Rule question

[X Breaker]

I am wondering about the following:

In a game when my opponent tried to hit his ball but missed hitting a cushion after contact, I called a foul and he insisted that he had hit a rail.

The tournament director came over, said since no one saw the shot, it would go to the shooter.

I tried to explained to the TD that from looking at the layout of the balls after he hit his ball, it was impossible that he would have hit a rail.

The TD did not care about any of that, he said as long as no one saw the shot, it went to the shooter.

Then he asked another tournament player to ref the rest of the game because he did not want to hear any more dispute. I feel sorry for the player--the poor guy had to sit there till he was called to his table for his next match.

Is he right in making that ruling? I always thought the rule about giving the shooter the benefit of doubt only applies in situations whereas there is no way to determine who is right. For example, if one player accuses another of touching the ball with his hand. Since we could not go back in time and there was no video camera, the benefit of doubt would go to the shooter.

In this situation, although we could not move back in time, we could certainly look at where the balls were and how they ended up to determine whether it was possible that the cue ball had indeed made contact with a rail. I was disappointed that he did not even bother doing that.

Mind you, this is a very small tournament and the TD is the owner of the pool hall and he is not really a player. He does not go to any tournament nor play in any of them. The only pool hall he goes to and plays at is his own.

I do not really care much about this little tournament. I am bringing this up because I want to know if this happens in a regular tournament, what is the porper way to rule?

Also, if you were in my shoe, what would you do?

Thank you.

Richard

 

[pooltchr]

You observed the position of the balls before the shot and also after the shot was made. The TD only saw the position when he was called over. There is no way he can rule on whether or not a ball did anything once the shot is over. In that case, he did the only thing he could do. I used to run tournaments, and before we started, I would always warn the players to call me BEFORE any questionable shots. If I don't see the shot, the ruling is almost always going to be in favor of the shooter.
Steve

 

[X Breaker]

You observed the position of the balls before the shot and also after the shot was made. The TD only saw the position when he was called over. There is no way he can rule on whether or not a ball did anything once the shot is over. In that case, he did the only thing he could do. I used to run tournaments, and before we started, I would always warn the players to call me BEFORE any questionable shots. If I don't see the shot, the ruling is almost always going to be in favor of the shooter.
Steve

The shot in question was not questionable at all before he shot it, and it was very obvious that no rail was contacted after he hit it. We both agreed where the balls were before he made the shot, the dispute was in whether the cue ball made contact with a cushion after contact, and it was clearly impossible from the way the balls ended up.

Isn't it true that sometimes the final outcome of the shot was used to determine whether a shot was a foul even when no ref was called over? An example would be a push shot when the balls are very close--where the cue ball stops and how it behaves can be used to determine whether a foul was committed.

Also, sometimes, isn't it true that a game will be replayed when two players could not agree on what exactly happened?

Thank you for your answer Steve.

Richard

 

[Mark Avlon]

The tournament director should have asked each player individually what happened in detail so at he has a clear understanding of what each player saw. Although he can’t make a call on the shot after the fact, he may be able get a sense that the shooter is trying to cheat or not. If he thinks a player isn’t being honest, he can then put both players on notice (without being accusatory) that another similar situation may be considered unsportsmanlike behavior. This will usually prevent another issue from occurring.

 

[Cornerman]

Is he right in making that ruling?

Yes. And he was right in asking for a referee for the rest of the match.

Also, if you were in my shoe, what would you do?

Shake my head, go on playing, and blame the bad call on all of my misery dating back to 1983.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

In a game when my opponent tried to hit his ball but missed hitting a cushion after contact, I called a foul and he insisted that he had hit a rail.

Here's a situation that came up (in 1990) where my opponent tried to use the logic of "look at the position afterwards." I'm not saying this was you situation, but I'm giving an example of why this can't be a logical debate point.

I'm playing a safety on the 13-ball.

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html

Before:

START(
%AN7O5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%Hj2N7%IL7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%Mp5N3%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pn0P8
)END

After:

START(
%AN7O5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%Hj2N7%IL7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%Mp0M5%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pq2N1
)END


The opponent only saw me hit the cueball, hit the cushion, and then hit the 13-ball. What he didn't see was that I clearly brushed the 13-ball first, which is why it relocated in the first place.

START(
%AN7O5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%Hj2N7%IL7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%Mp5N3%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pn0P8%Qs5N1%Uo5M7%Vo8M9%Yq9N4
%Zs2N6%br4O1%cp6O4%do1P3
)END

He argued over and over, the same words: "Look at the position. YOU COULDN'T HAVE HIT A RAIL!" It was simply that he couldn't get in his head that I hit the 13-ball before I hit the rail. He walked away saying,"if you want to be a poor sportsman, go ahead and take it." Harumph.

Food for thought.

