BCA ruling or perhaps just common sense?

[tatcat2000]

The same 'obsolete' safety rule he is quoting is also in http://www.playbca.com/Downloads/Rulebook/CompleteRulebook/tabid/372/Default.aspx

No, it is not. There is no such thing as BCAPL Rule 4.12. While most of the intent and effect of the applicable BCAPL rules is similar, the specific wording and effect of the applicable BCAPL rules differs from the pre-2008 version of WSR - significantly, in some respects.

The applicable BCAPL references for the issue in this thread are BCAPL 8-Ball Rule 2.8, "Safety Play" (p. 37), the BCAPL definition of "Safety" (p. 14), the BCAPL Applied Ruling for the definition of "Safety" (p. 67) and BCAPL Applied Ruling 1.45, "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" (p. 85).

So you're trying to get them to erase the obsolete link AND change the rule in the 'Officail Rules of the BCA Pool League'?

???

You speak of "them" as if the same party is responsible for the obsolete link and the content of The Official Rules of the BCA Pool League. That is not true. You are making the common error of equating the BCA and BCAPL. Please refer to my disclaimers at the end of this post for details.

I do ask, and have asked various contacts at the BCA on multiple occasions, to remove the obsolete material from their server. No luck to date.

As far as the BCAPL rules, I don't recall asking anyone to change anything. That's not my job. BCAPL referees are not in the business of making policy. (Again, please see the disclaimers for details.)

What I intended to convey was that the OP's specific situation would be looked at by the BCAPL National Office. The purpose of such a review is for the National Office to consider addressing the situation in an Applied Ruling, or possibly revising the applpicable rules themselves to specifically cover the OP's situation. If I was not clear in stating that, I apologize.

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

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.

 

[poolfool1957]

We discussed the incident with both Captains and came to an agreement that this will not happen again. We put a strongly worded note in the standings about unsportsmanlike conduct and noted that any further acts of this sort will not be tolerated.
It is obviously much more complicated than just an act of unsportsmanlike conduct but in a small town traveling bar league you have to try and work things out before taking out the hatchet. This was a player with no previous history of bad behavior so we had to take that into consideration. He knows he has to call a non obvious shot from now on and he knows he has to declare a safety.
Everyone else is now aware that they have a right to ask where a ball is being pocketed or for that matter if a safety is being played.
Thanks so much for all of the great responses. We know we won't hit perfection but we at least try to stay within the rules.

 

[justadub]

And cooler heads prevailed... :thumbup:

Sounds like your league is being run by some reasonable folks. Congrats to you on being so level-headed, and best of luck going forward.

 

[pt109]

We discussed the incident with both Captains and came to an agreement that this will not happen again. We put a strongly worded note in the standings about unsportsmanlike conduct and noted that any further acts of this sort will not be tolerated.
It is obviously much more complicated than just an act of unsportsmanlike conduct but in a small town traveling bar league you have to try and work things out before taking out the hatchet. This was a player with no previous history of bad behavior so we had to take that into consideration. He knows he has to call a non obvious shot from now on and he knows he has to declare a safety.
Everyone else is now aware that they have a right to ask where a ball is being pocketed or for that matter if a safety is being played.
Thanks so much for all of the great responses. We know we won't hit perfection but we at least try to stay within the rules.

I used to think ELO stood for Electric Light Orchestra...
..now I think it stands for Enlightened League Operator
good post

 

[poolfool1957]

We discussed the incident with both Captains and came to an agreement that this will not happen again. We put a strongly worded note in the standings about unsportsmanlike conduct and noted that any further acts of this sort will not be tolerated.
It is obviously much more complicated than just an act of unsportsmanlike conduct but in a small town traveling bar league you have to try and work things out before taking out the hatchet. This was a player with no previous history of bad behavior so we had to take that into consideration. He knows he has to call a non obvious shot from now on and he knows he has to declare a safety.
Everyone else is now aware that they have a right to ask where a ball is being pocketed or for that matter if a safety is being played.
Thanks so much for all of the great responses. We know we won't hit perfection but we at least try to stay within the rules.

 

[poolfool1957]

We discussed the incident with both Captains and came to an agreement that this will not happen again. We put a strongly worded note in the standings about unsportsmanlike conduct and noted that any further acts of this sort will not be tolerated.
It is obviously much more complicated than just an act of unsportsmanlike conduct but in a small town traveling bar league you have to try and work things out before taking out the hatchet. This was a player with no previous history of bad behavior so we had to take that into consideration. He knows he has to call a non obvious shot from now on and he knows he has to declare a safety.
Everyone else is now aware that they have a right to ask where a ball is being pocketed or for that matter if a safety is being played.
Thanks so much for all of the great responses. We know we won't hit perfection but we at least try to stay within the rules.

 

[supergreenman]

How on earth can the shooter be ruled he called a safe?

You cannot call 'safe' after the shot. Safety calls are NEVER obvious. NEVER.

