Jason Robichaud said:
This falls under the even more vague rule in pool, unsportmanlike behavior. You are not supposed to intentionally do it.
Rules - Shooting over a frozen object ball
- Thread starter Cornerman
- Start date
This falls under the even more vague rule in pool, unsportmanlike behavior. You are not supposed to intentionally do it.
Official BCAPL response
In BCAPL play:
Accidental movement with the opponent's option to restore the disturbed ball. That includes a case in which the shot is executed because the forward stroke takes place before the restoration. In all cases that ruling is dependent upon ther being no intent of UC and that there is no effect on the outcome of the shot (if one is executed). If either of those exist then there is a foul at best and more severe UC penalties at worst.
If the action is stopped before the shot is executed and the opponent elects restoration, then the ball will be restored frozen to the cue ball if possible. The spotting regulations of BCAPL Rule 1.46 clearly do not apply. This is a restoration under Rule 1.33.3 - not spotting under 1.46.
The restoration may be done by the offended player, or by the offender with permission of the offended player. Of course, it's best to have a ref/TD/third party do it if possible. Even if it is one of the players, there is no penalty for contacting the cue ball when restoring the ball. This paragraph assumes that proper care is taken not to disturb the position of the cue ball during the restoration.
The specific guidance is BCAPL Rule 1.33, which applies to all accidental movement regardless of whether or not a shot is executed. The wording of the rule has been changed in the next edition to clarify that provision. The OP's particular situation will be added as an Applied Ruling to the next edition as well.
History and the BCAPL's intent and reasoning:
The limiting provision under the old WSR Rule 1.16.1 - that it applied to "...stationary balls located between the cue ball and the shooter while in the act of shooting..." - was mostly ignored, and definitely ignored at the BCA Nationals, at least from the late 90's on and probably before that. The effective enforcement of accidental movement and "Cue Ball Fouls Only" provisions historically has been:
While certainly in the minority, it is not hard to find players with a natural motion that is so quick that it is easy to concieve that the forward stroke could take place before the player even realized that the ball had been disturbed. After talking with the BCAPL National Office about the OP's specific scenario, the belief is that the likelihood of a player gaining a significant advantage because of such an action is negligible. Therefore, there will be no "automatic" foul even if a shot is executed after the accidental movement occurs. However, that belief certainly does not preclude enforcing UC penalties if it can be clearly and definitively determined that the act was truly intentional. Funny thing about UC - you just can't run around and hand it out without solid and convincing evidence.
The case in which the backstroke that disturbs the ball is slower, and maybe there is a pause involved as well, would present a more likely case for UC if the player still continued the shot after a significant time has passed since the accidental movement. However, such a delay does not guarantee a UC ruling. The yips can do funny things to a body and there may be no UC intended at all. Funny thing about UC - you just can't run around and hand it out without solid and convincing evidence. (Did I already say that?)
As with any other case involving post-shot controversey, the referee will come to the table, gather the information, and use their judgment to issue the call.
:smile:
Buddy Eick
BCAPL National Senior Referee
BCAPL Director of Referee Training
Technical Editor, BCAPL Rule Book
bcapl_referee@cox.net
* The contents of this post refer to BCA Pool League (BCAPL) Rules only. The BCAPL National Office has authorized me to act in an official capacity regarding questions about BCAPL Rules matters in public forums.
* Neither I nor any BCAPL referee make any policy decisions regarding BCAPL Rules. Any and all decisions, interpretations, or Applied Rulings are made by the BCAPL National Office and are solely their responsibility. BCAPL referees are enforcers of rules, not legislators. BCAPL Rules 9.4.3 and 9.4.4 apply.
* No reference to, inference concerning, or comment on any other set of rules (WPA, APA, VNEA, TAP, or any other set of rules, public or private) is intended or should be derived from this post unless specifically stated.
* There is no such thing as "BCA Rules" other than in the sense that the Billiard Congress of America (BCA) publishes various rules, including the World Pool-Billiard Association's "World Standardized Rules". The BCA does not edit nor is responsible for the content of the World Standardized Rules. The Official Rules of the BCAPL is a separate and independent set of rules and, to avoid confusion, should not be referred to as "BCA Rules".
* The BCAPL has no association with the Billiard Congress of America other than in their capacity as a member of the BCA.
* The BCAPL has not addressed every imaginable rules issue, nor will it ever likely be able to, as evidenced by the seemingly endless situations that people dream up or that (more frequently) actually happen. If I do not have the answer to a question I will tell you so, then I will get a ruling from the BCAPL National Office and get back to you as soon as I can. If deemed necessary, the BCAPL will then add the ruling to the "Applied Rulings" section of The Official Rules of the BCA Pool League.
In BCAPL play:
Accidental movement with the opponent's option to restore the disturbed ball. That includes a case in which the shot is executed because the forward stroke takes place before the restoration. In all cases that ruling is dependent upon ther being no intent of UC and that there is no effect on the outcome of the shot (if one is executed). If either of those exist then there is a foul at best and more severe UC penalties at worst.
If the action is stopped before the shot is executed and the opponent elects restoration, then the ball will be restored frozen to the cue ball if possible. The spotting regulations of BCAPL Rule 1.46 clearly do not apply. This is a restoration under Rule 1.33.3 - not spotting under 1.46.
The restoration may be done by the offended player, or by the offender with permission of the offended player. Of course, it's best to have a ref/TD/third party do it if possible. Even if it is one of the players, there is no penalty for contacting the cue ball when restoring the ball. This paragraph assumes that proper care is taken not to disturb the position of the cue ball during the restoration.
The specific guidance is BCAPL Rule 1.33, which applies to all accidental movement regardless of whether or not a shot is executed. The wording of the rule has been changed in the next edition to clarify that provision. The OP's particular situation will be added as an Applied Ruling to the next edition as well.
