You want your pockets to be swallowers and not spitters
Rules Question - Why
- Thread starter GideonF
- Start date
Because defining the rule in any other way would leave a lot of freedom for interpretation.So this just came up on my Facebook feed.
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.www.facebook.com
I know the ruling is that the ball that doesn’t stay down isn’t considered pocketed. My question is why? I mean if the pocket was full and he shot it anyway then I guess I can see that the shooter should lose his turn.
But where, as here, the ball comes back up as result of bad table design, the rule seems unfair to David. Why is this the rule?
I had a situation ball bounced from the back of the pocket to the table. How would you put that into rule?
However you define a rule that ball needs to do whatever other than staying in the pocket creates room for missintepretation and agruing. Not good.
DeeDeeCues
Well-known member
Give this guy a cookie, he understand.
DeeDeeCues
Well-known member
We are currently experiencing cookie shortages, please check back at a later date. Thank you.
Sure they do.
The ball is not pocketed unless it remains in the pocket.
The fact that someone might not like a particular rule doesn't mean that it isn't a valid rule.
We run into that all the time in golf. People think you should be able to roll a ball out of a divot in the fairway instead of playing it down.
For the very same reasons that I've discussed in this thread, it simply doesn't make sense from a rule/consistency perspective.
I would be curious what Bob Jewett or Dr Dave think is the correct ruling on the ball that goes in one pocket and out the other.
The WPA rule says a ball is pocketed “when it enters the ball return system”, which to me means it is indeed pocketed, as the ball clearly entered the ball return system.
The rules do say that “an object-ball that rebounds from the pocket back onto the playing surface is not a pocketed ball”, but I don’t think you can say that a ball that goes into the ball return system and out another pocket has rebounded from the pocket.
It’s a weird situation, because if the rule reads the way I think it does, I don’t know what you do. I guess you put the object ball down, but what about any balls disturbed by the ball when it comes out?
This makes me think the ruling applied (that it is treated like a ball rebounding) makes practical sense, but I don’t think that’s how the rule reads.
The WPA rule says a ball is pocketed “when it enters the ball return system”, which to me means it is indeed pocketed, as the ball clearly entered the ball return system.
The rules do say that “an object-ball that rebounds from the pocket back onto the playing surface is not a pocketed ball”, but I don’t think you can say that a ball that goes into the ball return system and out another pocket has rebounded from the pocket.
It’s a weird situation, because if the rule reads the way I think it does, I don’t know what you do. I guess you put the object ball down, but what about any balls disturbed by the ball when it comes out?
This makes me think the ruling applied (that it is treated like a ball rebounding) makes practical sense, but I don’t think that’s how the rule reads.
I think the "in one side and out the other" counts as pocketed. If a ball comes off the runners and falls on the floor, it is also pocketed. I suppose the rule could be clarified, but the event is rare enough to not be worth worrying about. Let the ref have some action.
Thanks for this.
So in the clip I shared what should happen? The 2b goes down obviously, but what do we do with the balls disturbed by the 2? Leave them as they lie or try to replace them?
Oddly as written a ball that falls out the bottom of a broken pocket might not be pocketed (as it never came to rest at the bottom of the pocket) but surely that can’t be the case?
I'd leave them as they lie.
Another rare case. The official rules need an added book of rulings, like golf, with a thousand rare occurrences explained. In that particular case the general idea is that you do what you can with broken equipment to continue the game, if the game can still be contested fairly.
The BCA Pool League (CSI) rules have a very useful “applied rulings” that does this - probably from issues that have arisen at their events or questions from leagues. I often look at it when weird issues arise (eg whether a ball is “frozen” to a rail when it is only touching fibers from the rail).
That's a good resource, but one problem is that the applied rulings have to be worded at least as carefully and clearly as the rules themselves, or players will misinterpret them.
The only issue is the mfgers getting the ball to stay put.
Open question:
What if a ball is legally pocketed but knocks a previously pocketed ball back onto the table where it damages the layout in play?
What if a ball is legally pocketed but knocks a previously pocketed ball back onto the table where it damages the layout in play?