Rule on miscuing.... I had to withdraw from a tournament

Agree

jay helfert said:
My take on all this is number one, you shouldn't have said anything to the ref, just gone ahead and shot. You put him on alert, if you get my drift. Second, why withdraw if a call doesn't go your way. Every pool player has had calls made against them that they didn't agree with. They didn't quit though.
Click to expand...

Jay, glad to see you join in on this one, as I know that you have refereed many matches. I think his fate was sealed when he announced his intent to miscue. I can't imagine any referee in that situation ever saying, "I know what you intended, however your apparent lack of ability to execute the shot you attemted has resulted you accidentally making a legal hit, therefore I cannot call a foul on you." Think of the firestorm that would follow if his opponent was familar with the Rulebook.
 
JolietJames said:
Ok, so it's a rule, albeit a sillly one -and certainly not unsportsmanlike conduct.

What is your personal opinion in this situation Bob? Do you feel the shot was unsportsmanlike and why?
Click to expand...
My personal opinion is that the situation should never have arisen. The player should either have known the rule or asked, and I think the TD/official should have explained how he was going to judge the shot before the shot was taken if the opponent agreed that the rule could be explained. (In more formal settings, the referee is forbidden from explaining the rules to the players, but in a local tournament I think it may be a good thing.)

The penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct ranges from a warning to expulsion from the event with forfeiture of all prize money and standings points. Is it unsportsmanlike to be ignorant of the rules of the game you are playing? (Ignorance isn't actually one of the violations listed under 6.16.)

As for the specific shot.... The only way a player is allowed to set the balls in motion during a game is by striking the cue ball with a forward motion of the cue stick (that is, a motion parallel to the axis of the stick). Further, a miscue is not a normal contact between tip and ball. The most common intentional use of the miscue is in the type of jump shot played by beginners. It is a kind of disallowed manipulation of the balls -- it is not an accepted part of the game.
 
Thanks for your view Bob. The unsportsmanlike conduct thing is what angered me the most here. To me, it's a bit insulting. I don't need any more shame in my game. It makes the offender look like a cheat, or a sore loser just because he didn't know a rule and made a good hit in an illegal way. Now that we know the rule I suppose it could be considered underhanded to try to pull it off. I've played the same shot Niels played in the vid a few times in my life and never knew I was close to being called a cheat.
 
Camelot said:
Here is the situation....

The 9-ball is nearly frozen to the endrail, and the cueball is nearly frozen to the 9-ball.

I announce to the referee that I am going to miscue, and barely hit the cueball, but enough to make the 9-ball hit the rail. I wipe the chalk off the tip, and then make the shot. It was a legal hit. I hit the cueball only once, and the 9-ball hit the rail.

The ref then starts going through the rulebook for about 15 minutes. He then says that my shot was unsportsmanlike conduct, and that my opponent would get ball in hand.

I shook my opponent's hand and withdrew from the tournament.

Several people have told me that I cannot vocally announce that I am going to miscue on purpose, but I don't believe the rule.

What do you think?
Click to expand...


I smell Bert Kinister's $100 DVD.


Why would you announce that? It is supposed to be done discreetly and no one will know what you did. Watch the DVD again.
 
I understand completely, no one likes to be called out in public, especially in a tournament or a pool room. If you say you were not being a cheat, I believe you .

It is unfortunate that there are many good and great players that do not know but a few of the rules of any game they play. Too many arguments start when two players have different ideas about the rules and neither player is correct. I've seen it too many times.

Under the World Standardized Rules, (which I use for the tournaments at Hard Times)

When does a game of pool start?

Is the head string inplay or in the kitchen?

base of the ball or edge?

what is considered unsportsmanlike conduct?

Not too many players are able to answer even the first question.

That is why it is important to have a rule book handy. Everyone deserves to be able to play under the same rules. If the rules aren't applied to everone equally, you won't have a tournament or a decent TD.

