Spotting balls - who's responsible?

lights_out said:

Had this happen to me the other night at the pool hall. I was playing some 9-ball with my buddy while some of our other friends were watching. He scratches on his break. I take bih and start my run. After each ball I pocket, he's laughing. By the 3rd or 4th ball pocketed, everyone's laughing. At this point my friend walks to the table, reaches into the ball return and pulls out the nine ball and spots it. He made it on the break. I didn't see it go down and was so focused on my run that I just didn't notice that the table was missing the nine ball! I felt kinda stupid (less stupid after I ran out on him).

My question is, who's responsible for spotting that nine ball? What if we were gambling or playing in a tournament? Is it a foul to continue to shoot before spotting that ball?

The BCA rulebook tells you how to spot a ball but not who should spot it or when it must be spotted. Obviously it should be spotted immediately but what if it's not?

As a side note, after he scratched he handed me the cue ball from the ball return so obviously he did it on purpose to get a laugh. It worked cause we were all laughing. Unfortunately I was the only one laughing at his joke, everyone else was laughing at me.

Click to expand...

Well, shooting without a ball on the table has to be a foul, doesn't it? It certainly isn't your opponents fault, ie he can't get a foul called on him for this. I don't know what it says in the rule book, but i'd call a foul on you myself if i was td.

Just saw something similar happen in a streamed 10 ball tournament, 10 ball was sunk on a foul and neither player re-spotted it until the rack was almost gone, then it almost happened again but the player shooting re-spotted it at the end of his turn. Neither player was penalized.

You as the shooting player should have spotted the 9 Ball if your opponent didnt do so out of common courtesy, before starting your run.

LunaticFringeIn said:

You as the shooting player should have spotted the 9 Ball if your opponent didnt do so out of common courtesy, before starting your run.

Click to expand...

When I was a kid....seemed like almost everyone gambled.......
..but courtesy was more common.

If you scratch on the break, cue ball goes off the table and the money
ball is made.....it is your duty as the non-player to fetch the cue ball and
spot any balls that must be spotted.

I hear some people say good riddance to the old hustling days......
...but I have seen more rudeness around tournament players and league
players and even fun players.

I was running a tournament a while back and I was called for a ruling.
A player was calling foul because he had comboed the 9 and scratched.
He didn't spot it and the other guy assumed he had and shot.

Since it is the shooter's duty to see that the table is in order before he
shoots......my ruling was......
I'll award the foul...but you'll be disqualified for unsportsmanlike behavior.

The usual rule is that if the incoming player shoots more than one ball, before the opponent 'notices' that 'something is amiss', then the opponent cannot call a foul. This is the same thing when playing 8-ball, and the incoming player shoots the wrong side, without realizing it. The rules state that the opponent cannot simply sit there and watch. They have to say something before the 2nd ball is pocketed, or the shooter keeps that side for the remainder of the game. The same rule is followed in 1-pocket, on spotting balls you owe (which is why players 'mark' their pocket with a coin, to denote that they owe a ball...and take the coin off after they spot their owed ball). It kinda follows the "snooze you lose" scenario. :grin:

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

On the other hand, without it being addressed in the rules one could make the case that if a player makes a ball illegally he should be the one responsible for spotting it up, not the incoming player.

I too saw this in a 10 Ball match. When one of the players became aware of it they just spotted it up. It happens in one hole sometimes too when a player owes a ball but forgets to put it up at the end of his inning.

According to onepocket.org the rules in that game are "no fault":

9.4 If any owed balls, or balls that have fallen into a neutral pocket are forgotten and later remembered, then instead of being spotted after the current shooter’s inning, they are spotted after the end of the next player’s inning, unless there are no balls left on the table, in which case they are all spotted immediately. In any case, any owed balls are not forgiven, but still must be paid.

In practice, forgotten balls may be spotted at any time after they are remembered, as long as both players agree on the timing; if either player objects to an earlier spotting, then rule 9.4 should be followed.

Please note that playing ‘snooze you lose’ is the rare exception in house rules; it is by no means the standard rule, and it should only be accepted when it is clearly and mutually agreed on by both players before play begins.

Click to expand...