If your league has 'approved' that short rail banks are considered OBVIOUS shots, than again... this guy called his pocket.

IMO this is just an example of a pool player gettign away with UNSPORTSMANLIKE conduct, plain and simple.

What good is having a rule book if there are no players or league operators stong enough to enforce it.

Safety call after the shot... BS. Weak all around. I surely would not play in this league.

I don't want to disagree with you, it is BS.

However, the rules clearly state that all non obvious shots including kicks and banks must be called. He didn't call it. He also didn't call safety.

Was it a safety? no, it was a mistake.
Banks aren't obvious shots, so unless he called the shot he shouldn't continue. It's when we get lax on the rules that this crap comes up. I'm pretty sure that if people didn't let the obvious banks go without a call this would have never happened.

 

[supergreenman]

Player A is required to continue shooting under BCA rules.

http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_8bl.shtml

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.

These are tournament rules but there is an applied ruling in the big BCA book that covers this as well.

The red bolded words are key in this rule. In this situation, the shooter did not shoot an obvious shot. Not saying what he did was right, just saying that there's no rule against it.

I totally agree with Jeff in this case.

It really comes down to due diligence and asking the right questions prior to a shot being made.

 

[supergreenman]

I can argue both ways:



ARGUMENT FOR PLAYER B:
The 2010 BCAPL player’s handbook states on page 65 under applied rulings for 1.45 unsportsmanlike conduct:

“Particular sensitivity will be applied to issues involving communication between players. Attempts to manipulate the rules concerning communicating and acknowledging called shots, safeties, or other required information will receive special scrutiny. For instance, acknowledging a called shot or safety with a barely perceptible nod and then trying to claim later that you did not acknowledge the call will be considered unsportsmanlike conduct. It is incumbent on both players at all times to ensure that clear communication takes place.”

Assume that the rule book was not thrown on the floor and the opposing team captain was not called a vile name (i.e., sufficent justification alone to rule loss of game for unsportsmanlike conduct):

IMHO, since Player A waited 30 sec. and called the foul on himself only after considering his lack of shape, it seems like Player A tried to “manipulate the rules” by requiring that Player B accept his interpretation of the rules and forcing Player B to shoot the next shot. Because, it seems to me like the only “sporting” thing for Player A to do would be to also allow Player B the option of shooting or not (i.e., being able to decline the “bullcrap” foul if desired).

The waiting 30 seconds business is a red herring. there is no exact time limit specification in the rules therefore it is open to interpretation.

 

[supergreenman]

I Agree... But I think a new rule needs to be implamented that would solve this and other similar isssues..

A player shouldnt be allowed to call FOUL on him/her self, It should be up to the opponent to do so... Out of good sportsmanship a player can inform his/her opponent that a foul was commited, but it is up to the opponent to take action to the foul.

This will fix the problem - Hope the BCA reads this and considers it!:idea2:

The problem is, there is no foul in this situation. the worst penalty for making a non obvious shot would be loss of turn. Which is exactly what this player wanted.

 

[ykndoit]

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.

The red bolded words are key in this rule. In this situation, the shooter did not shoot an obvious shot. Not saying what he did was right, just saying that there's no rule against it.

I totally agree with Jeff in this case.

It really comes down to due diligence and asking the right questions prior to a shot being made.

You are right about the quote in red, BUT read the blue......

 

[supergreenman]

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.



You are right about the quote in red, BUT read the blue......

The problem is, the shooter never intended to shoot a safety. Because it's a non obvious shot:
a) the shooter should have indicated a pocket
b) the opponent should have asked which pocket

Since neither player did this, all that can be done is consider this a missed shot and end the turn.

I understand where you are coming from, but there was no safety intended. While it's the shooters responsibility to indicate what pocket he was shooting at, the opponent has a reciprical responsibility to be clear on what the shooter is shooting.

 

[Celtic]

The problem is, there is no foul in this situation. the worst penalty for making a non obvious shot would be loss of turn. Which is exactly what this player wanted.

I doubt it, the better refs in the BCAPL in Las Vegas would likely go over the situation very clearly, have the balls, where they were, the bank shot that was shot shown to them. Then they would come to the clear and obvious conclusion that everyone on this thread knows and that the player "played" the bank and screwed up the shape. The player would most definately have shot if he had gotten shape, that much is obvious as hell.

It was an obvious move, and the good refs in Vegas would pull out the "unsportsmanlike conduct" rule in this situation. Very likely the game would be over on a loss of game UC foul.

 

[ykndoit]

The problem is, the shooter never intended to shoot a safety. Because it's a non obvious shot:
a) the shooter should have indicated a pocket
b) the opponent should have asked which pocket

Since neither player did this, all that can be done is consider this a missed shot and end the turn.

I understand where you are coming from, but there was no safety intended. While it's the shooters responsibility to indicate what pocket he was shooting at, the opponent has a reciprical responsibility to be clear on what the shooter is shooting.

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.


