An interesting league situation.

nathandumoulin

nathandumoulin

WPBL / RUNOUT MEDIA
Silver Member
I was down at the local pool hall tonight practicing during league night, and although I wasn't playing in the league myself, I happened to witness a very odd occurrence that resulted in a dispute.

A player tried play 'rail-first' on a ball that was in the jaws. He called the ball, but when he shot, he missed the ball completely. The cue ball narrowly missed, and then went three rails and ran into another one of his balls.

Here's the strange part. Although he never made contact with his intended target, the impact on the nearby cushion caused the object ball to fall into the pocket.

He did strike one of his balls first...eventually, and the intended ball was pocketed....so is this a legal play?

I was baffled....and amused by the situation. Can anyone clarify what should have happened?
 
score it and shoot again... call ball and pocket only .. he executed a legal shot that resulted in his called ball falling in the called pocket...

sloppier than hell but the rules are the rules...
 
So he never hit the ball, but it fell because he hit the cushion near it? I'm either not getting the explanation or that is one crazy table
 
gunzby said:
So he never hit the ball, but it fell because he hit the cushion near it? I'm either not getting the explanation or that is one crazy table
Click to expand...

I guess that object ball was just that close to falling in that even the slightest vibration forced it to roll in.
 
I would say that the ball spots back as close to the two can get it before it fell. Then determine if the shot (hit on the other ball) was legal or not.

I feel a ball needs to be hit for it to count as a legally made ball.
 
nathandumoulin said:
I was down at the local pool hall tonight practicing during league night, and although I wasn't playing in the league myself, I happened to witness a very odd occurrence that resulted in a dispute.

A player tried play 'rail-first' on a ball that was in the jaws. He called the ball, but when he shot, he missed the ball completely. The cue ball narrowly missed, and then went three rails and ran into another one of his balls.

Here's the strange part. Although he never made contact with his intended target, the impact on the nearby cushion caused the object ball to fall into the pocket.

He did strike one of his balls first...eventually, and the intended ball was pocketed....so is this a legal play?

I was baffled....and amused by the situation. Can anyone clarify what should have happened?
Click to expand...

There is not much you can say if the shot was not a foul by any league rules I would have to allow the player to continue shooting if I were the referee whating the match. While the shot is not normal, with call pocket rules so long as the player did not walk away from the table and also did not intentionally bump the table to pocket the ball, the shot is legal.

Take care
 
Most leagues apply the 5 second rule. Any ball that falls into a pocket after having been sitting still for 5 seconds is considered to have been acted upon by outside forces, and would be replaced as near as possible to it's same location.

Since the shooter did make contact with one of his balls, and assuming he got to a rail after contact, I don't see any foul, but I wouldn't count the ball that dropped in, so it would be the next player's shot.

Steve
 
rule vs opinion

Well, since I don't think there is a rule that directly calls out this exact situation, I'll give my own opinion as others have.

Since the 'hanging OB' was never struck by any other ball during that shot, I would rule that it either is replaced or stays down (according to the rules or that game) but the shooter does not get to continue.

My reasoning...(a bunch of 'what if's' but these all should be considered as similar if not the same):

1. What if the 'hanging OB' fell before the CB got to the pocket?
2. What if the shooter was not calling that particular 'hanging OB' and it fell by it's self during, before or after a shot?
3. What if he leaned over the table to shoot (read leaned over 'hanging OB'), and after making a leagl hit on another ball but did not make the shot, everyone noticed the 'hanging OB' was gone, nobody saw him knock the 'hanging OB' into the pocket but it was gone after the shot...would he shoot again?

Again, a lot of 'what if's', but I think you might see my points. I would not under any circumstances allow a ball to be counted as a made ball (and allow a player to continue) unless that particular OB was struck by another ball during that particular shot.

I did have this situation happen during a game...a ball was indeed hanging. The shooter hits a different ball, misses but the 'hanging OB' falls in the pocket. We all stand there laughing and joking around, then he starts to shoot again and I had to stop him. I said "that dosen't count, it's a spontaneously moving ball, not a shot". We argued for a couple of minutes, but he could see my reasoning and gave in. I truly believe I was right then and I think I am now...ball may or may not stay down, but shooter is done.

L8R...Ken
 
This is actually interesting, thanks for sharing.

I guess the table in play must be considered. Some tables may not be level, or may have a bit of shimmy or shake. In many cases, bar tables are moved a few times a week, and are far from perfect. Or the ball may have been hanging such that it fell the moment a light breeze came through.

I think the five second rule is correct, and if no contact was made, the ball comes back up, and spotted where it was, to the best of your opponents ability.
 
you have to make contact with the object ball for it to count. you would spot this ball as close as possible to where it was and the shooter is done.
 
IMO, it counts.....he contacted the rail, which compressed, causing it to hit the ball into the pocket, and he also hit one of his balls to make it a legal shot.....it wasn't an outside force, like him hitting the table with his leg or blowing the ball in....his shot caused the ball to fall....I give it to him....
 