No fault sounds reasonable to me. But it still pays to be aware. Say you snap the nine and scratch. If you neglect to spot it up you may have missed an opportunity to do so while it would have created a cluster problem for your incoming opponent. If you are the incoming player I suppose you could pretend not to notice, run some balls to clear out the spot area, then "realize" the nine is missing and spot it up unmolested for an easy run out.

"Protect yourself at all times"

lights_out said:

Whether it "has to be a foul" or not, it isn't (as far as I know) addressed in the BCA rulebook. It certainly was my fault for not noticing the missing nine ball. However, if a td wanted to call me for a foul on that point, then my opponent could certainly be called for unsportsmanlike conduct. And how can you call a foul on me if you don't know what the rulebook says?

Click to expand...

Because I'm the TD, and I feel there are many bad rules in pool, and I don't even need to know them to be honest, because I know the game. As noted, this could have cleared up clusters, or the cb could have needed to run over the spot, any number of things. The integrity of the game could be totally destroyed.... since it was only the 2 of you causing all this, one of you has to be responsible. As noted, a player could possibly do this to gain an advantage under "no fault," that is unacceptable.

The problem here is that your opponent could say, and rightfully, well he shot the balls and there was no 9 on the table. Again, you cant call a foul on the other guy, or I wouldn't. But I would have called a foul on you. If i'm wrong, i'm wrong..... but in my mind it HAS to be somebody's responsibility, and I would say the shooter -- if I had to pick -- has the responsibility of making sure things are kosher before shooting. Glad it didn't cause a big controversy for you. And by the way, whether your opponent knew or not isn't important, there is no unsportsmanlike ruling here. "Mind fouls" simply have no place in pool -- or any sport -- it would be like saying we will penalize you if you think of bunny rabbits.... well, you just can't enforce that.

As a final note, i'd would probably let this slide and just spot the 9 if both players were ok with that. So I'd handle it differently in different situations... not ideal TD behavior, but this is an odd one. And what if you would have missed, and your opponent came up and shot without the 9, yes i think now he could have a foul called on him. Point is you gotta know what's going on b4 you shoot in pool... the 9 is a big part of 9 ball, and if you fail to notice it is on the table before shooting i dont see any leverage you have in the dispute department if a foul is called on you.

lights_out said:

So let me get this straight, "because you're the td", you'd pick and choose which rules you're going to enforce in your tourney and which you're not because "there are many bad rules in pool"? You can't make arbitrary rulings and end it with "because I'm the td and I say so!" You DO NEED to know all the rules and stick to them whether you agree with them or not. Any tournament must abide by a standard set of rules that the players are familiar with, and that can be referred to (as in a rule book) when a situation arises. You say you know the game but you won't get a game if your opponent has to play by your rules.

The hypothetical problem of "this could have cleared up clusters, or the cb could have needed to run over the spot, any number of things" is valid, however, it could also have left a dead 1-9 combo or somehow worked in my favor, especially since I'm starting with bih.

In your whole 2nd paragraph your make it clear that someone is responsible and a foul has to be called on someone. That was the point of this thread, who's responsible according to the rules? Since there is no clear rule, why is it my responsibility? As I stated in an earlier post, in one-pocket, if you make a ball illegally or in a neutral pocket, you spot the ball. He made the ball illegally, shouldn't he spot it up?

Lastly, if this were a tournament or a gambling session, this would clearly be a case of unsportsmanlike conduct. In my original post I stated that after he scratched, he got the cue ball out of the ball return and handed it to me. He had to look into the ball tray to grab the cue ball and not the nine ball to hand over. In this case he did it as a joke, but had it been a tourney or gambling, I would definitely call it "dirty pool."

Click to expand...

It is your responsibility because as a 9 ball player you shot without the 9 ball on the table. I mean it is ridiculous. And yes, rules need to be enforced with discretion many times. This was your fault, get over it -- yet as I said, if your opponent was cool with it, i'd let it slide as a TD. And you're missing a big part of the point, it does not matter who spots it.... let's say for the sake of argument he should spot it. Ok, then you need to tell him to spot it before you shoot. Then you say it could have benefited you to spot it, well, that is your effing fault that you didn't!!