Fred

 

[Bob Jewett]

The opponent only saw me hit the cueball, hit the cushion, and then hit the 13-ball. What he didn't see was that I clearly brushed the 13-ball first, which is why it relocated in the first place. ...
He argued over and over, the same word: "Look at the position. YOU COULDN'T HAVE HIT A RAIL!" It was simply that he couldn't get in his head that I hit the 13-ball before I hit the rail. ...

Although it would be outside the rules -- but not having a referee is always a little outside the rules -- you could have taken some balls on another table and replayed the shot the way you felt it occurred. The same could have been done for the OP's shot. Sometimes both players will agree to the replay. This doesn't always produce a good result, but it is often useful on double-hit calls (one of Fred's favorites) where the shooter might actually replay the double hit and agree that the replay was a good representation of the original shot.

 

[Cornerman]

but it is often useful on double-hit calls (one of Fred's favorites.

You're right, Bob, come to think of it. I guess this past incident is what in part caused my reaction at the Manalo incident. It's the same type of shot, isn't it?


Fred

 

[Bob Jewett]

You're right, Bob, come to think of it. I guess this past incident is what in part caused my reaction at the Manalo incident. It's the same type of shot, isn't it?


Fred

The same type of shot, but yours was probably much easier to rule on if the ref/player had been watching. I'm looking forward to seeing the DVD of the Manalo/Bustamante match, but I suspect that the resolution will not be good enough to be sure of the ball/cushion order.

 

[poolboy17]

you could have taken some balls on another table and replayed the shot the way you felt it occurred.

Actually, by ACS/BCA rules...once your match has started you CANNOT hit balls on another table. To do so would be a ball in hand foul to your opponent.

1.8 NO PRACTICE DURING MATCH
While a match is in progress, practice is not allowed. Taking a shot that is not part of that match is a foul.


There really is no GOOD way to handle situations like this when a ref is not present. I am a referee and have had to give the call to the shooter because I could not prove otherwise. Sometimes I have a distinct feeling that they really did commit a foul but cannot call a foul I did not see.

It's a frustrating situation...I've had it happen in some of my matches. Some guy will shoot a foul and I call it and they claim it wasn't. I call a ref for close shots but sometimes fouls occur even when the shot is not obviously questionable.

 

[Slasher]

Richard, seeing as how I ended up reffing the game, I volunteered by the way
I did not want to see a scrap break out and I wanted to tourny to finish at a reasonable time
Anyway, I don't think there is ever anyway to tell what happened during a shot, there are just to many variables.
So the TD has no choice really but to give it to the shooter, if you see a situation that may end up a questionable call, you need to get a ref before he shoots, not always forseable I know.
At the end of the day if the shooter made a genuine mistake, oh well move on, nobody died. If he cheated then shame on him and you know the old saying "what goes around...........

see you next outing.

 

[sjm]

Chalk this up to the limitations of playing without a ref. You can call a referee to watch a shot whenever you like, but even then you are not fully protected, because you cannot foresee every situation in which a referee's presence will be necessary. When your opponent is the shooter, they get the benefit of the doubt when there is a dispute.

The referee ruled correctly on this occasion, but it's easy to understand why you're upset.

 

[jay helfert]

Proper call

The tournament director should have asked each player individually what happened in detail so at he has a clear understanding of what each player saw. Although he can’t make a call on the shot after the fact, he may be able get a sense that the shooter is trying to cheat or not. If he thinks a player isn’t being honest, he can then put both players on notice (without being accusatory) that another similar situation may be considered unsportsmanlike behavior. This will usually prevent another issue from occurring.

Now here's a ref that knows what he is doing.
When I am called to rule on a shot that has already taken place, I ask each player to give me their version of what happened, starting with the shooter.
Quite often something is revealed by one or both players that helps me make a proper decision. It doesn't always work but it may give me a sense of who is being truthful.
By the way on a push shot, it is almost impossible to make a decision if you didn't see the shot, regardless of where the balls end up. I also agree with the person who said that it is best to call someone to watch the shot,
anytime there may be a questionable hit (like when two object balls are close together on a kick shot).
Rarely do I ever want to start a game over, unless something has happened to dramatically alter the position of the balls and they cannot be restored. In this case the person who broke that rack will break once again.
Some situations are not covered by the rules and players must depend on an official who uses good common sense in making a ruling. This comes from experience and good observation.

 

[jay helfert]

Actually, by ACS/BCA rules...once your match has started you CANNOT hit balls on another table. To do so would be a ball in hand foul to your opponent.

1.8 NO PRACTICE DURING MATCH
While a match is in progress, practice is not allowed. Taking a shot that is not part of that match is a foul.


There really is no GOOD way to handle situations like this when a ref is not present. I am a referee and have had to give the call to the shooter because I could not prove otherwise. Sometimes I have a distinct feeling that they really did commit a foul but cannot call a foul I did not see.