I'm going with the overall statement. The ball stays down, but his turn is over and you come to the table with the CB staying where it is. I will print out the exact wording of a legal shot according to the BCA:

4.11 LEGAL SHOT
(Defined) On all shots (except on the break and when the table is open), the shooter must hit one of his group of balls first and (1) pocket a numbered ball, or (2) cause the cue ball or any numbered ball to contact a rail. Please Note: It is permissible for the shooter to bank the cue ball off a rail before contacting the object ball; However, after contact with the object ball, an object ball must be pocketed or the cue ball or any numbered ball must contact a rail. Failure to meet these is a requirement.


SO....Based on what that states, he did not contact the OB before it fell, so that aspect of the shot would not be considered as for who would be at the table at the end of the shot. You'd be left to decide if the ball stays down, no question on who shoots next.

IMO
 
MilwShooter said:
I'm going with the overall statement. The ball stays down, but his turn is over and you come to the table with the CB staying where it is. I will print out the exact wording of a legal shot according to the BCA:

4.11 LEGAL SHOT
(Defined) On all shots (except on the break and when the table is open), the shooter must hit one of his group of balls first and (1) pocket a numbered ball, or (2) cause the cue ball or any numbered ball to contact a rail. Please Note: It is permissible for the shooter to bank the cue ball off a rail before contacting the object ball; However, after contact with the object ball, an object ball must be pocketed or the cue ball or any numbered ball must contact a rail. Failure to meet these is a requirement.


SO....Based on what that states, he did not contact the OB before it fell, so that aspect of the shot would not be considered as for who would be at the table at the end of the shot. You'd be left to decide if the ball stays down, no question on who shoots next.

IMO
Click to expand...


Very interesting. Thanks.

.....although what about combination shots? You never actually make contact directly with the intended ball either, and those still count.
 
nathandumoulin said:
Very interesting. Thanks.

.....although what about combination shots? You never actually make contact directly with the intended ball either, and those still count.
Click to expand...

True, you don't make contact with the intended pocked OB, but you did make contact with one of your OB before it went into the pocket.

BTW, good comments so far...good thread.

L8R...Ken
 
MilwShooter said:
I'm going with the overall statement. The ball stays down, but his turn is over and you come to the table with the CB staying where it is. I will print out the exact wording of a legal shot according to the BCA:

4.11 LEGAL SHOT
(Defined) On all shots (except on the break and when the table is open), the shooter must hit one of his group of balls first and (1) pocket a numbered ball, or (2) cause the cue ball or any numbered ball to contact a rail. Please Note: It is permissible for the shooter to bank the cue ball off a rail before contacting the object ball; However, after contact with the object ball, an object ball must be pocketed or the cue ball or any numbered ball must contact a rail. Failure to meet these is a requirement.


SO....Based on what that states, he did not contact the OB before it fell, so that aspect of the shot would not be considered as for who would be at the table at the end of the shot. You'd be left to decide if the ball stays down, no question on who shoots next.

IMO
Click to expand...

The part which you have highlighted is only one of several constutuent parts of (2) and is simply intended to define what needs to happen in order for a shot to be legal when a player goes rail first with the cue ball. All it is is saying is that if you go rail first, after the cue ball comes off the rail and contacts an object ball either an object ball (any one) has to be potted or the cue ball or any object ball has to touch a cushion for the shot to be legal.

That part of number (2) has nothing much to do with the particular shot described (assuming either the cue ball or any other ball hit a cushion after he contacted the ball which he wasn't aiming at but did hit, thereby making the shot legal, ie the 'shot' legal, not necessarily the 'pot' legal) or with the general subject of an unhit ball falling.

You are quite right that the question of whether or not he touched the ball which fell is relevant as regards whether the ball was legally potted, but not for the reason you are giving nor because of the content of the part of the rules you have highlighted.

This is simply a ball falling without being hit. Different rules worldwide treat it differently but the majority of rules are for the most part dependent upon a defined time limit between when it last came to rest and when it falls. No full description was given but it sems obvious this ball had been in that position for quite some time after it last came to rest before it fell and therefore for that reason alone most rules would require it to be replaced.

If the ball which fell in without being contacted was the nominated ball and the shooter played an otherwise legal shot, in most rules his turn is simply over because the nominated ball wasn't legally potted (it can't be if it wasn't hit), the ball is replaced and the opponent shoots.
 
Last edited:
The shooter might argue that the cue ball feathered the object ball so thin that it was hard to tell but there really was contact that made the ball slowly drop. If he really believes that, without agreeing on someone watching the hit before hand, the doubt goes in the shooter's favor I do believe.

If it's clear that there was no contact and the shooter doesn't deny it, then I think you have to replace the object ball under whatever rule (act of God or whatever mysterious moving ball rule), but since he made a legal hit on another object ball, his inning simply ends and the other guy plays it where it lies.

You can't just vibrate balls in; you have to shoot them in.
 
Cuebacca said:
....You can't just vibrate balls in; you have to shoot them in.
Click to expand...

Just as well. It's distracting enough playing good looking birds without them pulling that stunt :) :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top