JolietJames said:
Thanks for your view Bob. The unsportsmanlike conduct thing is what angered me the most here. To me, it's a bit insulting. I don't need any more shame in my game. It makes the offender look like a cheat, or a sore loser just because he didn't know a rule and made a good hit in an illegal way. Now that we know the rule I suppose it could be considered underhanded to try to pull it off. I've played the same shot Niels played in the vid a few times in my life and never knew I was close to being called a cheat.
Click to expand...
 
I watched the Niels video... is that a foul? To me, it looks totally legit. The CB/OB are frozen and OB is just off the rail. He aimed one way with the english to the opposite side and just poked briefly at it. No double hit.

I mean, Niels didn't miscue-- maybe the OP did.

If this is a foul, can someone explain why? You can't say "because he didn't make a legit stroke" -- because he did. For instance, if the CB were off the OB by 1/2" and the OB were off the rail by a 1/2", you'd use that same stunted poke to hit the OB to the rail-- and that's a legit/legal stroke---- so, why wouldn't the same stroke hold true to Niel's shot? Just because they're frozen doesn't change the fact that "jab" is legal.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
I watched the Niels video... is that a foul? To me, it looks totally legit. The CB/OB are frozen and OB is just off the rail. He aimed one way with the english to the opposite side and just poked briefly at it. No double hit.

I mean, Niels didn't miscue-- maybe the OP did.

If this is a foul, can someone explain why? You can't say "because he didn't make a legit stroke" -- because he did. For instance, if the CB were off the OB by 1/2" and the OB were off the rail by a 1/2", you'd use that same stunted poke to hit the OB to the rail-- and that's a legit/legal stroke---- so, why wouldn't the same stroke hold true to Niel's shot? Just because they're frozen doesn't change the fact that "jab" is legal.
Click to expand...

Dave:

It's not a foul. In that Niels video, you'll hear Tony Annigoni say to Niels that the shot was controversial, because they -- the commentators in the box -- couldn't tell if it were a double-hit or not. But Niels responded that it wasn't because he put low righthand english on it, which is the basically a much softer version of the fouette shot described by Bob Jewett.

Niels just performed the fouette shot with a "jab" stroke. The commentators (methinks Danny D. and Billy I.?) questioned it only because of the uncertainty of the double-hit, not knowing that Niels actually performed a soft fouette shot. Tony's interview with Niels cleared that right up.

But the intentional miscue is definitely illegal and considered unsportsmanlike conduct. The point of bringing up the Niels video was to demonstrate that the shot can be done without an intentional miscue.

I hope that helps clear it up(?),
-Sean
 
sfleinen said:
Dave:

It's not a foul. In that Niels video, you'll hear Tony Annigoni say to Niels that the shot was controversial, because they -- the commentators in the box -- couldn't tell if it were a double-hit or not. But Niels responded that it wasn't because he put low righthand english on it, which is the basically a much softer version of the fouette shot described by Bob Jewett.

Niels just performed the fouette shot with a "jab" stroke. The commentators (methinks Danny D. and Billy I.?) questioned it only because of the uncertainty of the double-hit, not knowing that Niels actually performed a soft fouette shot. Tony's interview with Niels cleared that right up.

But the intentional miscue is definitely illegal and considered unsportsmanlike conduct. The point of bringing up the Niels video was to demonstrate that the shot can be done without an intentional miscue.

I hope that helps clear it up(?),
-Sean
Click to expand...

Totally. Thanks!
Dave
 
Gotta say I read the original post and expected a bit of sympathy for the OP as I've always thought what he described to be deemed a legal hit.

I only know the shot as it comes up in Snooker now and then and to my knowledge has never been called a foul by a referee (even Snooker commentators will tell the viewers what shot the striker will play). I just assumed that the definition on this would be pretty similar, but we all know where 'assuming' gets you.

My only other point on the original post was concerning him announcing what shot he was intending to play to the referee. As somebody else has already noted, I'm sure the ego loved blurting out, "watch me play this clever shot", but in his defence, maybe he was just giving the ref a heads-up on what to look out for....and in actual fact showing 'sportsmanlike conduct'...?
 
Laura Norder said:
Gotta say I read the original post and expected a bit of sympathy for the OP as I've always thought what he described to be deemed a legal hit.

