MISCUES...Should they be a foul???

M

Mr. J

Jeff Jimenez
Silver Member
Something to think about and discuss here. I have miscued many times over the years and most likely all of us have here and there...

That unmistakable "CLINK, CHINK, TINK" Sound that happens...

I believe that the Ferrul has just made contact with the Cue ball and therefore a double hit has occured...

You many times do contact your intended ball and it either goes in or gets to a rail.

However, as we all know, most of the time this happening is not ruled as a foul and things are just so to speak "let go" for the moment and it is now the next players turn as the balls lay on the table...

What do you guys think?

Should a Miscue be a foul?

Thanks for your input...

Mr. J.
 
Last edited:
foul in my opinion.....a miscue normally occurs because we've put a bad stroke on the cb....its a mistake on our part.many people i know just let it go though....seems to be the done thing.
not sure i'd like to lose money on it happening though........:rolleyes:
 
This has been debated a lot over the years. FYI, I have a fairly good summary of all of the factors, along with video demonstrations and other resources, here:

I've always thought miscues should be fouls, but I can see the other side of the argument also (e.g., judging "partial" miscues).

Check it out,
Dave

Mr. J said:
Something to think about and discuss here. I have miscued many times over the years and most likely all of us have here and there...

That unmistakable "CLINK, CHINK, TINK" Sound that happens...

I believe that the Ferrul has just make contact with the Cue ball and therefore a double hit has occured...

However, as we all know, most of the time this happening is not ruled as a foul and things are just so to speak "let go" for the moment and it is now the next players turn as the balls lay on the table...

What do you guys think?

Should a Miscue be a foul?

Thanks for your input...

Mr. J.
Click to expand...
 
When I first came to Japan, 20 years ago, it was a foul to miscue. That changed about 10-12 years ago to not being a foul. Personally, I have no problem with it being a foul.

Another rule they have here, which hasn't changed yet, is no push out after the break. Personally, no problem with that rule either. Sure, it sucks to break and have to kick or jump at a ball but on the other side of that, I don't think I should be left with a purposeful tough shot after the other guys poor break. 2 sides to that coin though so I could really go either way. If the rule changed, I'd use it. I'm perfectly content the way it is though.

Oh, one more, if the cue ball and object ball are closer than the chalk cubes width then you can call "push" and shoot straight into it and not get a foul for a double hit. Not too fond of that one.
MULLY
 
Personally I have no real problem with it, but IMHO a better rule may be to give your opponent the choice of shooting or passing back to you.
 
Yes a miscue can actually be a foul by hitting the CB more than once, BUT.

If it is deemed that all miscues are fouls which is mostly noted by sound it opens up a big can of worms.

I have played with guys who sound like they miscue every other shot. They might have a hard tip or something about the cuestick that makes a miscue like sound. So now what ?

See what I mean ? Hard to go that route where all miscues are fouls.

I really do not know the official word on it, thats just mho.:cool:
 
No. A miscue is generally a total accident whether induced by neglecting your tip, a bad spot on a ball, or whatever. A lot of miscues create fouls and I think that is punishment enough.
 
I was shooting with a house cue last night at a local bar and a miscued several times- a few at critical moments of the game.

Almost all of my miscues result from attempting draw shots. I'm not sure if my draw stroke is just subpar or if the tips on the house cues I use are just terrible.

I have my own cue, but I need a new one because the back weighting is broken. I think I'm going to get a new cue this week.

To answer the question of this thread- no, I don't think miscues should be a foul because not all miscues actually involve double hits. It would be too difficult to determine which is a foul and which is not
 
Mr. J said:
... Should a Miscue be a foul? ...
Click to expand...
Intentional miscues are fouls and are treated as unsportsmanlike conduct. The present rule is here.

Some miscues do not result in contact of the side of the shaft with the cue ball.

So far as I know, no official rule set in any form of cue sports has ever played the typical miscue as a foul. (Whether the Japanese rule mentioned above was an official rule is not clear. It was not a WPA rule.)

The earliest direct mention of miscues in the rules that I could find is in the 1945 rule book of the Billiard Association of America (forerunner of the BCA), which said: "Miscue: Miscues are not fouls. (Referee will determine if any other infraction of the rules was involved.)"

I think making all miscues fouls would produce some very interesting league nights.
 
Double hits - where the tip is hitting twice - can be used to unfair advantage to get position, and so should be fouls. There is no advantage to be gained with a miscue, none that I can think of, anyway. So I see no need to change the accepted practice and start calling miscues fouls that wouldn't otherwise be fouls.
 
Most tournaments and action

Underclocked said:
No. A miscue is generally a total accident whether induced by neglecting your tip, a bad spot on a ball, or whatever. A lot of miscues create fouls and I think that is punishment enough.
Click to expand...

If you miscue and the ball goes past the headstring, break line. Then it is a FOUL. Gentlemens game, NO.
 
markpatrick said:
If you miscue and the ball goes past the headstring, break line. Then it is a FOUL. ...
Click to expand...
Sure, but that's the same as if you had just nudged the cue ball across the line on a warm-up. It's a foul because you did not drive 4 balls to a cushion on the break shot, not because it was a miscue.
 