You have no leverage when you shoot balls with no 9 on the table in a game of 9 ball. Again, there is no unsportsmanlike possibility here... that involves mind rules (=asking a player what was in his mind) which should never come into play. If you want proof walk into a good room and try to get a guy on an unsportsmanlike loss or game in this situation in a money match, you'll get laughed at or your ass kicked.

lights_out said:

So for the most part it sounds as though most agree it is not a foul on my part. I would think responsibility for spotting the ball would lie with the person that made the ball. In one pocket, you make a ball illegally or into a neutral pocket, you spot the ball.

Click to expand...

Actually there is nothing in the rules of 1 hole (per onepocket.org official rules) that says it's the offending player's responsibility to spot up the balls. And even if it was, there is no penalty for failing to do so. But the rules do not mention either player as being specifically responsible to spot ball(s).

But I still agree with your point. The only rule I could find related to failing to spot balls is the rule in one-pocket, and according to that rule there is no penalty to either player for failing to spot a ball(s). I couldn't find anything about it in either the World Rules or in the BCAPL Applied Rulings. Given that, if I was making the call and didn't have any other rule to go by other than the reference to it in the one pocket rules, I'd have a hard time penalizing either player. I certainly would have a hard time justifying penalizing the incoming player on a situation that occurred as a direct result of a foul by the other player. Additionally, I've seen this occur in a professional 10 Ball tournament and the players just agreed to spot the 10 ball when it's absence was noted.

The fact that it may work to the advantage or disadvantage of either player doesn't really change anything in my mind. It may work in favor of either player depending on who is "aware" so neither player has an inherent advantage from this situation.

Perhaps Bill Stock could chime in on how this would be handled in the BCAPL. I would imagine it has happened at least once but, as I said, I couldn't find anything in the Applied Rulings that addressed this. Yeah, this is a league but their rules are also used in the US Open 10 Ball as well as the US Bar Table Championships so they have some affect on the professional level outside the BCA Pool League. I wouldn't be surprised if this has also come up at the US Open 9 Ball Championship. If so I wonder how it was handled there.

Partial official BCAPL response

I will get with the office this week and get a complete response. In the meantime...

In BCAPL play there is a precedent that would likely apply. In BCAPL 8-Ball, if the 8-ball is pocketed on the break and another shot is taken before either player notices, Rule 2.4.4 mandates a re-rack. I see no reason why the same should not be true in 9-Ball/10-Ball, and if I were put into a position of having to make a decision without further guidance, that is what I would do. However, the final decision for BCAPL play rests with the National Office. I'll get a response ASAP.

Scott Lee said:

...This is the same thing when playing 8-ball, and the incoming player shoots the wrong side, without realizing it. The rules state that the opponent cannot simply sit there and watch. They have to say something before the 2nd ball is pocketed, or the shooter keeps that side for the remainder of the game...

Click to expand...

That ruling changed in BCAPL play in 2007 and in WSR in 2008. Now, after the failure to call a foul upon the first occurrence of a shot at the wrong group, a second shot at the wrong group triggers a re-rack. BCAPL Rule 2.6.3 and WSR Regulation 10 apply.

As noted, for 1P forgotten balls are covered both at .org. The same is true in BCAPL play.

As far as calling, or not calling, a foul on one player or the other for the failure to spot the ball, logical arguments could conceivably be made be made for any of them, and some have been presented here. The real problem, as previously noted, is the lack of direction from any rule set concerning the responsibility for spotting balls in a situation without a referee.

Rest assured that, at least concerning BCAPL play, that problem will be addressed and a decision made soon. I will post again as soon as it is handled.

As far as WSR goes, it would have to be a TD decision. As evidenced just by this thread so far, good luck in looking for any consistencey in application. However, if looking for ANY kind of guiding principle under WSR, the existence of the principle of WSR Regulation 10 is a pretty strong argument for a re-rack in 9-Ball/10-Ball...