I only know the shot as it comes up in Snooker now and then and to my knowledge has never been called a foul by a referee (even Snooker commentators will tell the viewers what shot the striker will play). I just assumed that the definition on this would be pretty similar, but we all know where 'assuming' gets you.

My only other point on the original post was concerning him announcing what shot he was intending to play to the referee. As somebody else has already noted, I'm sure the ego loved blurting out, "watch me play this clever shot", but in his defence, maybe he was just giving the ref a heads-up on what to look out for....and in actual fact showing 'sportsmanlike conduct'...?
Click to expand...

I thought it was always good to explain to the ref what's going to happen on a close hit, so he knows exactly what to look for.
 
I would agree in most cases.

I also had a player come over to watch a hit and he told his opponent he was going to intentionally FOUL.

I asked him why I was needed. He replied 'to make sure I hit it bad'
In a one pocket match when he was taking an intentional foul.

I call 'good hit' FOUL. Everyone laughed.


A good ref will know what to look for regardless of what the shooter says.

A ref can be asked what the rule in a situation is, but cannot ask for suggestions on how to play the shot.


Camelot said:
I thought it was always good to explain to the ref what's going to happen on a close hit, so he knows exactly what to look for.
Click to expand...
 
Camelot said:
I thought it was always good to explain to the ref what's going to happen on a close hit, so he knows exactly what to look for.
Click to expand...

I'm the same way, Camelot. If I'm playing a shot that someone wants to watch the hit, I let them know my intentions so that they can not only watch the hit, but the reactions of any other balls in that proximity (which can also help to validate the hit).

Someone posted a "You Make The Call" type of thread a while back. It was a match between Dennis Hatch vs Raj Hundal. Hatch made the two ball (?) in the side, but it was close enough to another object ball (the five ?) that it could have been a questionable hit. The ref called foul, but Hatch was able to argue (successfully) that if it were a bad hit, then the five ball would have ended up in a much different position than it did.

In all likelyhood, I would have done the same thing you did, with the only difference being that I would not have used the word 'miscue'.
 
If 2 balls are close and barely off the rail there is another way to make a clean hit without miscueing.

Put your jump cue flat on the table, with one hand hold the butt firmly down on the table. Put the tip just under the edge of the cue, and with your other hand lift the end of the cue quickly.

The cue ball will make a good hit, plus you might get the object ball froze to the rail.
 
Or maybe not

JD_Hogg said:
If 2 balls are close and barely off the rail there is another way to make a clean hit without miscueing.

Put your jump cue flat on the table, with one hand hold the butt firmly down on the table. Put the tip just under the edge of the cue, and with your other hand lift the end of the cue quickly.

The cue ball will make a good hit, plus you might get the object ball froze to the rail.
Click to expand...

If you read some of Bob's previous posts you will see that the shot you are describing is illegal. There is no forward motion of the cue. Some of the players that I play one-pocket with just love using that shot, but I never say anything because they are big underdogs to start with. If the game was closer I wouldn't let them get away with it.
 
M HOUSE said:
If you read some of Bob's previous posts you will see that the shot you are describing is illegal. There is no forward motion of the cue. Some of the players that I play one-pocket with just love using that shot, but I never say anything because they are big underdogs to start with. If the game was closer I wouldn't let them get away with it.
Click to expand...

See, if you jack up 90 degrees and hit straight down on the CB (like a masse), that's legal and there's no forward motion of the cue. If you do the opposite of what that guy said and bring the tip straight down--- I'd guess Bob would say that's also illegal even though nothing is different other than the orientation of the cue.

That's why the rules should be based on tip/CB contact -- not having double-hits or pushes are all that should really matter. That, and the euro rules are the best with frozen balls-- you should have to shoot away.

The above solves everything. Otherwise, there are double-standards, confusion and interpretation.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
See, if you jack up 90 degrees and hit straight down on the CB (like a masse), that's legal and there's no forward motion of the cue. ...
Click to expand...
Well, no. In the case of a shot at pool, "forward" means motion along the axis of the cue stick towards the cue ball. This clarification may be missing from the rules, but it is certainly what was intended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top