Idiotic Frozen Ball Rule

T

TheBook

Ret Professional Goof Off
Silver Member
Last night a friend of mine showed me a shot and said that he learned something during their 8 ball league. The CB was frozen against the opponent's ball. The shooter was told by my friend's team mate that the ball was frozen. The player said thank you and shot the cue ball away at a 60 degree angle in the opposite direction of the object ball (his ball) and tried to hide the CB behind the 8 ball. It did hit a rail. The object ball did not move because the CB was shot in the opposite direction, away from it. The LO said it was legal because the balls were touching and therefore it was legal.

I told him that rule is BS because it would give instant ball in hand if the CB were frozen to the 8 ball or any other group of balls that did not belong to the shooter. According to that rule it would be impossible to hit your ball first. As soon as you shot the CB would be hitting that ball first.

I told him when he plays against the LO to freeze the CB up against his group or the 8 ball and them show him how idiotic that ruling was.

Thoughts on this?

I figured out how to use the WEI table and put it in post #12
 
Last edited:
This rule

TheBook said:
Last night a friend of mine showed me a shot and said that he learned something during their 8 ball league. The CB was frozen against the opponent's ball. The shooter was told by my friend's team mate that the ball was frozen. The player said thank you and shot the cue ball away at a 60 degree angle in the opposite direction of the object ball (his ball) and tried to hide the CB behind the 8 ball. It did hit a rail. The object ball did not move because the CB was shot in the opposite direction, away from it. The LO said it was legal because the balls were touching and therefore it was legal.

I told him that rule is BS because it would give instant ball in hand if the CB were frozen to the 8 ball or any other group of balls that did not belong to the shooter. According to that rule it would be impossible to hit your ball first. As soon as you shot the CB would be hitting that ball first.

I told him when he plays against the LO to freeze the CB up against his group or the 8 ball and them show him how idiotic that ruling was.

Thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

We have run into something similar in Vegas. My tema mate was shooting away from an opponents ball an the ball rocked when the cue ball moved away, like it rolled into a divit. No contact was made with the ball, and my buddy made a good hit on his ball. Ref called a foul. It's totally rediculous. Now, I can understand if you move the ball, even with your cue, it being a foul.
In the story you describe, it seems someone has read something into the rules, that ain't there. It was absolutely a foul. The object ball must move, whether it's frozen or not. If it rocked and rolled back, it's a good hit. Doubt he will convince the LO of it tho. They tend to believe what they want until someone besides a player tells them different, and then it's usually a battle.
 
i think its a foul. same situation as a frozen rail. have to get another rail... have to get another ball.... same thing
 
L.O. injected a snooker rule into the game of pool

TheBook said:
Last night a friend of mine showed me a shot and said that he learned something during their 8 ball league. The CB was frozen against the opponent's ball. The shooter was told by my friend's team mate that the ball was frozen. The player said thank you and shot the cue ball away at a 60 degree angle in the opposite direction of the object ball (his ball) and tried to hide the CB behind the 8 ball. It did hit a rail. The object ball did not move because the CB was shot in the opposite direction, away from it. The LO said it was legal because the balls were touching and therefore it was legal.

I told him that rule is BS because it would give instant ball in hand if the CB were frozen to the 8 ball or any other group of balls that did not belong to the shooter. According to that rule it would be impossible to hit your ball first. As soon as you shot the CB would be hitting that ball first.

I told him when he plays against the LO to freeze the CB up against his group or the 8 ball and them show him how idiotic that ruling was.

Thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

TheBook:

This is a rule swiped from the game of snooker. There is a rule in snooker that says if the cue ball is declared "frozen" against an object ball, "contact with that ball has already been made." Therefore it's legal to shoot away from the ball, providing one doesn't foul in the process (e.g. by contacting the object ball with either his/her bridge hand, hair, cue tip / ferrule, etc. when shooting over the object ball).

In snooker, one will see players playing safeties by merely rolling the cue ball up onto an object ball to make contact, without contacting a cushion/rail (contacting a rail/cushion is not necessary in the game of snooker). Then, if the ref declares the cue ball "frozen" against the object ball, the shooter can then just shoot the cue ball away from the object ball, because "contact has already been made."