It's a frustrating situation...I've had it happen in some of my matches. Some guy will shoot a foul and I call it and they claim it wasn't. I call a ref for close shots but sometimes fouls occur even when the shot is not obviously questionable.

I'd have to agree with you on this one. I don't like the idea of trying to set up the shot on another table. Against the rules or not, it is an unworkable solution to most problems.
That is something that is better left for after the match.
One day I will tell a hilarious story about such a situation that occured at The Last Call For 9-Ball tournament in Atlantic City where Weenie Beenie decided to be a referee.

 

[X Breaker]

Richard, seeing as how I ended up reffing the game, I volunteered by the way
I did not want to see a scrap break out and I wanted to tourny to finish at a reasonable time
Anyway, I don't think there is ever anyway to tell what happened during a shot, there are just to many variables.
So the TD has no choice really but to give it to the shooter, if you see a situation that may end up a questionable call, you need to get a ref before he shoots, not always forseable I know.
At the end of the day if the shooter made a genuine mistake, oh well move on, nobody died. If he cheated then shame on him and you know the old saying "what goes around...........

see you next outing.

Anyway, thanks for reffing the game for us. The guy who ran the tournament obviously did not really know how to resolve the situation, I am glad you stepped in and ref the game so we could move on.

I am curious about how such a situation would be resolved in a big money match.

I like Jay's approach that he would at least try to understand what happened, rather than "it goes to the shooter, tough luck..."

Anyway, thank you for all the feedback.

Richard

 

[Slasher]

I am curious about how such a situation would be resolved in a big money match
Richard

In the parking lot

 

[Bob Jewett]

Actually, by ACS/BCA rules...once your match has started you CANNOT hit balls on another table. To do so would be a ball in hand foul to your opponent.

I think it's more important to rule fairly than to follow the strict letter of the law in this matter. It's important to understand the reason for Rule 1.8. I don't think shooting a replay violates the spirit of the rule.

I am a referee and have had to give the call to the shooter because I could not prove otherwise. Sometimes I have a distinct feeling that they really did commit a foul but cannot call a foul I did not see....

But if they do the replay, you can see the foul.

I'd prefer having the non-shooter assume the duties of the referee in unrefereed matches. If you can't trust one, you can't trust the other, either.
I think you would learn pretty quickly which players not to allow into your tournaments.

 

[poolboy17]

I think it's more important to rule fairly than to follow the strict letter of the law in this matter. It's important to understand the reason for Rule 1.8. I don't think shooting a replay violates the spirit of the rule.


But if they do the replay, you can see the foul.

I'd prefer having the non-shooter assume the duties of the referee in unrefereed matches. If you can't trust one, you can't trust the other, either.
I think you would learn pretty quickly which players not to allow into your tournaments.

Bob, of course you're right. The spirit of that rule has to be taken into account. All I'm saying is that I would never put myself into the postion of having a referee decide to call a foul on me for it or not. Leagues...possibly but a tournament I never would.

With regards to the replay...I presume you mean the players renacting the shot as opposed to a video replay. I suppose it is possible that both players would agree on exactly what happened...in this scenario I suppose you could possibly figure out if a foul occured. In my experience...this is relatively rare. I just reffed a state tournament where the players couldn't agree on whether the shooter moved an object ball with ball in hand or in the process of shooting! One shooter or the other almost always embellishes their end of the story.

I'm not trying to be argumentative...just playing Devil's Advocate.

 

[a_susie_cue]

When you are playing without a ref, the call will go to the shooter. Yes it is unethical to lie to make sure your opponent does not get ball in hand, however, I have seen it happen more than once. In small tounaments, it is very common to play without any refs. Hopefully, you will have honest opponents who won't have to cheat to win. If they want to say they hit a rail and you say they didn't and an arguement breaks out, the call will go to the shooter.

 

[shinobi]

Richard,

This happens to everyone that plays in regular tournaments. I try not to let it bother me, otherwise I shark myself. When there is a disagreement, I have to accept the rule (that disputes go to the shooter) and move on. If it happened again, I would absolutely get the TD involved and/or ask someone to watch the match. Fortunately it has never happened a second time.

Even THIS has happened to me... Sometimes I ask the TD or another player to watch a shot when the chances of a foul are high. On a few occasions, the player OBVIOUSLY fouled (no doubt about it) yet the shot was declared "Good". Frustrating, but what do I do? I thank the person for watching the shot and keep shooting. The whole point of asking someone else to watch the shot is to eliminate potential arguments by having a third party make the call. But clearly even that is not foolproof, as everyone makes mistakes. You can only do so much, unless you have video replay

In this particular case, your opponent was a C+ player who can barely run two balls. I have played him many times myself. He has no history of complaints against him, and I have never witnessed any attempts to cheat. He probably believes he did not foul. Ignorance is never a good excuse, but I prefer ignorance to cheating.