:smile:
Buddy Eick
BCAPL National Head Referee
BCAPL Director of Referee Training
Technical Editor, BCAPL Rule Book
bcapl_referee@cox.net

Find the Official Rules of the BCA Pool League here:

http://www.playbca.com/Downloads/Rulebook/CompleteRulebook/tabid/372/Default.aspx

* The contents of this post refer to BCA Pool League (BCAPL) Rules only. The BCAPL National Office has authorized me to act in an official capacity regarding questions about BCAPL Rules matters in public forums.
* Neither I nor any BCAPL referee make any policy decisions regarding BCAPL Rules. Any and all decisions, interpretations, or Applied Rulings are made by the BCAPL National Office and are solely their responsibility. BCAPL referees are enforcers of rules, not legislators. BCAPL Rules 9.5.3 and 9.5.4 and the BCAPL Rules "Statement of Principles" apply.
* No reference to, inference concerning, or comment on any other set of rules (WPA, APA, VNEA, TAP, or any other set of rules, public or private) is intended or should be derived from this post unless specifically stated.
* For General Rules, 8-Ball, 9-Ball, 10-Ball, and 14.1 Continuous: there is no such thing as "BCA Rules" other than in the sense that the Billiard Congress of America (BCA) publishes various rules, including the World Pool-Billiard Association's "World Standardized Rules" for those games. The BCA has no rules committee. The BCA does not edit, nor is responsible for the content of, the World Standardized Rules. The Official Rules of the BCAPL is a separate and independent set of rules and, to avoid confusion, should not be referred to as "BCA Rules".
* Since 2004, there is no such thing as a "BCA Referee". The BCA no longer has any program to train, certify or sanction billiards referees or officials. The BCAPL maintains what we consider to be the most structured, complete and intensive referee training program available.
* The BCAPL has no association with the Billiard Congress of America other than in their capacity as a member of the BCA. The letters "BCA" in BCAPL do not stand for "Billiard Congress of America, nor for anything at all.
* The BCAPL has not addressed every imaginable rules issue, nor will it ever likely be able to, as evidenced by the seemingly endless situations that people dream up or that (more frequently) actually happen. If I do not have the answer to a question I will tell you so, then I will get a ruling from the BCAPL National Office and get back to you as soon as I can. If deemed necessary, the BCAPL will then add the ruling to the "Applied Rulings" section of The Official Rules of the BCA Pool League.
* All BCAPL members are, as always, encouraged to e-mail Bill Stock at the BCAPL National Office, bill@playcsi.com, with any comments, concerns or suggestions about the BCAPL rules.

Thanks, Buddy. A re-rack does seem like an equitable solution. While I might be a little upset that my opponent gets a do-over after scratching on the break I suppose I also have to accept responsibility for not paying enough attention and proceeding to shoot.

Look forward to hearing back from you with the decision.

lights_out said:

Rules are rules. Discretion on enforcement will only lead to further problems. And there's nothing to get over. I didn't lose the US Open because of this, nor did I lose any money. I just posed a question for an intelligent discussion or response. You have your opinion on the matter, I choose not to agree with it. I play in all the good rooms in and around Chicago and have plenty of games available. I would never try to "get a guy on an unsportsmanlike". I will take a stance on any issue I have with any situation, and I'm not likely to get laughed at or get my ass kicked... If you knew me you'd understand why.

Click to expand...

That is true if the TD doesn't have any brains.

Listen, you're right, we think opposite.... but discretion is important. If there is a one hole tournament, and a guy needs a ball to win the tournament and he has 5 dead balls pointing toward his hole, and then a monkey comes through the room and knocks all the balls off the table.... discretion is needed. There is no rulebook for this, or maybe there is, but it may not be fair.

As you say, I could be wrong on paper, but I don't care, this was ultimately your fault for shooting before the 9 ball was spotted.... but there are "skills" you need to win a game of nine ball....

1) be able to shoot the 9 in without scratching
2) be able to see if the 9 is on the table in a game of nine ball

If you don't have those skills, maybe you should not be able to win, for a good reason. This has never once happened to me, nor any good player I have ever seen. Not even once. 1) Did you not see the 9 ball go in during his shot? If not then your bad, why weren't you watching the table? Do you think it is ok not to watch your own pool game? 2) You did not notice it's conspicuous absence on the table even after you ineptly didn't notice its falling into a pocket?

DogsPlayingPool said:

A re-rack does seem like an equitable solution. While I might be a little upset that my opponent gets a do-over after scratching on the break I suppose I also have to accept responsibility for not paying enough attention and proceeding to shoot.

Click to expand...

In the absence of a concise rule on this, I would agree that a re-rack would be the fairest way to handle the situation. I also very much agree with the latter part of that paragraph, which is why I posted what I did previously. Unfortunately, you did a much better job of articulating that point than I did.