Ruling

teebee said:
I agree, I don't think it is a foul to set equipment anywhere on a table as long as you don't commit a foul while doing it. I can't find anything that makes it a foul to leave that equipment there when you are done with it ( unorthodox and careless maybe). You are responsible to make sure a pocket is clear of extra balls that make it unlikely to recieve another ball, I wonder if this is a similar situation.
Click to expand...


See, the part that gets me is, there's a chance the shooter wasn't aware that something was in the pocket. The fact is, step outside this for a moment and remember what JoeyA said initially -

What is the right thing to do?

Well, the right thing to do is figure out a way that the shooter continues shooting. He pocketed the ball. The only reason why the ball didn't stay in the pocket is because his opponent left his equipment IN the pocket which he really shouldn't do.

Now, if the shooter knew the cue handle was there, I would probably feel differently.
 
cigardave said:
I'm hard pressed to believe that a foul was committed in the situation originally described. The rule cited by Jude does not apply imo.

The question of whether or not the ball would have stayed down in the pocket had the cue butt section not been there can never be answered with utmost certainty.

The correct call imo is... Player A's turn at the table... with the table left as is after the ball popped out of the pocket while Player B was shooting.

And, of course, the cue extension should be removed from the pocket before Player A shoots his first shot.
Click to expand...


Well, it applies in the sense that the rule specifies that you are responsible for the equipment you bring to the table. It doesn't specify if that responsibility ends when your turn ends or when you remove the equipment from the table.
 
Player A goofed and left his equipment on the table. It could well have been an honest mistake.

Player B, however, was not paying enough attention either, else he would have fished out that cue piece and handed it back to A.

Sounds like one of those "oops" situations, not unsportsmanlike conduct on the part of A. Doesn't that have to be largely intentional?

I'm not sure who I would rule against, as they both goofed - one left his equipment on the table, and the other didn't notice it and move it. Granted, A is more at fault than B in that sense, as he's the cause of the whole issue to start with.
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
See, the part that gets me is, there's a chance the shooter wasn't aware that something was in the pocket. The fact is, step outside this for a moment and remember what JoeyA said initially -
Click to expand...



Well, if player A is looking at his refection in the waitresses eyes and happens to notice his opponent make the 9 on the snap, but doesn't notice that he scratched as well and pays him $100 for that game...... OR, player A is picking his nose and examining his find and doesn't see player B commit a foul by not hitting the object ball and accepts being hooked behind another ball......IT'S HIS FAULT.
Players should pay attention to what's happeneing at the table during their opponents turn. It's THEIR responsibility. imo :)
Doug
( I always paid VERY close attention to how I was losing all my games, before paying the man his cheese )


.
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
Here's your choices-

1. BCA rules for referees 2.18 Outside interference. Balls are to be restored and replayed. This is the one I would go with.

2. rule 2.11. On NON-ball return systems, it is the shooters responsibility to check pockets. If a ball goes in and pops out, too bad. Next shooters turn.
Click to expand...


How about this one:

3.41 Interference
If the non-shooting player distracts his opponent or interferes with his play, he has fouled. If a player shoots out of turn, or moves any ball except during his inning, it is considered to be interference.
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
Well, it applies in the sense that the rule specifies that you are responsible for the equipment you bring to the table. It doesn't specify if that responsibility ends when your turn ends or when you remove the equipment from the table.
Click to expand...
Jude - I agree with your statements above. What I don't agree with is calling a foul on Player A in this situation. The example cited in the rule is a sitaution that a player single-handedly causes a change in the layout of the table by dropping something on a ball that he brought to the table. In that sense he is responsible and should pay a penalty for his mistake.

IMO, what it doesn't infer is that any anomoly caused by what Player A brought to the table (in this case, the ball popping out of the pocket is most likely caused by the forgotten butt in the pocket) is a foul on Player A. That's what I don't agree with.
 
Smorgass Bored said:
Well, if player A is looking at his refection in the waitresses eyes and happens to notice his opponent make the 9 on the snap, but doesn't notice that he scratched as well and pays him $100 for that game...... OR, player A is picking his nose and examining his find and doesn't see player B commit a foul by not hitting the object ball and accepts being hooked behind another ball......IT'S HIS FAULT.
Players should pay attention to what's happeneing at the table during their opponents turn. It's THEIR responsibility. imo :)
Doug
( I always paid VERY close attention to how I was losing all my games, before paying the man his cheese )
Click to expand...


I honestly believe you could see a ref rule any one of a number of ways here. I mean, our discussion right here illustrates all the possibilities.
 
I think that a player accepts the table and pocket condition when he takes a shot. Repeated actions that affect table conditions by the opponent could be construed as unsportsmanlike. Even repeated carelessness.
 
cigardave said:
Jude - I agree with your statements above. What I don't agree with is calling a foul on Player A in this situation. The example cited in the rule is a sitaution that a player single-handedly causes a change in the layout of the table by dropping something on a ball that he brought to the table. In that sense he is responsible and should pay a penalty for his mistake.

