rules question

[mikepage]

world standardized rules or whatever...

9-ball (or comparable 8-ball situation)

With the 8-ball and 9-ball sandwiching the cueball into the cushion, your opponent can't make a legal hit or even a legal stroke that isn't a likely sellout. He prefers to give you ball in hand without moving anything So he carefully picks up the cueball and hands it to you.

Acceptable as merely a ball-in-hand foul?

 

[Only ERO's]

Rule

Mike-

I am not sure a definite ruling on this but I think it might be pushing towards a loss of game. The player should just tap the ball with the shaft or tip.

A few years back at a state level tournament, one of my teammates was shooting a think cut sprawled across the table. The cue ball took off and he grabbed the cue ball because he wasn't sure he could get his body out of the way. We all thought it was an easy foul and no big deal but they called a ref. The ref gave my teammate a warning and said if it is done again it was either a loss of game or a forfeit of the match; I can't remember which. That might just have been the state ref saying this but I am sure there is a true rule behind it.

 

[PKM]

I guess to be strict it would fall under this rule:

3.29 SPECIAL INTENTIONAL FOUL PENALTY
The cue ball in play shall not be intentionally struck with anything other than a cue’s attached tip (such as the ferrule, shaft, etc.). While such contact is automatically a foul under the provisions of Rule 3.19, if the referee deems the contact to be intentional, he shall warn the player once during a match that a second violation during that match will result in the loss of the match by forfeiture. If a second violation does occur, the match must be forfeited.
http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_gen.shtml

Might as well just hit it with your cue if you're taking a foul

 

[Neil]

............

 

[BVal]

Correct. It is ball in hand. Done twice, it's loss of game per BCA rules.

Twice it is loss of match.

 

[td873]

world standardized rules or whatever...

9-ball (or comparable 8-ball situation)

With the 8-ball and 9-ball sandwiching the cueball into the cushion, your opponent can't make a legal hit or even a legal stroke that isn't a likely sellout. He prefers to give you ball in hand without moving anything So he carefully picks up the cueball and hands it to you.

Acceptable as merely a ball-in-hand foul?

Mike,

I remember a rule addressing a situation where no one can / will take a shot. The game is reracked and played again. I can't remember the exact rule off the top of my head, but I'll see if I can dig it up. IIRC, it applies to 8 ball specifically. Not exactly what you posted on, but the solution is not to pick up the cue ball.

-td

[EDIT] found it:
BCA 8-ball rule:

STALEMATED GAME
If, after 3 consecutive turns at the table by each player (6 turns total), the referee judges that attempting to pocket or move an object ball will result in loss of game, the balls will be re-racked with the original breaker of the stalemated game breaking again. The stalemate rule may be applied regard-less of the number of balls on the table. Please Note: Three consecutive fouls by one player in 8-ball is not a loss of game.

BCA 9-ball rule:
5.14 STALEMATE
If the referee decides that neither player is attempting to win from the current position, he will announce his decision, and each player will have three more turns at the table. Then, if the referee still feels that there is no progress towards a conclusion, he will declare the rack a stalemate and the original breaker of the rack will break again.

 

[Cuebacca]

That is a good rule (rule 3.29). However, IMO, there should be some kind of repercussions on the first offense. For example, letting the incoming player have the option of resetting the balls and making the original player play a legitimate intentional foul.

 

[Neil]

...............

 

[nola22]

APA rule questions

Ok, guys, now I'm confused. I know you're citing bca rules, but I've been playing apa 8 ball for years, and many times I've seen players simply pick up the cue ball and give it their opponent, conceding a ball in hand foul. There are several situations where a player has nothing to gain and lots to lose by attempting a shot. The most obvious scenario is when a player is on the 8, and has a hard kick shot with a serious risk of scratching.

Last week, a new player in our league became verbally abusive when one of our players did this to him. That's the first time I've heard anyone complain about it. Does anyone know if this move is illegal under APA rules? If so, what's the additional penalty?

I have one more question. I once had an opponent intentionally hit my last remaining ball first, tying it up with the 8 ball, rather than attempt a difficult shot on his last remaining ball. I have to admit it kinda pissed me off. Anyone know if that was legal?

 

[PKM]

Ok, guys, now I'm confused. I know you're citing bca rules, but I've been playing apa 8 ball for years, and many times I've seen players simply pick up the cue ball and give it their opponent, conceding a ball in hand foul. There are several situations where a player has nothing to gain and lots to lose by attempting a shot. The most obvious scenario is when a player is on the 8, and has a hard kick shot with a serious risk of scratching.

Last week, a new player in our league became verbally abusive when one of our players did this to him. That's the first time I've heard anyone complain about it. Does anyone know if this move is illegal under APA rules? If so, what's the additional penalty?

I don't think the APA specifically says anything, usually people will just accept it as ball-in-hand. Someone should just tell them to hit the CB and take the foul.

I have one more question. I once had an opponent intentionally hit my last remaining ball first, tying it up with the 8 ball, rather than attempt a difficult shot on his last remaining ball. I have to admit it kinda pissed me off. Anyone know if that was legal?

