Frozen balls in One Pocket

[1pocket]

None of the rules that I have read address this situation. Suppose the one ball and the cue are in the middle of the table and the two ball is frozen to the rail. The cue strikes the one which then is driven into the two which was called frozen. I did see a tour. dir. rule once that since the two ball was frozen it became part of the rail by rule, so the shot was legal. Have never seen a written rule however.

If the two ball was called frozen, and neither the cue ball or any other ball actually went to a rail, it sure sounds like a foul to me.

 

[dabarbr]

None of the rules that I have read address this situation. Suppose the one ball and the cue are in the middle of the table and the two ball is frozen to the rail. The cue strikes the one which then is driven into the two which was called frozen. I did see a tour. dir. rule once that since the two ball was frozen it became part of the rail by rule, so the shot was legal. Have never seen a written rule however.

This is an interesting question. In your scenario I believe the TD called it wrong. It would be the same thing that if the cue ball was played off the one ball and went to the two ball. The two I believe must reach another rail. I would have called it a foul. Lets wait for more responses.

 

[DoubleA]

This is an interesting question. In your scenario I believe the TD called it wrong. It would be the same thing that if the cue ball was played off the one ball and went to the two ball. The two I believe must reach another rail. I would have called it a foul. Lets wait for more responses.

The explanation was , that since the two ball was called frozen it became part of that rail according to the rule. Therefore, driving a legally hit ball to the two ball was the same as driving it to that rail.

 

[ronhudson]

The explanation was , that since the two ball was called frozen it became part of that rail according to the rule. Therefore, driving a legally hit ball to the two ball was the same as driving it to that rail.

That's an imaginative and inventive ruling. Ask him to show you that one in any rulebook.

 

[dabarbr]

The explanation was , that since the two ball was called frozen it became part of that rail according to the rule. Therefore, driving a legally hit ball to the two ball was the same as driving it to that rail.

Then he is saying that if the two is frozen to the rail and the one is right next to it and not touching the two that all you have to do is touch the one to the two and no foul? This I believe is a foul.

With his reasoning if the two is frozen to the rail and the one is frozen to the two, but not touching the rail, then the one cannot satisfy a safety if it goes to that same rail because they both are considered as part of that rail.

P.S... I think I have too much time on my hands. I need to go practice.

 

[DoubleA]

Then he is saying that if the two is frozen to the rail and the one is right next to it and not touching the two that all you have to do is touch the one to the two and no foul? This I believe is a foul.

With his reasoning if the two is frozen to the rail and the one is frozen to the two, but not touching the rail, then the one cannot satisfy a safety if it goes to that same rail because they both are considered as part of that rail.

P.S... I think I have too much time on my hands. I need to go practice.

I do not know the answer, as I said before, this is the only explanation I have ever seen. As yet, noone has has cited a real rule to cover this either way.
come on guys, does anyone know the "real rule", not just opinion?:shrug: :shrug:

 

[Masirib5]

Only a foul if...

In the original shot "A", the opponent must indicate that the object ball is frozen or it isn't a foul.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I do not know the answer, as I said before, this is the only explanation I have ever seen. As yet, noone has has cited a real rule to cover this either way.
come on guys, does anyone know the "real rule", not just opinion?:shrug: :shrug:

The real rule is available on the WPA website, http://www.wpa-pool.com

But briefly: After the cue ball contacts an object ball, some ball must be driven to a rail. For this rule, the phrase "driven to" has a very special meaning. If a ball is frozen to a cushion at the start of the shot, simply driving that ball against that same cushion does not count as "driving it to a cushion." (If a ball starts frozen to a cushion and leaves the cushion and later returns to that cushion, then it was driven to that cushion, but this situation is quite rare.)

 

[DoubleA]

I do not know the answer, as I said before, this is the only explanation I have ever seen. As yet, noone has has cited a real rule to cover this either way.
come on guys, does anyone know the "real rule", not just opinion?:shrug: :shrug:

Someone has to be able to find a rule, but I can't, and I have looked at all the rules about frozen balls that I can find. In some of the rules that I have found, it is stated that if a ball is called frozen it becomes part of that rail. In this light, I can understand the tour. dir's. ruling. Not saying it was right or wrong.

 

[Samiel]

At snooker, no cushion contact is required on any shot. If you are close to the pack, and need to hit a red, you can just roll up to the pack and barely contact a red.

I didn't know this Bob. Thanks for the info.

DoubleA - I believe your TD was right. If a ball is frozen to a rail and you hit another ball into that ball, I think it satisfies the "ball must hit a rail" rule.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

... If a ball is frozen to a rail and you hit another ball into that ball, I think it satisfies the "ball must hit a rail" rule.

Nope. It's the same as if the cue ball itself hits the ball that's frozen to the rail (which was talked about above). To satisfy the rule a ball must be "driven to" a rail. A ball that's frozen to a rail isn't "driven to" that rail unless it first leaves the rail and then returns (as Bob says, a rare occurrence).

pj
chgo

 

[tucson9ball]

frozen balls

I didn't know this Bob. Thanks for the info.

DoubleA - I believe your TD was right. If a ball is frozen to a rail and you hit another ball into that ball, I think it satisfies the "ball must hit a rail" rule.

This is not correct. As Bob Jewett stated, after the cue ball contacts the object ball, a ball must contact a rail. In this set up, it contacts a ball, not a rail.

 

[DoubleA]

This is not correct. As Bob Jewett stated, after the cue ball contacts the object ball, a ball must contact a rail. In this set up, it contacts a ball, not a rail.

But if the frozen ball is part of the rail that it is frozen to, is driving a ball to it not the same as driving a ball to that rail?

 

[dabarbr]

But if the frozen ball is part of the rail that it is frozen to, is driving a ball to it not the same as driving a ball to that rail?

No. With this logic then if a ball is frozen to a rail and considered to be part of that rail then if another ball is frozen to that ball and it's not touching the rail then it also would be considered as part of the rail. This cannot be.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

if the frozen ball is part of the rail that it is frozen to

What ever gave you the idea that a ball can be a part of the rail?

pj
chgo

Edit: Never mind, I didn't see the above post about the ref making that ruling. Sorry.

 

[wincardona]

Franky, just a little more info for you. The rule is that after the cue ball contacts with a legal object ball, ANY ball on the table must contact a rail to which it was not already frozen. It doesn't have to be the cue ball or the object ball which was struck. Another important point though; In your drawing, you show the cue hitting the one ball. If for example the cue ball stops as you have shown it and the one ball continues on and strikes the two ball, it is still a foul if the two ball was also frozen to the rail. If the two ball is not frozen and the one ball hits it and drives it to the rail, then it is a legal shot.

I believe only if the 2 ball was called frozen before the shot.

 

[Bob Jewett]

But if the frozen ball is part of the rail that it is frozen to, ...

So far as I know, there has never been a rule set with the concept of a ball being part of the rail. Here is the (brief) definition from the World Standardized rules:

The cushions, tops of the rails, pockets and pocket liners are parts of the rails.​