rule/ettiquette on cue ball only fouls scenario?

[smashmouth]

this one drives me nuts, would like opinions

local rule in a regular 8 ball handicapped tourney that draws good crowds and all skill levels states cue ball fouls only, you disrupt other balls, you move them back and play on

scenario as follows;

shooter (usually lower skill levels) has to bridge over balls to strike the cueball, so very awkward cueing, shooter accidentally disrupts other balls....no biggie, part of the rules, shooter places them back and trys again

my issue is seeing these guys repeat the above scenario multiple times before an actual good hit

no official penalty, and never once seen the shooter regress and simply switch to another available shot

in my mind, a simple rule ammendment would fix this with the second attempt switching to all balls fouls


thoughts?

 

[GoldCrown]

thoughts?

Possible see how many players are on the same track as you. If there is a big majority go to the proper people and request a change. If not simply live with it.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... thoughts?

Play all ball fouls from the start. Have players act as referees if needed. That's the only way you are ever going to get them to worry at all about fouling.

 

[MattPoland]

BCA Pool League rules handle this well.

Disturb a ball, only your opponent can approve moving it back. Opponent has a little discretion to restore the ball slightly worse than it started. Move it back without approval, foul. Disturb two balls, foul.

A player held to these standards will be more hesitant to bump balls. Or they’ll not understand, get huffy, and everyone gets sharked for a while.

http://www.playcsipool.com/uploads/7/3/5/9/7359673/official_rules_of_csi__170714_.pdf

Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

 

[thintowin]

house rules rule plain and simple

 

[jburkm002]

I hate watching all balls foul. Baggy shirts (heck normal shirts), hair (normally the women). I just tough watching them worry they may touch a ball while stretching for a shot. I doesn't bother me within reason if an amateur who probably rarely has to use a bridge to shoot over a ball. Has trouble with the shot. One of my players was shooting over a ball the was sitting in the pocket. Think he knocked in 3 times on his back stroke and they had to keep putting it back. More funny than anything. I guess unless there is someone out there that purposely moves balls around to gain an advantage. I don't see the need for the rule.

 

[Jaden]

unfortunately...

this one drives me nuts, would like opinions

local rule in a regular 8 ball handicapped tourney that draws good crowds and all skill levels states cue ball fouls only, you disrupt other balls, you move them back and play on

scenario as follows;

shooter (usually lower skill levels) has to bridge over balls to strike the cueball, so very awkward cueing, shooter accidentally disrupts other balls....no biggie, part of the rules, shooter places them back and trys again

my issue is seeing these guys repeat the above scenario multiple times before an actual good hit

no official penalty, and never once seen the shooter regress and simply switch to another available shot

in my mind, a simple rule ammendment would fix this with the second attempt switching to all balls fouls


thoughts?

You guys seem to be playing by house rules...

Typically, cue ball fouls only is if one ball is moved it is the option of the opponent to leave it where it is or move it back to where it was. If the cue ball or any other ball then travel in the path of the moved ball, it is a foul.

If two or more balls are moved, it is a foul.

Hope that clears up the rules, but I doubt it will be very helpful in your case.

Jaden

p.s. a funny story. I know rules pretty well and at one of the mezz west state events up in San Fran. Me and Rodney Morris and a couple of guys are sitting by the tournament desk and a guy walks over asking about banks. He claimed that his bank was an obvious bank even though he didn't call it. We were playing by WPA rules which state there are no such thing as obvious banks or caroms. This was covered in the players meeting so I stated that. He said, "Who are you?" I said "I'm Jaden", he replies "No, who are you to be stepping in". I say "I'm the man with the answer". He obviously didn't like my answer so he replies "You're getting involved in things that aren't your concern". I say "You came over and asked, I answered". "I'm involved in whatever the **** I say I am".

Now whenever Rodney sees me, he says "I'm involved in whatever the **** I say I am".