Hitting a moving cue ball (Ruling Question)

Charlie Hustle

Charlie Hustle

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Last night in the finals of a tourney I was hill hill with my opponent. (Bar Box 8 Ball) As hes gets down to shoot his warm up strokes, he either barely touched the ball with his tip, or it rolled off from the weight of his hand. In one quick motion he conintued to shoot and pocketed his ball. It happened so fast I couldnt tell how the cue ball moved, but it def did. I called him out on it, and of course he said he only hit it once. Lets say his tip didnt touch it, but just the weight of his bridge hand made it roll a little bit and he continued to shoot. Whats the ruling on something like this?

Btw, the tourney director said that since he didnt see it, we had to replay the game. I felt bad about not knowing the call and offered my opponent to replay the whole set. (Small race to 2) He wanted none of it and only wanted to play that one game again. He broke dry and I ran the rack for the win. :wink:


Charlie
 
I find it difficult to believe the weight of his bridge on the table would cause the CB to move. I'll bet you do too. It also seems quite suspicious that almost immediately after you saw it move, he hurried to shoot it.

I suppose if the felt were fairly loose, which could happen on a poorly maintained bar table, his bridge hand could have cause the CB to move. I honestly don't know the proper call for this.
 
The tourney director got it wrong, according to WPA rules. In the case of a match that is not being refereed, the call goes to the shooter. He should not have called a replay based on what you've stated.

If the referee had seen it, and the shooter bumped the cue ball while making his warmup strokes, he would have called foul and awarded you BIH. If the ball simply rolled off by itself, which I doubt, he would have replaced it and let the shooter continue to shoot.

That's my ruling.

Brian in VA
 
Could the cloth have been loose and his bridge hand caused it to wrinkle a bit thus moving the cue ball? I'm not even sure how that would be ruled on but I can see it happening.

In any case I am gonna guess this will be considered a foul. Maybe not intentional but still a foul. But I am no expert on the rules.
 
Cdryden said:
Could the cloth have been loose and his bridge hand caused it to wrinkle a bit thus moving the cue ball? I'm not even sure how that would be ruled on but I can see it happening.

In any case I am gonna guess this will be considered a foul. Maybe not intentional but still a foul. But I am no expert on the rules.
Click to expand...

Im leaning more towards this.

If he would have just stopped for a second and told me that the ball just rolled off, I would have said "no problem, continue shooting" but since he rushed so quick to keep shooting, Im pretty sure he knew he did something wrong. I was about 4-5 away watching his every shot.
 
Brian in VA said:
The tourney director got it wrong, according to WPA rules. In the case of a match that is not being refereed, the call goes to the shooter. He should not have called a replay based on what you've stated.

If the referee had seen it, and the shooter bumped the cue ball while making his warmup strokes, he would have called foul and awarded you BIH. If the ball simply rolled off by itself, which I doubt, he would have replaced it and let the shooter continue to shoot.

That's my ruling.

Brian in VA
Click to expand...


This is correct.......
With no referee, the shot always goes to the shooter. No replay.
 
tucson9ball said:
This is correct.......
With no referee, the shot always goes to the shooter. No replay.
Click to expand...

I understand that. But this wasnt a reginal tournament or anything like that, just a small bar box tourney. Hell, the director was probally getting another beer and shot. My questions pertains to the ruling of hitting a moving cue ball like that. Lets say the director was watching, whats the correct call?
 
Always to shooter?

tucson9ball said:
This is correct.......
With no referee, the shot always goes to the shooter. No replay.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm a little slow this morning, but if the call always goes to the shooter (when there's no referee), what's the point in having foul rules at all? If I see someone commit a foul, and I call it, the shooter can simply continue shooting?

I understand that the example here involves a disagreement between the two players, but if the shooter automatically wins every debate, then wouldn't an unscrupulous player simply argue every call and never be wrong?
 
Donny Lutz said:
Maybe I'm a little slow this morning, but if the call always goes to the shooter (when there's no referee), what's the point in having foul rules at all? If I see someone commit a foul, and I call it, the shooter can simply continue shooting?

I understand that the example here involves a disagreement between the two players, but if the shooter automatically wins every debate, then wouldn't an unscrupulous player simply argue every call and never be wrong?
Click to expand...

Well said sir, well said.
 