If I was his opponent, I would just have said " Nice bank, keep shooting son."

 

[cajunfats]

Yes

I'd call unsportsmanlike conduct and award ball in hand to player B. If that starts a bigger argument, move to loss of game.

Also see WPA rule 1.10 (http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules_tournament#1.10): "Fouls must be called promptly." By looking over the table for 30 seconds before turning it over, player A didn't call his "miss" promptly, which is further evidence of his unsportsmanlike conduct.

This reference is closest to what should have been decided at the time. However, because leagues are filled with players who believe they shouldn't intervene to discredit a player or to maintain team advantage, you have situations like this that occur.

The WPA Rule is derived from BCA Rules that have been in effect for many years. The final arbiter is the local league operator who must assess the intent of the player involved.

Simply stated, the Team Captain of the player committing the infraction is responsible for the call, especially in order to maintain integrity throughout the match/season. When the shooter is the Captain of the infraction team, the protest goes to the League Operator. Once the protest goes to the LO, the Team/Player committing the infraction must understand that the penalty can result in Match Forfeiture. Any games won, money collected count against the guilty team.

As written, this incident should have resulted in Team Forfeiture of Match Play that night, a warning issued to the appropriate player, advising Team Captain of responsibilities, and any monies collected for League Payouts be logged against the team for that weeks play.

It sounds harsh, but if you want rules, respect them. That's why hundreds of people devote a lot of energy to make the Rule Books.

 

[supergreenman]

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.


If I was his opponent, I would just have said " Nice bank, keep shooting son."

Once again, the key words in this rule are highlighted in bold and red.

 

[Wags]

What????!!!!

If you mean the BCAPL, rest assured that the BCAPL is reading this and considering it. (The BCA has absolutely nothing to do with it and has no interest in it whatsoever - see disclaimers for details.)

P.S. - OUSooner - you are quoting obsolete rules in post 60. Please lose that link forever. I hope I can get you to do it - I damn sure can't seem to be able to get the Billiard Congress of America to do anything about it. It lives on their server and has been obsolete for more than three years...:slap:

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 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.

Why would you think you could control the Billiard Congress of America? They have nothing to do with the BCAPL. The BCAPL rules are only for BCAPL leagues just like VNEA has their rules, APA has their rules, TAP has their rules, etc. Don't tell him to lose the link, the World Standardized Rules as set by the World Pool-Billiard Association are the most used rules in the world. They are also the rules most commonly used in pro events and a non-sanctioned league situation. That is what is posted on www.bca-pool.com. They are hardly obsolete except maybe to the BCAPL.

Different thread...Please do something about the double hit rule. That one causes more arguments than this little spat.

Very simple. Unsportmanlike conduct on "A". Everything points toward that.

 

[5am]

I agree. Player A acted within the rules. Not sporting of him, but clearly allowed by the rules. If I see Player B about to bank a ball and not declare which pocket he intends to pot the object ball, I will request he make the call before the shot. If I don't, my bad, and the result could be what happened to player B in the example cited above.

As an aside, a few weeks after I joined a BCA league a while back I asked several people on league night about a particular rule mentioned in the rulebook. A number of guys I saw shooting were clearly violating the rule about using their cue sticks as an aiming aid. More than a few answered, "You actually read the rulebook?" followed by, "We don't use that rule here." Ah.

Still, ignorance of the rules is no excuse.

 

[chevybob20]

4.12 “SAFETY” SHOT
For tactical reasons, a player may choose to pocket an obvious object ball and also discontinue a turn at the table by declaring “safety” in advance. A safety shot is defined as a legal shot. If the shooting player intends to play safe by pocketing an obvious object ball, then prior to the shot, the shooter must declare a “safety” to the opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to make the opponent aware of the intended safety shot. If this is not done, and one of the shooter’s object balls is pocketed, the shooter will be required to shoot again. Any ball pocketed on a safety shot remains pocketed.


If I was his opponent, I would just have said " Nice bank, keep shooting son."

I agree. He did not call the shot and did not call a safety. Therefore, the shot is not considered a missed shot (as if he called the pocket). So, he keeps shooting as stated by the rules.

 

[chefjeff]

We discussed the incident with both Captains and came to an agreement that this will not happen again. We put a strongly worded note in the standings about unsportsmanlike conduct and noted that any further acts of this sort will not be tolerated.
It is obviously much more complicated than just an act of unsportsmanlike conduct but in a small town traveling bar league you have to try and work things out before taking out the hatchet. This was a player with no previous history of bad behavior so we had to take that into consideration. He knows he has to call a non obvious shot from now on and he knows he has to declare a safety.
Everyone else is now aware that they have a right to ask where a ball is being pocketed or for that matter if a safety is being played.
Thanks so much for all of the great responses. We know we won't hit perfection but we at least try to stay within the rules.

Nothing like a good pool culture to handle such problems.

(You could have just broken his thumbs.:wink

Jeff Livingston