Mite of gotten the yips during execution.
If it did hit the shaft and it was only obvious by video, is it a foul?
Should video review be allowed for miscues?
With technology, if this is allowed then all miscues will soon be fouls.
read OP rules link again:
Under the current rules (see WPA WSR 6.16c), a miscue is a foul only if it is intentional.
i have no doubt that marcel is right that cue hit cb multiple times, it was technically a foul, but an intention provision should overrule that
Here's the other pertinent rule:
2.11 MISCUE
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue-ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or due to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue-stick with the cue-ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue-ball at the same time, and this causes the cue-ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. If an unintentional miscue causes the cue-ball to leave the playing surface, including partially or fully jumping over a ball, it is treated like a legal jump shot. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 3.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).
Isn't it inconsistent that intentional miscue is unsportsmanlike while intentional/ deliberate foul is not?![]()
"An unintentional scoop caused by a draw shot miscue is not a foul regardless of whether there is secondary contact between the tip or ferrule and the cueball which there most always is."
If one believes in Karma, the foul call had nothing to do with Jayson Shaw's later situation.
His early win celebration on the other hand...
Your exact words straight from the video.Please let me know where you got that quote. It is incorrect without more context. If there is clear visual evidence of secondary contact, either live or during video replay, the shot is a foul.
it probably did hit more than once but that doesn't matter imo, as it wasn't intentional. two things can be true at the same time: it can technically be a foul AND still be legal because in the spirit of the game unintentional miscues are tolerated.
if there will ever, against all probability, be a pro that scoops to jump over an obstructing ball, that's a different story.
Intention has zero to do with fouls. Do you generally intend to scratch? Do you intend to not hit a rail after contact?
Miscues should not be fouls unless an obvious double hit occurred. By obvious, I mean with the naked eye without video payback. Replay would be the death of pool, which is already boring as hell to watch. Before someone jumps down my throat, that is my opinion (which should be obvious), but also seems to be the consensus of the non pool playing population.
Intention has zero to do with fouls.
Miscues should not be fouls unless an obvious double hit occurred. By obvious, I mean with the naked eye without video payback.
The 'Regardless of secondary cue ball contact' is something they should italicize. Most players believe that 2nd hit is a foul. Need a billboard for that one!!FYI, I just posted a new video that calls out another bad draw-shot-miscue foul judgement at the Philippines Open. The bad call was against Patric Gonzales in a match with Jayson Shaw, who later missed an easy semi-final match-winning shot against Arseni Sevastyanov for even more drama. Check it out:
Supporting Resources:
- rules resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/rules/
- foul resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/
- scoop shots: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/scoop/
- more examples of bad calls: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/examples/
As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.
Enjoy!