Do you call these on C players?

[semperfi]

The opponent is the referee while the other player is shooting.

Wow...been playing pool since '62 and never heard that one before. I'm sure I'll see that rule enforced at the, soon to start, Derby City Classic, since they missed enforcing it last year. Anybody remember seeing Jeanette Lee in the bank tournament last year. She had a rail to rail, straight back off the footrail. The shot was not "on", and she was trying to hold the ball. She shot with a lot of low, the cue double kissed making that "clunk" sound and shot sideways off the object ball, which of course, went in the called corner pocket. Everybody including the opponent knew what happened, but when questioned, Lee said no, it was a good bank, no double hit. Oh well, who said life's fair?
Mike

 

[dingle]

The comment about fouls always go to the shooter if no ref is present always bugs me a little. I understand that rule, but it's just a shame that not everyone is honest who plays this game. I assure you, I always call fouls on myself even if my opponent wasn't paying attention. That's just the way I am.

Anyway, I will always call a ref in the future when there is a doubt. I guess I did, indeed feel a little bad about it, but I don't think I was wrong in calling the foul. A foul is a foul.

 

[dingle]

I've never heard if this 2 inch rule.

In response to this, there is a rule about shooting at a 45 degree angle if the cue ball and an object ball are within a chalk's distance. I was simply explaining the shot by telling you it was 2 inches (he didn't have to shoot it at a 45).

 

[dingle]

And by the way, it's a BCA league this happened in. APA is all slop anyway (at least here), so why even have fouls!

 

[jjinfla]

Ok.

Here in Europe, the opponent is the referee. That's why non-shooting player is always paying attention to the game.
I have called many fould on myself. I think being honest is the best thing to do...

This is not as absurd as it sounds at first blush.

In fact this is the exact way that players are supposed to play in the BCA leagues. There is no talking to your fellow teammate while he is at the table. It is up to him to watch what his opponent does at the table and then to call a foul if one should occur.

Surely you BCA players know this.

And of course most players will call a foul on themselves. But they are not required to.

Simultaneous hits are addresed in the BCA manual and they do go to the shooter.

APA is designed for the new player and players who want to help new players and players who want to have fun. Yet, there are some pretty good players in the league. But very few would be classed B or better.

Jake

 

[Bob Jewett]

...
Here's my question finally, what was the right thing to do?

Against such a weak player, I'd have said prior to the shot, "When the cue ball is that close to the object ball, there is some danger of hitting the cue ball twice. I'm familiar with the shot, and will be happy to call it, but you may want to ask someone else to be the referee."

As for "arguments go to the shooter," the main point to note is that in the US, many players cannot be trusted to make a fair call if they are in the game. "Do unto others before others do unto you" is their motto, and they do unto others as often as they can get away with it. In Europe evidently, the attitudes are different.

 

[dingle]

Against such a weak player, I'd have said prior to the shot, "When the cue ball is that close to the object ball, there is some danger of hitting the cue ball twice. I'm familiar with the shot, and will be happy to call it, but you may want to ask someone else to be the referee."

As for "arguments go to the shooter," the main point to note is that in the US, many players cannot be trusted to make a fair call if they are in the game. "Do unto others before others do unto you" is their motto, and they do unto others as often as they can get away with it. In Europe evidently, the attitudes are different.

Bob,

You are absolutely right, that would have been the best course of action.

 

[jjinfla]

As for "arguments go to the shooter," the main point to note is that in the US, many players cannot be trusted to make a fair call if they are in the game. "Do unto others before others do unto you" is their motto, and they do unto others as often as they can get away with it. In Europe evidently, the attitudes are different.

Gee Bob, do you really have such a low opinion of Americans? I personally find that most of the players around here are pretty honest. A dispute arises occasionally when someone is not aware of the rules. Sometimes close hits are questioned but are usually settled quickly. Of course the room owners here are the final word. Their decision stands. And people learn from their mistakes.