I think your L.O. must've been playing too much Golf on a snooker table or something, because he/she is injecting a SNOOKER RULE into the game of pool. The shot you describe is most definitely a FOUL in pool.

Hope this is helpful!
-Sean
 
Taken from the BCA rulebook.

1.30 Double Hit
1. It is a foul if your cue tip strikes the cue ball more than once on the same stroke.
2. It is a foul if your cue tip is still in contact with the cue ball when the cue ball strikes an object ball. However, such a stroke may be considered legal if the object ball is legal and cue ball strikes it at a very fine angle. The referee is the sole judge of whether or not the angle taken results in a legal shot. The referee may not advise you concerning the angle taken for the shot.

What I'm taking away from this is that once your angle is greater than or equal to 90 degrees (i.e. doesn't cause the frozen object ball to move) it would be a foul. That LO's rule is indeed stupid :p
 
satman said:
We have run into something similar in Vegas. My tema mate was shooting away from an opponents ball an the ball rocked when the cue ball moved away, like it rolled into a divit. No contact was made with the ball, and my buddy made a good hit on his ball. Ref called a foul. It's totally rediculous. Now, I can understand if you move the ball, even with your cue, it being a foul.
Click to expand...

Sam,

Play from time to time on the Joss Tour here in the Northeast. We play all ball fouls. Years ago, we played in a room with poorly maintained tables and loose cloth. I addressed the cue ball and the cloth rolled up slightly behind the cue ball and it moved! Without being struck by the tip. My opponent called foul and Mike Zuglan agreed. The ball moved regardless.

In this instance, it was impossible for the shooter to make a good hit. None of his group of ball was struck legally. Cue ball to his opponent. League operator obviously is not a pool player.

Lyn
 
every league has a rule about touching an object ball while placing ball in hand. thats a foul. if you drop the cueball while placing ball in hand its a foul
 
TheBook said:
Last night a friend of mine showed me a shot and said that he learned something during their 8 ball league. The CB was frozen against the opponent's ball. The shooter was told by my friend's team mate that the ball was frozen. The player said thank you and shot the cue ball away at a 60 degree angle in the opposite direction of the object ball (his ball) and tried to hide the CB behind the 8 ball. It did hit a rail. The object ball did not move because the CB was shot in the opposite direction, away from it. The LO said it was legal because the balls were touching and therefore it was legal.

I told him that rule is BS because it would give instant ball in hand if the CB were frozen to the 8 ball or any other group of balls that did not belong to the shooter. According to that rule it would be impossible to hit your ball first. As soon as you shot the CB would be hitting that ball first.

I told him when he plays against the LO to freeze the CB up against his group or the 8 ball and them show him how idiotic that ruling was.

Thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

When you combine stupidity, lack of knowlege alcohol and egos around a pool room, situations like this happen ALL the time...
 
In snooker, the "touching ball" rule only applies when the ball could be legally played if it wasn't touching. So applying it to 8-ball, if you were frozen to the opponent's group or the 8 then the rule wouldn't apply anyway.
Sadly, pool doesn't have this rule. It would remove a lot of confusion and arguments.
Dr Dave has some videos all about the frozen ball rules, which are extremely helpful - but wouldn't it be better to not have the issues at all?
 

CueTable Help



This is basically what the shot consisted of. The CB is frozen to the shooter's ball. He has solids. He shot totally away from his ball. As I stated according to those rules if the CB is frozen to the 8 or the other player's group it would result in instant ball in hand.
 
Last edited:
TheBook said:
[...CueTable snip...]

This is basically what the shot consisted of. The CB is frozen to the shooter's ball. He has solids. He shot totaly away from his ball. As I stated according to those rules if the CB is frozen to the 8 or the other player's group it would result in instant ball in hand.
Click to expand...

TheBook:

That looks to me exactly like what I'd mentioned in an earlier post (post #6) -- that the shooter (and/or the L.O.) injected a snooker rule into pool. The shot you diagram is commonly done in snooker, and as timseal mentions (in post #11), during certain particular situations.

