Is there a rule....

J

Jagr Fan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Regardless of the game (8-ball, 9-ball, 10-ball, et. al.), is there a rule that covers this situation.
An object ball is tucked tightly into the pocket shelf. The player attempts to hit the point of the cushion
and the ball at the same time. The cue ball hits the point, but misses the object ball entirely. But, as the
cue ball travels around the table without hitting another object ball, the ball in the pocket shelf falls.
Is the shooter credited with pocketing the ball...does it get spotted...does it replaced in the pocket...??
What is the rule for this unique situation (or is there such a rule...)??
 
It fell as a result of the shot. If it fell while he shot something else, it would stay down. Conveniently enough for him, that would qualify as a legal shot.

If it fell while nothing was moving, it would typically be replaced (depending on rule set)
 
Jagr Fan said:
Regardless of the game (8-ball, 9-ball, 10-ball, et. al.), is there a rule that covers this situation.
An object ball is tucked tightly into the pocket shelf. The player attempts to hit the point of the cushion
and the ball at the same time. The cue ball hits the point, but misses the object ball entirely. But, as the
cue ball travels around the table without hitting another object ball, the ball in the pocket shelf falls.
Is the shooter credited with pocketing the ball...does it get spotted...does it replaced in the pocket...??
What is the rule for this unique situation (or is there such a rule...)??
Click to expand...
I would say if the cue ball is still moving and the object ball deep in the pocket falls, it would be still counted as a pocketed ball, even if it’s hard to prove whether the cue ball made any contact with that object ball the first time by. Once the cue ball was to stop rolling, then after roughly 5 seconds if it the object ball falls, then that object ball would be placed back in the pocket where it was.
 
Jagr Fan said:
Regardless of the game (8-ball, 9-ball, 10-ball, et. al.), is there a rule that covers this situation.
An object ball is tucked tightly into the pocket shelf. The player attempts to hit the point of the cushion
and the ball at the same time. The cue ball hits the point, but misses the object ball entirely. But, as the
cue ball travels around the table without hitting another object ball, the ball in the pocket shelf falls.
Is the shooter credited with pocketing the ball...does it get spotted...does it replaced in the pocket...??
What is the rule for this unique situation (or is there such a rule...)??
Click to expand...
Yes there is a rule that covers that. If the object ball was clearly not struck, it does not count and is replaced. That's true whether it was the intended ball and the cue ball came close to it or if it was in a distant pocket and happened to fall although untouched.

If it is not clear whether the cue ball grazed the object ball, then there is a problem. The rule that sort of applies is the one that says, in effect, if the legitimacy of a shot cannot be determined (such as fair/foul hit on a close hit), it is assumed the shot was legal. I suppose it will be a good opportunity for the ref to give a creative interpretation.

Another rare case, which I've never seen, is if the ball is hanging and starts to move just before the cue ball arrives and the cue ball hits it. The cue ball might do some strange things as a result, such as on a power draw shot where the OB is partly down the pocket.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Yes there is a rule that covers that. If the object ball was clearly not struck, it does not count and is replaced. That's true whether it was the intended ball and the cue ball came close to it or if it was in a distant pocket and happened to fall although untouched.

If it is not clear whether the cue ball grazed the object ball, then there is a problem. The rule that sort of applies is the one that says, in effect, if the legitimacy of a shot cannot be determined (such as fair/foul hit on a close hit), it is assumed the shot was legal. I suppose it will be a good opportunity for the ref to give a creative interpretation.

Another rare case, which I've never seen, is if the ball is hanging and starts to move just before the cue ball arrives and the cue ball hits it. The cue ball might do some strange things as a result, such as on a power draw shot where the OB is partly down the pocket.
Click to expand...

The problem is who determines clearly not struck? That's why every major rule set talks about "results of the shot"
 
ideologist said:
The problem is who determines clearly not struck? That's why every major rule set talks about "results of the shot"
Click to expand...

I would assume everyone could determine it did not hit since the post said "the ball misses the object ball". If it's hanging so close as to fall due to table vibrations there is no way that it could have possibly not have fallen if it was touched at all, I would feel very very safe as a ref to make that call even if I was not there and the players were arguing about it. Simple logic wins, if it takes a hair dropping on the ball to make it fall, there is really no way you can possibly contact the ball so thin to have it not drop in the first place, therefore no touch. If the ball falls on it's own (that includes any outside vibrations or movement of the cloth) it gets replaced.