So far as I know, no official rule set in any form of cue sports has ever played the typical miscue as a foul. (Whether the Japanese rule mentioned above was an official rule is not clear.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was official rule for amateur tournaments. Same goes with the push out after the break. It's allowed in pro tournaments but not in amateur. Go figure.
MULLY
 
markpatrick said:
If you miscue and the ball goes past the headstring, break line. Then it is a FOUL. Gentlemens game, NO.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, you didn't make a legal break, that's why it's a foul. Same as if you miscue and don't hit the lowest numbered ball on the table, it's a foul, but not because of the miscue. What we're talking about here is when, for example, someone is shooting the one ball, miscues, but still makes contact with the lowest numbered ball and gets a rail. Should the miscue be a foul?
MULLY
 
What I don't understand is why it's OK to miscue (either a double hit / double-hit with ferrule contact) by accident but it's not OK to double-hit otherwise. I'm pretty sure 100% of all miscues result in some kind of double hit - and isn't a double-hit a foul?

This has definitely been debated to death. However, I think the rules per se talk out of "both sides of its mouth." On one side you can't double-hit, you can't have ferrule contact, etc, and on the other you can if it was by accident.

I'm a black and white type of guy when it comes to rules. Words like "by accident" or "intentional" are gray areas that should be removed from rule books. I'm not talking about league players, by the way...they normally have their own set of rules anyways. Heck, some don't even play with BIH.

When balls are frozen, you can push through. If they're not, you can't. I think if someone says "it's within chalks width" and pushes through the shot - it's a foul. Otherwise, what's a "chalks width?" What if it's close? Are you dropping a chalk cube between the balls?

I dunno - I can go on all day. Double-hits, ferrule contacts and the like should be fouls....ALL the time, not sometimes. I'm sure I can setup a scenario where the CB/OB are close and I "need" a push and can act like I unintentionally miscued. Who's judges the "intention" and how can unsportsmanlike conduct be brought into play? What if I REALLY tried my best - who would believe me?

See what I mean? Very cryptic.

I understand the flip side argument... people don't like fouls on unintentional miscues. Golfers sometimes unintentionally whiff their tee shot out of bounds. That doesn't mean they can try again without penalty - they lost that stroke and the distance (it's a golfing foul). Why aren't chunks/whiffs in pool a foul???
 
SpiderWebComm said:
When balls are frozen, you can push through. If they're not, you can't. I think if someone says "it's within chalks width" and pushes through the shot - it's a foul. Otherwise, what's a "chalks width?" What if it's close? Are you dropping a chalk cube between the balls?
Click to expand...

I can answer this one, when a situation occurs here where the balls are really close together the shooter picks up the chalk and puts it as close to the balls as he can to see if it can go between them or not. If he says it can, the other player usually gets up and confirms it by doing the same thing. If it did come down to one saying open and one saying closed then they would both ask someone else to check it and let it go with whatever that person said. Simple as that and about as difficult as it should be. But again, in 20 years over here I don't think I've ever seen a problem with it.
MULLY
 
mullyman said:
I can answer this one, when a situation occurs here where the balls are really close together the shooter picks up the chalk and puts it as close to the balls as he can to see if it can go between them or not. If he says it can, the other player usually gets up and confirms it by doing the same thing. If it did come down to one saying open and one saying closed then they would both ask someone else to check it and let it go with whatever that person said. Simple as that and about as difficult as it should be. But again, in 20 years over here I don't think I've ever seen a problem with it.
MULLY
Click to expand...

So, if you think the CB/OB are within a chalk and someone calls “push” and shoots through it--- you guys don’t consider that a foul??? CB/OB have to be touching to push through.

3.23**** FOULS BY DOUBLE HITS
If the cue ball is touching the required object ball prior to the shot, the player may shoot toward it, providing that any normal stroke is employed. If the cue stick strikes the cue ball more than once on a shot, or if the cue stick is in contact with the cue ball when or after the cue ball contacts an object ball, the shot is a foul. (See Rule 2.20 <http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_gen.shtml#2.20> for judging this kind of shot.) If a third ball is close by, care should be taken not to foul that ball under the first part of this rule.

2.20 **** JUDGING DOUBLE HITS
When the distance between the cue ball and the object ball is less than the width of a chalk cube, (See Diagram 18) special attention from the referee is required. In such a situation, unless the referee can positively determine a legal shot has been performed, the following guidance may apply: if the cue ball follows through the object ball more than 1/2 ball, it is a foul.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
dr_dave said:
Most miscues do, but not all. For more info with videos and a related article, see:
Click to expand...
Should a tip be allowed to "slide" on the CB?
Click to expand...
IMO, yes; unless the sliding is "prolonged" or there is "secondary contact" or a "double hit" from the ferrule or shaft.

SpiderWebComm said:
Would prolonged contact be a push then?
Click to expand...
Yes ... that is the definition of a "push," which is a foul. However, the duration of contact during a sliding-tip miscue is very short, much shorter than a typical "push" shot.

Regards,
Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top