Donny Lutz said:
Maybe I'm a little slow this morning, but if the call always goes to the shooter (when there's no referee), what's the point in having foul rules at all? If I see someone commit a foul, and I call it, the shooter can simply continue shooting?

I understand that the example here involves a disagreement between the two players, but if the shooter automatically wins every debate, then wouldn't an unscrupulous player simply argue every call and never be wrong?
Click to expand...

I think you've grasped the issue. I don't know for sure but I believe the rule on this was set up to make it more of a "gentleman's game" just like golf where players call penalties on themselves. And they're fine with it because that's the way the game is played.

Fortunately, those unscrupulous types can't argue a miss.

For the record, if I saw a shooter hitting a moving cue ball, I would call a foul as it is one for shooting when balls are still moving (that includes spinning, too.)

Brian in VA
 
Brian in VA said:
I think you've grasped the issue. I don't know for sure but I believe the rule on this was set up to make it more of a "gentleman's game" just like golf where players call penalties on themselves. And they're fine with it because that's the way the game is played.

Fortunately, those unscrupulous types can't argue a miss.

For the record, if I saw a shooter hitting a moving cue ball, I would call a foul as it is one for shooting when balls are still moving (that includes spinning, too.)
Brian in VA
Click to expand...

This is what I was looking for. Thank you
 
Charlie Hustle said:
I understand that. But this wasnt a reginal tournament or anything like that, just a small bar box tourney. Hell, the director was probally getting another beer and shot. My questions pertains to the ruling of hitting a moving cue ball like that. Lets say the director was watching, whats the correct call?
Click to expand...


I understand...
1) Hitting moving cue ball........always a foul. The player should have called the foul on himself/herself.

Let me go into more detail from what I've observed firsthand. I've seen cue balls move on their own, whether it's uneven slate or a bug on the table. I've even seen a flying bug land on a cue ball, the player fans the bug to get rid of it and the ball moved. None of those scenarios would be a foul in my book, as long as the ball wasn't touched.

Unfortunately, I've also witnessed shooters barely touching the cue ball and then shooting just like you described. Unless they call this foul on themself, they get away with it. Sad, but it comes down to scruples(sp.)
 
I think perhaps we should reword this scenario to avoid confusion. Your opponent wasn't hitting a moving ball. He was hitting a stationary ball that re-settled. In my opinion, if he touched the ball or caused it to move deliberately, some sort of penalty should be levied. If, on the other hand, it moved and he wasn't the cause of it (which is what I think happened), play should go on.

The problem is, from certain angles, it could appear like a double-hit. I recently saw something like this happen during a 14.1 match. The shooter hit a ball that re-settled as his cue was about to strike the cue-ball. His opponent thought he double-hit it. I saw everything and chose not to involve myself in the argument which was settled quickly (and correctly, imo).

Unfortunately, these things happen. I think it's important to act in the spirit of the rules. Did he touch the cue ball? If so, it's a foul. If not, play on.
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
I think perhaps we should reword this scenario to avoid confusion. Your opponent wasn't hitting a moving ball. He was hitting a stationary ball that re-settled. In my opinion, if he touched the ball or caused it to move deliberately, some sort of penalty should be levied. If, on the other hand, it moved and he wasn't the cause of it (which is what I think happened), play should go on.

The problem is, from certain angles, it could appear like a double-hit. I recently saw something like this happen during a 14.1 match. The shooter hit a ball that re-settled as his cue was about to strike the cue-ball. His opponent thought he double-hit it. I saw everything and chose not to involve myself in the argument which was settled quickly (and correctly, imo).

Unfortunately, these things happen. I think it's important to act in the spirit of the rules. Did he touch the cue ball? If so, it's a foul. If not, play on.
Click to expand...

Actually, the OP said his opponent shot the CB in 'one continuous motion' - implying that it was shot before settling. The OP later confirmed that he was looking for a ruling on hitting a CB in motion.
 
GeoEnvi said:
Actually, the OP said his opponent shot the CB in 'one continuous motion' - implying that it was shot before settling. The OP later confirmed that he was looking for a ruling on hitting a CB in motion.
Click to expand...

Yes but this wasn't a moving ball. It's not like it was rolling into position and he shot at it. The cueball had stopped. It was motionless. Then, it moved and he hit it. It re-settled.