That is a perfectly legitimate strategy under all rules as far as I'm aware.

 

[poolpro]

That is a good rule (rule 3.29). However, IMO, there should be some kind of repercussions on the first offense. For example, letting the incoming player have the option of resetting the balls and making the original player play a legitimate intentional foul.

A LEGITIMATE intentional foul? That sounds a bit like an oxy moron!

I am familliar with this discussion. I do not really know why someone would be offended by someone picking up the cue ball and handing it over. It is simply a tactical play to not rearrange the balls and give your opponent a better layout. I understand what the rules say, and if it ever comes up in a REFEREED match I will absolutely not pick up the ball.

As the opponent of a player who receives the picked up cue ball, I see absolutely NO benefit by having my opponent tap the cue ball down table and not contact anything to cause a foul as opposed to him just handing it over. I kinda feel like a foul is a foul is a foul. Would it really make you feel better to have me pretend to miscue or something? Or would you prefer an honest " here you go, I know that anything else will only improve the layout" ? It is purely a tactcal response designed to not worsen your chances of losing, much like a basketball team that throws the ball out of bounds to try to runout the clock. It may not be the best example of superior mind blowing skill, but it does win games. It is kind of like a bar player who just CANNOT understand why you would EVER play a safety shot at all. They cannot comprehend a concept that does not involve putting a ball in a pocket. They would rather play a five rail bank shot on the eight (that they have never even seen, let alone made) instead of rolling the eight toward a pocket, and hiding the cue ball. Man I love playing those guys!

Again, while I am not disputing what the rules say, or how they are applied, I am saying that it is ridiculous to really obsess over this kind of thing. It is very important to understand the rules so you can apply them with authority, but if you are relying on a rule to win a game you are in trouble.

I think it is the "spirit of the rules" that apply here. I have handed the cue ball over, and received it many times over the years in league play, tournaments and money games. Never really had an issue with someone getting offended. I do not remember one time that anyone would have gained an advantage by hitting the cue with the tip as opposed to picking it up. I would be very curious to know of a situation where it could reasonably change the outcome of the game. Even supposing that it could, you still get one free warning anyway, so you think that it could be a determining factor TWICE in the same match? I suppose anything is possible!

 

[mikepage]

[...]

As the opponent of a player who receives the picked up cue ball, I see absolutely NO benefit by having my opponent tap the cue ball down table and not contact anything to cause a foul as opposed to him just handing it over. [...]

You need to reread my original description. I'm not talking about the situation where a player could tap the cueball and just chooses not to to save time.

 

[Cuebacca]

A LEGITIMATE intentional foul? That sounds a bit like an oxy moron!

What I mean is an intentional foul using a legal stroke.

I am familliar with this discussion. I do not really know why someone would be offended by someone picking up the cue ball and handing it over. It is simply a tactical play to not rearrange the balls and give your opponent a better layout. I understand what the rules say, and if it ever comes up in a REFEREED match I will absolutely not pick up the ball.

As the opponent of a player who receives the picked up cue ball, I see absolutely NO benefit by having my opponent tap the cue ball down table and not contact anything to cause a foul as opposed to him just handing it over. I kinda feel like a foul is a foul is a foul. Would it really make you feel better to have me pretend to miscue or something? Or would you prefer an honest " here you go, I know that anything else will only improve the layout" ? It is purely a tactcal response designed to not worsen your chances of losing, much like a basketball team that throws the ball out of bounds to try to runout the clock. It may not be the best example of superior mind blowing skill, but it does win games. It is kind of like a bar player who just CANNOT understand why you would EVER play a safety shot at all. They cannot comprehend a concept that does not involve putting a ball in a pocket. They would rather play a five rail bank shot on the eight (that they have never even seen, let alone made) instead of rolling the eight toward a pocket, and hiding the cue ball. Man I love playing those guys!

Again, while I am not disputing what the rules say, or how they are applied, I am saying that it is ridiculous to really obsess over this kind of thing. It is very important to understand the rules so you can apply them with authority, but if you are relying on a rule to win a game you are in trouble.

Wow! You definitely want to re-read the original post. That's the situation I was commenting on, and other situations where there is either an illegal stroke or an illegal part of the cue used to intentionally foul.

No one's getting offended by picking up the wide open cueball as far I know. In fact, if the wide open cueball is picked up by my opponent to intentionally foul, he most likely missed out on a chance to rearrange one or more ball in some way to his advantage, even if only slightly. So, yeah, I'm not a stickler on the picking up of the wide open cueball.

I think it is the "spirit of the rules" that apply here. I have handed the cue ball over, and received it many times over the years in league play, tournaments and money games. Never really had an issue with someone getting offended. I do not remember one time that anyone would have gained an advantage by hitting the cue with the tip as opposed to picking it up. I would be very curious to know of a situation where it could reasonably change the outcome of the game. Even supposing that it could, you still get one free warning anyway, so you think that it could be a determining factor TWICE in the same match? I suppose anything is possible!

