One Pocket Rules Question

SlateMan

SlateMan

Registered
How long after a ball is spotted is it okay for a player to "adjust" the spotted ball? In this clip, Jeremy Jones doesn't like the fact the balls are not touching after the ref spots the balls. I am okay with that, but then a bit later he re-adjusts the balls, even after there has been action. Maybe the table was bumped or something but that seems like a rule violation to keep adjusting the balls. Alex didn't seem happy but really just didn't care.

 
there was a ref who seemed to agree the balls were not spotted correctly
i dont think you would find a rule about it
alex seemed ok with it after jeremy's explanation that the balls were not frozen
 
Later on in the same game there was a scratch and the ref spotted the ball. But JJ then picked up the ball and respotted it. I think that JJ picking up the ball in a refereed game is a foul and the ref should have called it. Nit picking, yes, but that is the refs job to spot balls.
 
Tennesseejoe said:
Later on in the same game there was a scratch and the ref spotted the ball. But JJ then picked up the ball and respotted it. I think that JJ picking up the ball in a refereed game is a foul and the ref should have called it. Nit picking, yes, but that is the refs job to spot balls.
Click to expand...
I am in agrrement. When I watched it some time ago I thought JJ fouled by picking up the ball and respotting it. He should have advised that the ref do that, which would have allowed the ref bott the decision to respot and the action of respotting.
 
Perhaps I haven't watched it far enough but I see Jj petitioning the ref and he adjusted. Way too late to be adjusted.🤷 On the ref not JJ
 
Well as there was a referee present he or she has final word. That is reason they have these people playing part of nutural observer, final decision maker.
 
In games with large clusters of balls, players will often only formulate a general idea of what the mass of balls offers -_until_ they are actually about to shoot something involving those balls. It would be on the players to check and have the position of the balls "finalized" up front, either by Ref or player consensus. Otherwise, providing no movement has occurred, subsequently freezing the balls in line is probably the best action.
 
The balls are to be frozen when placed. Afterward, it occurs to me that the "shit happens" axiom is applicable. Or, how long is too long? My kids subscribed to a "three second rule" to govern when food could be safely retrieved and consumed from floors of any and all description (including the skinning shed's) but here maybe we should employ a number of innings rule. Or, perhaps, the old "I never saw no ball come near 'em" standard should be employed?

Y'all do know that there are certain areas on Earth, and even, yes, here in our own country, that Earth's surface is known to move so that the relative positions of physical objects located thereon are affected to some degree? So at what point would a re-rack be implicated?
 
Biloxi Boy said:
The balls are to be frozen when placed. Afterward, it occurs to me that the "shit happens" axiom is applicable. Or, how long is too long? My kids subscribed to a "three second rule" to govern when food could be safely retrieved and consumed from floors of any and all description (including the skinning shed's) but here maybe we should employ a number of innings rule. Or, perhaps, the old "I never saw no ball come near 'em" standard should be employed?

Y'all do know that there are certain areas on Earth, and even, yes, here in our own country, that Earth's surface is known to move so that the relative positions of physical objects located thereon are affected to some degree? So at what point would a re-rack be implicated?
Click to expand...
The 'rule' is clear but what's the rule on unintentional and/or inconsequential violations of rules?
 
lfigueroa said:
Technically, foul.

Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...
In theory I agree with you.

However, it is a foul and that does not change regardless of how the players feel about it.

In a friendly game the two players, knowledgeable and respectful of each other, can agree to ignore the foul and adjust the ball properly. However, in a tournament an overzealous ref could still call the foul if he wanted to.

The correct answer would be to alert the ref to the fact that the ball was not spotted correctly and let the ref decide what to do about it. Typically if play has resumed since the ball was spotted, even it was spotted incorrectly, it would be left alone. The reason being that subsequent play could have resulted in exactly the same conditions and changing them would be undoing the natural evolution of the game.

Both rules and referees are best when they interfere the least.
 
lfigueroa said:
Technically, foul.

Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...


Respect is hard to find in society In 2022.

This is not a time when man’s word, or handshake was all you need in business.

Not contract drawn up by $750.00 corporate lawyers, that could be disputed after both parties signing had legal advice to sign,🤯
 
lfigueroa said:
Technically, foul.

Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...


Name another professional sport that lets a player reverse a ref's
decision....
1658589430181.png
 
Ref training in just about any other sport vs pool?
Sad JJ has to do the mans job for him.
More sad than unsportsmanlike.
 
justjames said:
In theory I agree with you.

However, it is a foul and that does not change regardless of how the players feel about it.

In a friendly game the two players, knowledgeable and respectful of each other, can agree to ignore the foul and adjust the ball properly. However, in a tournament an overzealous ref could still call the foul if he wanted to.

The correct answer would be to alert the ref to the fact that the ball was not spotted correctly and let the ref decide what to do about it. Typically if play has resumed since the ball was spotted, even it was spotted incorrectly, it would be left alone. The reason being that subsequent play could have resulted in exactly the same conditions and changing them would be undoing the natural evolution of the game.

Both rules and referees are best when they interfere the least.
Click to expand...

er, that's what happened.

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
Technically, foul.

Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...
That’s the best answer.

I’ve seen the ball spotted and froze only to roll off from being frozen 2-3-4-5? Innings later. We just re-freeze them when that happens, usually due to old cloth with divots in it.

Not re-freezing them is bad. Having the balls frozen is fair and equal for both players. Could be said if they aren’t frozen it’s also equal. But frozen is the standard and I believe the best practice. As it’s the intended position after the ball is spotted.

Experienced players ain’t gonna bicker over this-unless there’s bad blood or a clear advantage for one player(unlikely)

Best
Fatboy<——-who’s shot was it again…..😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top