History and the BCAPL's intent and reasoning:
The limiting provision under the old WSR Rule 1.16.1 - that it applied to "...stationary balls located between the cue ball and the shooter while in the act of shooting..." - was mostly ignored, and definitely ignored at the BCA Nationals, at least from the late 90's on and probably before that. The effective enforcement of accidental movement and "Cue Ball Fouls Only" provisions historically has been:
- that it applies at all times - not just when shooting;
- it applies regardless of whether or not a shot is actually executed;
- it does not matter at what point in the body-positioning/ball address/bridging/fidgeting/shooting/finish/stand-up-off-the-shot-process the acidental movement occurs;
- it does not matter where on the table it occurs.
While certainly in the minority, it is not hard to find players with a natural motion that is so quick that it is easy to concieve that the forward stroke could take place before the player even realized that the ball had been disturbed. After talking with the BCAPL National Office about the OP's specific scenario, the belief is that the likelihood of a player gaining a significant advantage because of such an action is negligible. Therefore, there will be no "automatic" foul even if a shot is executed after the accidental movement occurs. However, that belief certainly does not preclude enforcing UC penalties if it can be clearly and definitively determined that the act was truly intentional. Funny thing about UC - you just can't run around and hand it out without solid and convincing evidence.
The case in which the backstroke that disturbs the ball is slower, and maybe there is a pause involved as well, would present a more likely case for UC if the player still continued the shot after a significant time has passed since the accidental movement. However, such a delay does not guarantee a UC ruling. The yips can do funny things to a body and there may be no UC intended at all. Funny thing about UC - you just can't run around and hand it out without solid and convincing evidence. (Did I already say that?)
As with any other case involving post-shot controversey, the referee will come to the table, gather the information, and use their judgment to issue the call.
:smile:
Buddy Eick
BCAPL National Senior Referee
BCAPL Director of Referee Training
Technical Editor, BCAPL Rule Book
bcapl_referee@cox.net
* The contents of this post refer to BCA Pool League (BCAPL) Rules only. The BCAPL National Office has authorized me to act in an official capacity regarding questions about BCAPL Rules matters in public forums.
* Neither I nor any BCAPL referee make any policy decisions regarding BCAPL Rules. Any and all decisions, interpretations, or Applied Rulings are made by the BCAPL National Office and are solely their responsibility. BCAPL referees are enforcers of rules, not legislators. BCAPL Rules 9.4.3 and 9.4.4 apply.
* No reference to, inference concerning, or comment on any other set of rules (WPA, APA, VNEA, TAP, or any other set of rules, public or private) is intended or should be derived from this post unless specifically stated.
* There is no such thing as "BCA Rules" other than in the sense that the Billiard Congress of America (BCA) publishes various rules, including the World Pool-Billiard Association's "World Standardized Rules". The BCA does not edit nor is responsible for the content of the World Standardized Rules. The Official Rules of the BCAPL is a separate and independent set of rules and, to avoid confusion, should not be referred to as "BCA Rules".
* The BCAPL has no association with the Billiard Congress of America other than in their capacity as a member of the BCA.
* The BCAPL has not addressed every imaginable rules issue, nor will it ever likely be able to, as evidenced by the seemingly endless situations that people dream up or that (more frequently) actually happen. If I do not have the answer to a question I will tell you so, then I will get a ruling from the BCAPL National Office and get back to you as soon as I can. If deemed necessary, the BCAPL will then add the ruling to the "Applied Rulings" section of The Official Rules of the BCA Pool League.
Last edited:
I deleted this.
Last edited:
If I were gambling and the player did that, I wouldn't make a big deal of it, I would simply ask him to put it back. If at that time, he disturbed the cue ball, I would call a foul.
deadgearplyr said:
lol... I can see it...
he puts it 2 millimeters away
"Nope, that's not where it was."
He puts it 1 millimeter away
"Nope, that's not where it was."
He puts it a half millimeter away
"Nope, that's not where it was."
He gently touches it to the cueball.
"FOUL"
It depends on how the "cue ball fouls only" rule is written. I think it's better to call all fouls. If I had to rule on the shot under the WPA regulation, I would not call a foul and I'd put the object ball back frozen if it had been called frozen.Cornerman said:
I played one player who was adept at the following technique for shooting over a ball close to the cue ball: on the back stroke, lower your tip so that the object ball is moved back towards your bridge hand. This provides a clear path for the stick to get to the cue ball so you can even draw the cue ball. It is important to practice the motion to make it look natural and to practice the line, "But we're playing cue ball fouls, only, Nit."
In China, this is not a problem. Everybody here always play all fouls referee or not, even in casual play. Also players routinely call fouls on themselves even if unseen by the opponent.
Seems like a very sportsmanlike way to play and makes better players of everyone.
Seems like a very sportsmanlike way to play and makes better players of everyone.
I have seen a Ref mark a cue balls position, pick it up, clean it and replace it. I would think re-positioning an object ball frozen to the cue ball would be covered under this situation.
Anyhow, I like the way they did it on the Seminole Pro Tour. It's cue ball fouls only except when you are shooting over a ball. If you touch a ball you are shooting over it is a foul.
Anyhow, I like the way they did it on the Seminole Pro Tour. It's cue ball fouls only except when you are shooting over a ball. If you touch a ball you are shooting over it is a foul.
I asked some players about this in the APA. I was told that if the other ball moved on the back stroke it is not a foul. Then it is the option of the non shooter to restore it to the "original" position before the player continues his shot. This is handled like any other ball placement. The opponent puts the ball back into or close to the original postion. This eliminates the shooter from disturbing the CB and fouling.