Legal Safety When The Cue Ball Is Frozen To The Object Ball

[Racky BallBoa]

I was playing a game of 8 Ball the other day and a situation came up where the cue ball was frozen (definitely touching) the object ball with little or no chance of pocketing the frozen object ball so a safety was declared. So, my partner stroked the cue ball into the nearest cushion, however, the frozen object ball did not move at all, not even a slight rock. The opposing team felt that it was a foul because the frozen object ball did not move. We felt that the shot met all the requirements for a legal safe, that is, it was already in contact with the object ball and then made contact with a cushion. What is your opinion? Could you please provide me with some a reference to some definitive rule or youtube video? I searched and could not find anything definitive. Perhaps its one of those rules that varies from place to place.

 

[BRussell]

In all pool rules I've ever seen, it has to move the ball. (Snooker may be different.) Here's the World pool-billiard association rules:

6.7 Double Hit / Frozen Balls

If the cue stick contacts the cue ball more than once on a shot, the shot is a foul. If the cue ball
is close to but not touching an object ball and the cue tip is still on the cue ball when the cue
ball contacts that object ball, the shot is a foul. If the cue ball is very close to an object ball,
and the shooter barely grazes that object ball on the shot, the shot is assumed not to violate the
first paragraph of this rule, even though the tip is arguably still on the cue ball when ball-ball
contact is made.

However, if the cue ball is touching an object ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot
towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if
the object ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue ball.
(Even though it may be legal to shoot towards such a touching or “frozen” ball, care must be
taken not to violate the rules in the first paragraph if there are additional balls close by.)

The cue ball is assumed not to be touching any ball unless it is declared touching by the
referee or opponent. It is the shooter’s responsibility to get the declaration before the shot.
Playing away from a frozen ball does not constitute having hit that ball unless specified in the
rules of the game.

 

[Benward452]

I know in Snooker you can shoot away from a frozen ball and it be a legal shot, but this is not the case in pocket billiards games (8, 9, 14.1, 1-pkt, etc.).

The ball needs to move in those games.

In most rule sets you can also stroke directly into the frozen ball even if it might technically be a double hit.

 

[ChrisinNC]

I was playing a game of 8 Ball the other day and a situation came up where the cue ball was frozen (definitely touching) the object ball with little or no chance of pocketing the frozen object ball so a safety was declared. So, my partner stroked the cue ball into the nearest cushion, however, the frozen object ball did not move at all, not even a slight rock. The opposing team felt that it was a foul because the frozen object ball did not move. We felt that the shot met all the requirements for a legal safe, that is, it was already in contact with the object ball and then made contact with a cushion. What is your opinion? Could you please provide me with some a reference to some definitive rule or youtube video? I searched and could not find anything definitive. Perhaps its one of those rules that varies from place to place.

Just because CB is frozen to the OB, doesn't mean driving the CB to the rail automatically constitutes a legal shot. For the shot/safety to be considered legal, the angle in which you shoot the CB towards a rail must be at an angle that, at the very least, feathers the OB enough to make it oscillate, even if it doesn't move the OB to a different spot.

 

[Celophanewrap]

My thought would be, or the way I'd interpret the rule is that the action of shooting or the
act of the shot wouldn't actually begin until the cue ball is struck from it's present
position. Simply pushing the cue ball to a rail without it making contact with an object
ball AFTER the cue ball is struck doesn't meet the criteria of a legal shot. Your cue
must strike the cue ball for the shot to begin. Pushing the cue ball away from the object
ball does not create contact with that object ball, striking the cue ball at a perpendicular
angle or a semi perpendicular angle would create contact with that object ball after the
shot begins even though that contact would be only milliseconds, it causes the object ball
to move indicating contact and thus - a legal shot (so long as something makes contact
with a rail, of course). I believe your partner committed a foul

 

[garczar]

Just because CB is frozen to the OB, doesn't mean driving the CB to the rail automatically constitutes a legal shot. For the shot/safety to be considered legal, the angle in which you shoot the CB towards a rail must be at an angle that, at the very least, feathers the OB enough to make it at oscillate, even if it doesn't move the OB to a different spot.

Oscillate's the word here. OB has to at least oscillate in some way. In my area if you're dead-froze you can shoot straight thru it with no foul. Also,if cue-ball is one chalk-cube(or closer) without touching object ball then you have to elevate or shoot at an angle. These rules can vary from spot-to-spot.

 

[hang-the-9]

Oscillate's the word here. OB has to at least oscillate in some way. In my area if you're dead-froze you can shoot straight thru it with no foul. Also,if cue-ball is one chalk-cube(or closer) without touching object ball then you have to elevate or shoot at an angle. These rules can vary from spot-to-spot.

That whole "elevate or it's a foul" thing is a horrible rule, just because you raised the butt of the cue like a masse does not mean that you did not still foul. It's a rule that states "as long as you look like you are trying to avoid the foul, it's not a foul", which is clearly not true. It's like telling the judge "but I was trying not to shoot him in the head, just the toe" "Well son, I guess as long as you tried it's OK, 4 weeks for attempted toe shooting". I see people elevate and then push the the cueball like crazy anyway, instead of getting the draw that a good hit does, the cueball follows the object ball for several feet before it goes back.

 

[BRussell]

That whole "elevate or it's a foul" thing is a horrible rule, just because you raised the butt of the cue like a masse does not mean that you did not still foul. It's a rule that states "as long as you look like you are trying to avoid the foul, it's not a foul", which is clearly not true. It's like telling the judge "but I was trying not to shoot him in the head, just the toe" "Well son, I guess as long as you tried it's OK, 4 weeks for attempted toe shooting". I see people elevate and then push the the cueball like crazy anyway, instead of getting the draw that a good hit does, the cueball follows the object ball for several feet before it goes back.

Yeah that's such a dumb rule, and thankfully seems to be disappearing. And it's really easy to tell a push from a good hit. The few moments it takes to explain and show the difference between a push and a good hit barely takes any longer than telling people to elevate.

 

[Bob Jewett]

If the touching object ball moves even though the cue ball is shot away from that ball, it does not count as a hit. Sometimes the object ball will move because it loses the support of the cue ball. This is more likely in the rack area where there are lots of craters.

In order for the hit to count, you have to shoot somewhat towards the object ball, the dividing line being their common tangent.

 

[Cornerman]

In all pool rules I've ever seen, it has to move the ball. (Snooker may be different.) Here's the World pool-billiard association rules:

Just one more paragraph down answers the OP explicitly:

From Rule 6.7

“Playing away from a frozen ball does not constitute having hit that ball unless specified in the
rules of the game.”

Only in snooker does this count. None of the rules of American Pool consider “shooting away” as legal.


Freddie

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Only in snooker does this count. None of the rules of American Pool consider “shooting away” as legal. ...

Shooting away is also required and legal at blackball the rules for which are at the end of the WSR.

 

[BRussell]

Just one more paragraph down answers the OP explicitly:

From Rule 6.7

“Playing away from a frozen ball does not constitute having hit that ball unless specified in the
rules of the game.”

Only in snooker does this count. None of the rules of American Pool consider “shooting away” as legal.


Freddie

Yeah somehow I bolded the wrong part.