Now if the player banged into the point and the ball fell at the same instant then that may be a tougher call to make if it fell due to the rail contact or due to hit of the ball, if the ball fell once the cueball was away from it for even a split second I would call no hit. We also have cell phone cameras, a good idea to record these things to check if the call can be this close.
 
ideologist said:
The problem is who determines clearly not struck? That's why every major rule set talks about "results of the shot"
Click to expand...
They also say, if the ball falls on its own, it is put back. Someone has to figure out whether it was struck. As for who will determine things, the players need to figure that out together if there is no referee.
 
hang-the-9 said:
I would assume everyone could determine it did not hit since the post said "the ball misses the object ball". If it's hanging so close as to fall due to table vibrations there is no way that it could have possibly not have fallen if it was touched at all, I would feel very very safe as a ref to make that call even if I was not there and the players were arguing about it. Simple logic wins, if it takes a hair dropping on the ball to make it fall, there is really no way you can possibly contact the ball so thin to have it not drop in the first place, therefore no touch. If the ball falls on it's own (that includes any outside vibrations or movement of the cloth) it gets replaced.

Now if the player banged into the point and the ball fell at the same instant then that may be a tougher call to make if it fell due to the rail contact or due to hit of the ball, if the ball fell once the cueball was away from it for even a split second I would call no hit. We also have cell phone cameras, a good idea to record these things to check if the call can be this close.
Click to expand...
I think most of us have seen a cue ball roll past an object ball and feather it so lightly that you really have to be paying close attention to notice the object ball waiver, even if it doesn’t change position.
 
"...misses the object ball entirely. But, as the
cue ball travels around the table without hitting another object ball,..."

Foul.
 
ChrisinNC said:
I think most of us have seen a cue ball roll past an object ball and feather it so lightly that you really have to be paying close attention to notice the object ball waiver, even if it doesn’t change position.
Click to expand...

So then the same rule would have to apply, if you did not see the other thin hit it can be called a non-hit as well. However a ball hanging even a small nudge may be enough to know if it fell and when it fell. If you do this shot and the ball does not drop till the cueball traveled past the rail, it's impossible for it to have fallen due to the ball hitting it. It's not like the coyote falling off a cliff after 10 seconds in the air. Cueball hits the hanging ball, it falls in instantly, not cueball hits the ball, goes 3 rails then the ball drops. If the ball drops as the cueball is traveling it's not from the contact.

And again in the question it is stated the ball did not contact the other not that it was the contact they were arguing about. That is a separate rule and one I would still have to say "no contact" if the ball did not fall the instant the cueball went past where the ball was.
 
hang-the-9 said:
So then the same rule would have to apply, if you did not see the other thin hit it can be called a non-hit as well. However a ball hanging even a small nudge may be enough to know if it fell and when it fell. If you do this shot and the ball does not drop till the cueball traveled past the rail, it's impossible for it to have fallen due to the ball hitting it. It's not like the coyote falling off a cliff after 10 seconds in the air. Cueball hits the hanging ball, it falls in instantly, not cueball hits the ball, goes 3 rails then the ball drops. If the ball drops as the cueball is traveling it's not from the contact.

And again in the question it is stated the ball did not contact the other not that it was the contact they were arguing about. That is a separate rule and one I would still have to say "no contact" if the ball did not fall the instant the cueball went past where the ball was.
Click to expand...

That would be an exciting zoom in to see during a live billiard match. very dramatic situation. the moments before falling into the black hole. I just wanted to add that I as important as how the hit is happening is the science to document it. Which is why having more dynamic film on pool actions during a match takes planning for pre mounted cheap cameras, operated with computers.

Is it worth the trouble to set up though? For myself I enjoy home made videos often.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Yes there is a rule that covers that. If the object ball was clearly not struck, it does not count and is replaced. That's true whether it was the intended ball and the cue ball came close to it or if it was in a distant pocket and happened to fall although untouched.

If it is not clear whether the cue ball grazed the object ball, then there is a problem. The rule that sort of applies is the one that says, in effect, if the legitimacy of a shot cannot be determined (such as fair/foul hit on a close hit), it is assumed the shot was legal. I suppose it will be a good opportunity for the ref to give a creative interpretation.

Another rare case, which I've never seen, is if the ball is hanging and starts to move just before the cue ball arrives and the cue ball hits it. The cue ball might do some strange things as a result, such as on a power draw shot where the OB is partly down the pocket.
Click to expand...
Correct. Thank you Bob.
 
In CSI/BCAPL/USAPL play the OP situation is specifically covered in CSI Applied Ruling 1-49-1 Situation 1, diagram included. The ball is treated the same as any other hanging ball that falls during a shot.

Therefore, by rule, the ball is not legally pocketed, and based on the circumstances of the shot, either the shot will be replayed after restoration or there will be a re-rack. It is not a foul in and of itself, but the shot could still be a foul because of other circumstances.

It seems complicated, but the intent of the rule when written was that, assuming it was agreed the CB did not contact the hanging ball, that neither the players nor the referee should be forced to guess what caused the ball to fall. Also, if you accept that there was no CB contact, then there is no compelling reason to treat the hanging ball differently than any other hanging ball simply because it is in contact with the cushion.

Buddy
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top