When you shoot a shot and bump another ball with your cue and the cueball comes back and runs into the ball you moved with your cue is this a foul in APA?
APA question about foul
- Thread starter 9ball mike
- Start date
Yes, if you interfere with the cue ball it is a foul.
Thanks for the reply. I was playing a tournament the other night that goes by APA rules and this happened. When I called a foul they tried to tell me it is a foul in BCA but not in APA.
From the Rulebook:
g. Causing even the slightest movement or altering the
course of the cue ball, even accidentally, is a foul.
Even dropping the chalk on the cue ball is a foul. It is
not a foul, however, to accidentally move any other
balls unless, during his turn at the table, a player
moves a ball and it in turn comes in contact with the
cue ball. Any balls moved accidentally during a shot
must be replaced by the opponent after the shot is
over and all balls have stopped rolling. If it occurs
before the shot, it must be replaced by the opponent
before the shot is taken.
So, yes, it was a foul and should have resulted in BIH for you.
g. Causing even the slightest movement or altering the
course of the cue ball, even accidentally, is a foul.
Even dropping the chalk on the cue ball is a foul. It is
not a foul, however, to accidentally move any other
balls unless, during his turn at the table, a player
moves a ball and it in turn comes in contact with the
cue ball. Any balls moved accidentally during a shot
must be replaced by the opponent after the shot is
over and all balls have stopped rolling. If it occurs
before the shot, it must be replaced by the opponent
before the shot is taken.
So, yes, it was a foul and should have resulted in BIH for you.
Last edited:
Thanks for showing the official ruling. At least now I know that I was correct in calling the foul, and now I will stick to my guns next time.
What? Did you read the rule quoted above? The path of the cue ball was altered due to the moved balls. It would have contacted them and taken a different path. It's very clear in the rule that this is a foul...
I know it's crazy but the shooter didn't directly alter the cue ball. Accidental contact of a different ball causing contact with the cue balls path isn't a foul.
Not saying I'm 100% right but it's my interpretation based on page 6, situation 3 on that recently posted document in another thread.
The rule book doesn't state how the cueball path has to be altered for it to be a foul. There is no interpretation necessary...
The question whose answer if be curious to know if... If a player takes a shot and accidentally moves another ball, and, as a result of that movement, the cue in the course of its path passes through where the ball originally sat without contacting it, is it a foul? The path of the cue is altered, but indirectly by removal of an obstacle instead of directly, and the rule seems vague in addressing that scenario.
I was thinking the same thing. So next time I accidently move another ball while shooting I guess I can just pick the ball up and wait for the cue ball to stop rolling? Then set back where it was. There for not causing any altering contact. lol
APA or BCA or ACS I have always used the rule that if a ball you moved would have or does touch the cue ball then or during it's path it's a BIH foul. Shouldn't even be a debate to me.
Nope, it's a foul, the ball interfered with the cueball.
"Causing even the slightest movement or altering the
course of the cue ball, even accidentally, is a foul. "
And what is this "my interpretation based on page 6, situation 3 on that recently posted document in another thread"? LOL. We just need to find "another thread" and find a document in it.
I have seen someone strike the cue and in the same stroke,move a ball with the stick,,accidentally. The cue hit opposite rail and was coming back toward the moved ball,,but before they hit,,shooter grabbed ball and moved it back!! lol
Its gets interesting here ,,no matter what league you are playing.
So the balls never actually hit each other,but looked like they would.
And I know it is not legal for shooter to move a ball back.( It's up to opposing player.)
So I say this is a foul!! But it is a mess trying to explain all this,when shooter thinks he did no wrong!!! lol
Its gets interesting here ,,no matter what league you are playing.
So the balls never actually hit each other,but looked like they would.
And I know it is not legal for shooter to move a ball back.( It's up to opposing player.)
So I say this is a foul!! But it is a mess trying to explain all this,when shooter thinks he did no wrong!!! lol
What they did is technically unsportsmanlike conduct beyond a regular foul and in a real tournament, the ref would have likely awared a loss of game to a person doing that not just ball in hand. He not only commited two fouls by A. hitting the ball in the path of the cueball and B. by grabing it without asking the opponent first he commited a third more serious foul by grabbing the ball off the table to have the cueball avoid hitting it. Three infractoins in one shot, the last one easily a cause for loss of game, and possibly an extra penalty game based on the situation.
I didnt mean to imply that he seen the cue ball coming,, he did not. It was delayed. And if not paying attention,you wouldnt even realize the cue crossed the path of the moved ball.
The shooter thought he was doing a good thing.And a reaction to moving the ball.
It probably happens more than we think.
The APA rule is clear that the opponent should be the one to move it back after the shot is complete if the movement occurred during the shot, but it is not clear that the player moving it back is a BIH foul - it might be argued that it was merely poor sportsmanship, and that the opponent should be able to correct that placement. This situation comes back to the question of whether alteration of the cue ball path to create a BIH foul can be indirect, which requires a judgment call, as opposed to direct, which is self-evident.
The ball was grabbed while other balls were in motion, that right there is a foul, aside from the fact that he grabbed it without checking with the opponent. While balls are in motion, even if it's the last shot and you make the 9 and the cueball is moving at 1 inch a minute, if you grab it while it's in motion, you can be called for a foul. In the shot that was described, there were clearly other balls moving, nothing should be touched till they all stop. Like if you miss a hit on a ball and the cueball is still moving around the table, you can't touch it till it stops.
"poor sportsmanship" is a foul on it's own, and often with greater penalties than a regular foul actually. So you can't really say "merely" to that since it's a greater offence. Knowingly moving a ball is a lot more serious than hitting it accidently during a shot.
The discussion wasn't about picking up the cue while it is in motion, but about a movement made to another ball. Personally, I'd prefer it if any movement of any ball at any time (other than resulting from a proper shot) would be a foul, as it would encourage better play by punishing poor mechanics or carelessness, but that isn't the case.
The rules are not clearly written, and hence actual enforcement can vary from some areas to another depending on the interpretation made by the local league operator or division representative, as applicable. In the case of the shooter moving the ball after the stroke and before all balls have come to rest, it is clear that the opponent should be the one to restore their position, and that the nature of the shooter's action would be a foul, but the rules do not clearly define whether that particular action should constitute a BIH foul, rather only stating that direct contact of the cue ball to a ball moved would lead to that infraction. Altered path by an inadvertently caused absence is not addressed.
I'm in agreement that sportsmanship violations are often far worse than violations that deliver BIH (for example, giving shot advice when allotted timeouts are exhausted), and while they can lead to even more stern penalties (forfeit of a game, match, or league expulsion), the less egregious ones tend to draw no penalty unless repeated.