The most common BIH foul is failure to hit a rail after contact with the OB. And the reason a player does not call it is because he just has a mental lapse and doesn't realize it was a foul. That is why it is important for a player to watch his opponent. Of course we never play with referee.

Jake
Jake

 

[Bob Jewett]

Gee Bob, do you really have such a low opinion of Americans? I personally find that most of the players around here are pretty honest. ...

I'd agree with "most" but I said "many." If we went to a major tournament around here, I think I could point out five or six players that you better have a ref come over for.

I played in one BCA Nationals back when they had one ref for each two tables. I had to kick at a ball two cushions and got a good hit and a rail. The ref was out of position, but my opponent saw clearly what happened. The ref called a foul, even though he did not see the shot. My opponent said nothing. It's hard to find good referees, and sometimes it's hard to find sportsmanship in your opponent.

I have lots of other examples.

 

[Cuebacca]

Sorry to resurrect such an old post. I was searching for one of Bob's posts and came across this thread. I realize that the Original Poster hasn't even logged in in over a year, so he may not even read this. However, I was surprised at the general agreement that the OP should have been completely out of luck after that shot.

Perhaps the shooter just didn't fully understand how easy it is to rule the shot a foul when the CB behaves the way it did. Or maybe he was worried that the OP was trying to twist the rules to take advantage of him.

I agree with and understand the rule that arguments go to the shooter. I also agree that the OP should have called the Tournament Director from the get go. However, I think there may have been a fair way to settle the argument, and wanted to see if anyone would agree with me.

The OP calls the TD and says something like the following, "Here is what I witnessed on this shot... CB 2 inches from OB. Shooter hits CB and follows through. CB follows forward at ~100 miles an hour up and down table several times. There was no delay after the CB contacted OB; it just shot forward at high speed."

Is it fair to call the TD over and say this? This gives the TD a chance to say to the shooter, "Do you agree that this is what happened?"

The shooter might then say, "Yes, that's exactly what happened, but I don't think I hit the CB twice." In that case, I would think the TD would explain that, yes, this CB action is a characteristic of a double hit, and it is ruled to be a foul.

Or the shooter might say, "No, I didn't follow through much on my stroke. The CB sort of paused for a moment after hitting the 1, and it only went up table and half way back down."

Then the TD might say, "Sorry, OP, argument goes to the shooter. I have to rule it a good hit."

What do you guys think? Would it have been fair for the OP to call the TD like that? If the shooter agreed with the OP's description of the shot, would it have been fair for the TD to rule it a foul? I think so, but JMO, and I'd like to be enlightened if the general consensus is 'no'.

Maybe this is unfair, because it would allow entrapment of lessor players into a foul?

 

[Jross]

Gee Bob, do you really have such a low opinion of Americans? I personally find that most of the players around here are pretty honest. A dispute arises occasionally when someone is not aware of the rules. Sometimes close hits are questioned but are usually settled quickly. Of course the room owners here are the final word. Their decision stands. And people learn from their mistakes.

The most common BIH foul is failure to hit a rail after contact with the OB. And the reason a player does not call it is because he just has a mental lapse and doesn't realize it was a foul. That is why it is important for a player to watch his opponent. Of course we never play with referee.

Jake
Jake

Haha, just had to say after reading that it reminded me of something that happend to me gambling a year or so ago. My opponent was at the table shooting, I turned around to get a drink and turned back around rather quick, he was coming up short on shape and moved the damn cueball with his stick!

This was a rather decent player also, was very suprised to see it happen, almost one of those 'my eyes decieved me things' , never said anything to him about it.

 

[Cuebacca]

Haha, just had to say after reading that it reminded me of something that happend to me gambling a year or so ago. My opponent was at the table shooting, I turned around to get a drink and turned back around rather quick, he was coming up short on shape and moved the damn cueball with his stick!

This was a rather decent player also, was very suprised to see it happen, almost one of those 'my eyes decieved me things' , never said anything to him about it.

Holy moly! That's hilarious!! Hmm, if you're supposed to let that go, I should stand corrected.