You are correct -- to take the spirit of that grossly-misinterjected rule to its logical conclusion, if that cue ball were declared frozen against the opponent's category of balls, or the 8-ball itself, as soon as the shooter shot the cue ball away from the opponent's ball or 8-ball, he/she would INSTANTLY be relinquishing ball-in-hand to the opponent, because, as is the spirit of the snooker rule from whence it apparently came, "contact with that offending ball was already in progress."

Silly, short-sighted, uninformed, and opportunistic on the part of the shooter and/or L.O. :mad:

-Sean
 
This is one reason why I don't play league...... Everyone is an expert about the "rules". The stories are endless especially regarding double hits....


As sfleinen said earlier this is a snooker rule not a 8 ball rule. In no possible way shooting away from the 5 can it be a good hit as shown in your wei post. In pocket billiards unless the five visibly moves it has not been contacted by the cue ball.

Dudley
 
Last edited:
dave sutton said:
every league has a rule about touching an object ball while placing ball in hand. thats a foul. if you drop the cueball while placing ball in hand its a foul
Click to expand...

"if you drop the cueball while placing ball in hand its a foul"

HUH? randyg
 
Someone hacked randyg's AZB account!

randyg said:
HUH? randyg
Click to expand...

Whoa! We have an imposter here -- that can't be the real randyg, because everyone knows the real randyg signs-off with "SPF=randyg". Calling the Impersonation Police!!

:D

j/k,
-Sean
 
Dudley said:
As sflein said earlier this is a snooker rule not a 8 ball rule. In no possible way shooting away from the 5 can it be a good hit as shown in your wei post.
Click to expand...

No, this is not a snooker rule - this is a mistaken, incomplete reading of a snooker rule. Shooting away from the 5 is always OK. It would indeed be a stupid rule, but it only exists to prevent fouling with a push shot.
 
A Mike Page video clarifying double hits, frozen balls, & true push shots

timseal said:
No, this is not a snooker rule - this is a mistaken, incomplete reading of a snooker rule. Shooting away from the 5 is always OK. It would indeed be a stupid rule, but it only exists to prevent fouling with a push shot.
Click to expand...

timseal:

Great post! I agree 100% it's a completely mistaken, incomplete reading of, and most of all, opportunistically applied interpretation of a snooker rule.

"Shooting away from the 5 is always OK" if one is willing to give the opponent ball in hand, because in pool, no legal contact with 5 has been made. However the issue of preventing fouling with push shots, in pool, is at best a controversial one. Some league rules stipulate that, when the cue ball is declared frozen to the object ball (assuming it's the shooter's category of balls -- stripes or solids), one must jack-up the cue to at least a 45-degree angle, and after the stroke is applied, the cue ball must not cross into the area formerly occupied by the object ball. Some other leagues stipulate that if the cue ball is declared (and agreed upon by both teams) to be "frozen" to the shooter's object ball, it is legal to stroke through the cue ball with a normal stroke.

Mike Page has an excellent video describing the differences between frozen ball combinations, double hits, and why a true "push stroke" is EXTREMELY RARE. Here's the video:

"Double hits, frozen balls & push shots"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rip8xwobksc

EDIT: at about 6:47 in the video, is Mike's demonstration of a true (and rare!) "push shot."

Hope this is helpful,
-Sean
 
Last edited:
timseal said:
No, this is not a snooker rule - this is a mistaken, incomplete reading of a snooker rule. Shooting away from the 5 is always OK. It would indeed be a stupid rule, but it only exists to prevent fouling with a push shot.
Click to expand...

In snooker the rules are different than in 8-ball or 9-ball. You aren't allowed to shoot through a frozen ball in the same fashion as pocket billiards. I agree that this call by the LO was completely ridiculous.

This is probably where the idiocy came from.

Touching Ball: If the cue ball is touching another ball which is, or can be, on, the referee or player shall state "Touching Ball." Thereafter the striker must play away from it or it is a push stroke (foul). No penalty is incurred for thus playing away if (1) the ball is not on; the ball is on and the striker nominates such ball; or (3) the ball is on and the striker nominates, and first hits, another ball. [If the referee considers that a touching ball has moved through an agency other than the player, it is not a foul.]

http://www.titansports.co.uk/rules/snooker.htm

Dudley
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top