This is the official WPA rule on re-settled balls:

1.7 Balls Settling
A ball may settle slightly after it appears to have stopped, possibly due to slight imperfections in the ball or the table. Unless this causes a ball to fall into a pocket, it is considered a normal hazard of play, and the ball will not be moved back. If a ball falls into a pocket as the result of such settling, it is restored as closely as possible to its original position. If a settling ball falls into a pocket during or just prior to a shot, and this has an effect on the shot, the referee will restore the position and the shot will be replayed. The shooter is not penalized for shooting while a ball is settling. See also 8.3 Ball Pocketed.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I've seen the CB move all the time on tables with loose cloth, as players slide up their bridge hand.
But what you saw sounded like a typical scrub/bar move... the guy tapped it, he knew he tapped it, so he immediately slammed it. I dunno what the mindset here...

"if I shoot right away he won't notice the tap"? ...obviously once the tap is noticed, no future action can make it "un-noticed". If anything it draws attention to the foul.

"if I get the shot off before he calls the foul, it's not a foul"? ...that's not how it works.

Unfortunately there has to be some way to resolve "he said she said" situations without resorting to some kind of endless filibuster between the players. So we have "it always goes to the shooter".

I remember an APA LO responding in a thread about players intentionally fouling.

He said something like...

"A lot of guys will ask me about a rule and I explain it, and they immediately come back with 'well can't you just do this'? Like they found a loophole that lets them cheat and nobody can do anything about it. But I explain to them that if they try to exploit the rules and cheat, people will report them and I can have them removed from the tournament/league."

That was the thrust of it. So can the shooter exploit the 'always goes to the shooter' rule? Maybe once. But if he develops a reputation for it he may find he's out the door.
 
I have had a OB move all by itself ,,I was just about to shoot it,,and it moved. It's weird thing to witness first hand ,in that position. For such a tiny movement it sure does get your attention and makes you want to react.
I have seen balls move/settle many times. But never while in stroke.

The guy who shot this probably tried to stop but could not ,,,one goes into a mini convulsion,,lol,,,and it is enough to make you loose focus and control of the cue. Similar to when you do touch the cue accidentally while in stroke.

This has got to be one of the rarest things to happen on a table. But I don't think it's a foul.

Maybe pat him on the back and tell him what bad luck he had, to be in stroke while thew ball decided to move.
 
CreeDo said:
I've seen the CB move all the time on tables with loose cloth, as players slide up their bridge hand.
But what you saw sounded like a typical scrub/bar move... the guy tapped it, he knew he tapped it, so he immediately slammed it. I dunno what the mindset here...

"if I shoot right away he won't notice the tap"? ...obviously once the tap is noticed, no future action can make it "un-noticed". If anything it draws attention to the foul.

"if I get the shot off before he calls the foul, it's not a foul"? ...that's not how it works.

Unfortunately there has to be some way to resolve "he said she said" situations without resorting to some kind of endless filibuster between the players. So we have "it always goes to the shooter".

I remember an APA LO responding in a thread about players intentionally fouling.

He said something like...

"A lot of guys will ask me about a rule and I explain it, and they immediately come back with 'well can't you just do this'? Like they found a loophole that lets them cheat and nobody can do anything about it. But I explain to them that if they try to exploit the rules and cheat, people will report them and I can have them removed from the tournament/league."

That was the thrust of it. So can the shooter exploit the 'always goes to the shooter' rule? Maybe once. But if he develops a reputation for it he may find he's out the door.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of a time in a state tournament. When a guy I was playing was locked up,,and didn't have a shot ,,none at all. So he just tapped the cue a inch or so and looked at me.
I walked up and grabbed the ball,,,since it was obviously BIH. He had a shit grin on his face as I walked up ,,but immediately started crying foul!!!

Since I didn't ask if it was BIH,,got the ref over and sure enough,,he now had BIH!!! It was a trick on his part. This was a team event,,we won that match.

Later in the tournament we heard a bunch yelling from another table. I look over and guess who was getting yelled at??

I go over and ask if he did the BIH thing?? lol And yep,,he did it again to someone else. I told them all that he also did it to me less that a hour ago.

There was some more yelling and almost a fight,,,the guys teammates,,were just as pissed at him as anyone was.

I think??? the guy learned to not bend the silly shit rules to gain a edge!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top