That is precisely why I said that a person should not get "one free pass" at making an illegal foul (how do ya like that one? ). It is already unlikely to come up once in a tournament. Twice in one match would really be something. However, it may come up once every now and then, so it's worth having a rule about it.

 

[pulzcul]

Not only was pushing youre ball into the 8 legal,but it was smart to! Don

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Acceptable as merely a ball-in-hand foul?

It should be unsportsmanlike conduct in an officiated match. Although the rule book currently give the player a free pass on the first offense, it should not. The players should be expected to know the rules before the game starts, and if they know the rules they will know that you have to play with your tip, not your hand or your shaft. Even Efren (US Open 2000 against Dallas West).

 

[Andrew Manning]

You need to reread my original description. I'm not talking about the situation where a player could tap the cueball and just chooses not to to save time.

I don't understand, you're saying the player could not touch the CB with his tip without disturbing the balls more than he felt was acceptable? I don't see how this could be possible, considering that touching the CB with the tip lightly enough to move it a millimeter is a "legitimate" intentional foul. If the 8 and 9 were frozen to the CB and the CB was frozen to the rail, it could not have been lifted out without disturbing the balls at least as much as touching the CB with the tip would.

-Andrew

 

[Bob Jewett]

I don't understand, you're saying the player could not touch the CB with his tip without disturbing the balls more than he felt was acceptable? I don't see how this could be possible, considering that touching the CB with the tip lightly enough to move it a millimeter is a "legitimate" intentional foul. ...

I think that Mike wanted us to accept his premise that the player feels he can't touch the cue ball without the possibility of leaving a shot. If you accept that premise, then what should the rule be?

There are lots of players -- I've seen them in league -- who don't know that you can take a foul without moving the cue ball by playing the softest possible perfectly vertical masse shot. You don't have to move the cue ball when taking such a shot, you just have to make tip-to-ball contact. So the player in question might be hampered as much by ignorance as clumsiness.

 

[mikepage]

I don't understand, you're saying the player could not touch the CB with his tip without disturbing the balls more than he felt was acceptable? I don't see how this could be possible, considering that touching the CB with the tip lightly enough to move it a millimeter is a "legitimate" intentional foul.

I'm saying he doesn't want to take the chance of screwing up that 1 mm shot, so instead of trying he just passes on the attempt.

I, as his opponent, want him to attempt to make "legitimate contact" between the tip and the cueball--in hopes that he'll nudge the furniture a bit.

 

[poolpro]

I'm saying he doesn't want to take the chance of screwing up that 1 mm shot, so instead of trying he just passes on the attempt.

I, as his opponent, want him to attempt to make "legitimate contact" between the tip and the cueball--in hopes that he'll nudge the furniture a bit.

OKay, I reread the posts so far and get where you are coming from. I do see that you could gain some advantage by having your opponent attempt a tip to ball contact. Although, I feel if I were your opponent, I could absolutely touch the tip to the ball without disturbing the layout enough to make a difference for you.

So I still say that this is still much ado about nothing. If you are playing someone who could not commit a foul without selling out, you should probably win anyways. I could literally just touch the cue tip to the ball without causing any movement whatsoever ( not even the 1mm you are concerned with).

Also you could just touch the cue ball with the ferrule. I know that this falls under the same illegal foul ( wow ,stil can't get used to that distinction) but it is still just a ball in hand foul. I do not see why my INTENT should make any difference. If I am just lining up for a shot, and my cue accidently touches the cue ball, it is a foul. It does not matter one bit that it was not my INTENTION to committ a foul. The fact remains that it was. A referee is not a psychic, nor should he attempt to be. A players intention should not be taken into account on a foul call. Rarely does a players intent matter ( except when calling a pocket in 8 ball, or say a pushout in 9 ball). On these ocassions it is necessary to state this before the shot. Now even if I INTEND to play a pushout, and roll the cue ball into a specific location, and I instead pocket the cue ball, it would still be a foul. It does not matter that I didn't intend for it to happen, what DID happen was, I committed a foul.

Like I said, this is such a rare occurance, I can't see it making the difference between winning or losing a match. And the rules are clear about it being a free pass on the first one anyways.

My real debate was with the occurance of just picking up the ball to save time instead of just tapping the ball one inch. So I do see your distinction, I don't think it will cost you any games ( or maybe one in about five thousand or so ). I know I have played waaay more than that and can honestly say I have not won or lost based on the distinction of a legitimate versus non legitimate foul.

 

[CreeDo]

It's kind of an interesting situation... you want to foul by touching the CB but doing so might make a shot for the opponent... I know one tactic is to place the tip a hair below the CB and gently lift the stick, I think it's called a lift-brush foul. Anyway efren did it in a straight pool match against someone a long time ago, and the player complained that it constituted an intentional foul cuz he was hitting with the ferrule rather than the tip. He wanted efren to bite 16 points rather than just 1. I think the ref ruled in efren's favor and the score ended up something like 150-0. Anyway I like Bob's idea better... come down vertically and there's no chance of screwing up the position.

I guess it'd also be a good general habit in non-tricky situations to gently roll the CB towards your opponent rather than pick it up and hand it to him.