situation specifically covered in the rules? i bet someone on the 14.1 forum knows about this.
just wondering
jr
Different kinds of fouls are treated differently. If you have ball in hand, a requirement of the shot is that you have to shoot over the line and if you don't the ball-in-hand passes to your opponent. The full, official rules are here: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/the_rules_of_play and I think they have to be taken all together to really make sense.

If the shot you describe were permitted, the correct play would not be to leave the cue ball by the head rail. That would be a bad shot. The correct shot would be to place the cue ball for a corner hook in the corner pocket so your opponent couldn't even hit a ball directly and then barely touch it. That would be a much better shot. But it is not permitted. It is not part of the game, any more than intentionally moving an object ball with your hand.
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
nashville, maybe Mr. Jewett can provide a better explanation since I would only be guessing, but I would suppose the idea is that the incoming player has already been rewarded enough with a point against his opponent AND ball in hand. So allowing him to then take a "cheap" way of further improving his position by corner hooking his opponent is deemed too much of a reward.

BTW, from the way rule 6.11 reads the unsportsmanlike conduct violation seems to only come into play when the CB illegally makes contact with an object ball. I'm not sure it would be UC to play the shot you described as that may only be BIH to your opponent. I guess the reason contacting another ball can be UC is you are not only intentionally violating 6.11 but you are really also intentionally illegally disturbing balls. So I can see where that would result in the more severe penalty.

Hope this helps.

EDIT: I see Bob was typing while I was, lol.
 
Last edited:

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... If you have ball in hand, a requirement of the shot is that you have to shoot over the line and if you don't the ball-in-hand passes to your opponent. ...

Bob, instead of having that as the rule, why not have the requirement be that you have to shoot over the line or you have not yet taken your inning. In other words, if someone did what the OP is talking about, he should just be told, "Sorry, that's illegal. You have to shoot across the line, so try again. If you refuse to do that, you would be forfeiting the game."
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
Bob, instead of having that as the rule, why not have the requirement be that you have to shoot over the line or you have not yet taken your inning. In other words, if someone did what the OP is talking about, he should just be told, "Sorry, that's illegal. You have to shoot across the line, so try again. If you refuse to do that, you would be forfeiting the game."

Interesting, but if your sitting in your chair and your opponent commits a 6.11 foul (or any foul), why should he get a free do-over rather than turning the table over to you?
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Interesting, but if your sitting in your chair and your opponent commits a 6.11 foul (or any foul), why should he get a free do-over rather than turning the table over to you?

Perhaps the table is such that you wouldn't want it.
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
Perhaps the table is such that you wouldn't want it.

I guess that could be the case. But then your opponent could simply take the lag foul as in the OP scenario and in all likelihood leave you worse off anyway than if you had ball in hand. So I think you are still better off even if you don't like the table.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Bob, instead of having that as the rule, why not have the requirement be that you have to shoot over the line or you have not yet taken your inning. In other words, if someone did what the OP is talking about, he should just be told, "Sorry, that's illegal. You have to shoot across the line, so try again. If you refuse to do that, you would be forfeiting the game."
If someone has ball in hand and touches the ball on a warm-up stroke, it needs to be a foul.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I guess that could be the case. But then your opponent could simply take the lag foul as in the OP scenario and in all likelihood leave you worse off anyway than if you had ball in hand. So I think you are still better off even if you don't like the table.

Nah, make him shoot across the line. He might miscue into the stack and leave you something.:smile:
 
Top