IMO, what it doesn't infer is that any anomoly caused by what Player A brought to the table (in this case, the ball popping out of the pocket is most likely caused by the forgotten butt in the pocket) is a foul on Player A. That's what I don't agree with.
Click to expand...


You make a very good point. I can't disagree with you. However, I'm not sure you're right. I'm not sure I'm right and really, I'm just tossing rules and thoughts out there. In fact, I'm not sure we would even see two refs agree on a proper ruling here. It's a good brain tease.
 
Please Tease Me. Whip Me, Thrill Me, Kill Me

Jude Rosenstock said:
It's a good brain tease.
Click to expand...


Yes, it's a tease alright, but it's not my brain that's aroused. It's my 6" jump handle.
Doug
( hey, just how long did you expect me to participate in a pool related thread, before resorting to jokes ) :)


.
 
I just spoke to a BCA Referee and these are some of the things he says:

Tough question No rule really applies directly to this matter.
Player A is not guilty of unsportmanlike conduct.
But one rule states that a player cannot let go of their stick at the table unless holding the table during break or say to bend down to tie their shoe. It is widely considered to be a foul to shoot a shot with a peice of random equipment on the table i.e. say a bridge you at the last minute choose not to use.
Click to expand...

Since player had an opportunity to remove said device prior to shooting even if it was not his equipment, my feeling is it is a foul on player B. The same as if Player A left their stick on the table along the rail and player shot without moving it.
Click to expand...

what if Player B didn't see it? What if the break handle (or whatever it's called) is small enough to fit entirely in the pocket?

Then that is simple nothing in the pocket can obstruct a ball from leaving the table so the ball goes down and player B continues to shoot.
Click to expand...

Only actual table parts can cause a ball to return to the table. On a drop pocket table the balls already pocketed cannot hold a ball from being pocketed but most people remove cluttered pockets so no arguements happen.
Click to expand...

Player A would only receive a penalty if it was deliberate. You can't have accidental unsportsmanlike conduct.
Click to expand...
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
BCA Ref said:
But one rule states that a player cannot let go of their stick at the table unless holding the table during break or say to bend down to tie their shoe.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I don't mean to side-track the thread, but I'm pretty sure that this is a misconception that should be cleared up. I'm surprised to hear a BCA ref say that. You can put the cue down on the table as long as you don't use it to aim. Sometimes I set my cue down on the table when I'm going to go grab a bridge for example. I just make sure to set it at such an angle that it's clearly not being used to aim.

Here is the rule from WPA:

6.12 Cue Stick on the Table
If the shooter uses his cue stick in order to align a shot by placing it on the table without having a hand on the stick, it is a foul.
​

and from the BCA:

3.42 DEVICES
Players are not allowed to use a ball, the triangle or any other width-measuring device to see if the cue ball or an object ball would travel through a gap, etc. Only the cue stick may be used as an aid to judge gaps or as an aid to aligning a shot., so long as the cue is held by the hand. To do so otherwise is a foul and unsportsmanlike conduct. (Also see Rules 1.3, 1.4 and 2.15)​
 
Regarding the actual question, I'm not sure how I'd rule it if I were a ref, if I were required to use rules to back my decision. I guess I'm glad I'm not a ref.

In my opinion, there should be a way to rule it to where Player B shouldn't be punished. It is bad form, IMO, to shoot a jump shot with your cue handle in the pocket. There are plenty of other places to put it. Sure it was unobservant for Player B to shoot without noticing the cue, but it should have never been there in the first place, IMO. Giving Player A ball in is too much, considering he made the bigger error.
 
Cuebacca said:
I don't mean to side-track the thread, but I'm pretty sure that this is a misconception that should be cleared up. I'm surprised to hear a BCA ref say that. You can put the cue down on the table as long as you don't use it to aim. Sometimes I set my cue down on the table when I'm going to go grab a bridge for example. I just make sure to set it at such an angle that it's clearly not being used to aim.

Here is the rule from WPA:

6.12 Cue Stick on the Table
If the shooter uses his cue stick in order to align a shot by placing it on the table without having a hand on the stick, it is a foul.
​

and from the BCA:

3.42 DEVICES
Players are not allowed to use a ball, the triangle or any other width-measuring device to see if the cue ball or an object ball would travel through a gap, etc. Only the cue stick may be used as an aid to judge gaps or as an aid to aligning a shot., so long as the cue is held by the hand. To do so otherwise is a foul and unsportsmanlike conduct. (Also see Rules 1.3, 1.4 and 2.15)​
Click to expand...


Okay, in all fairness, I caught him on his way out the door so he wasn't looking at specific wording. He did want to say that to make things clear,

Drop pocket should be cleared by player so a stacked ball doesn't reflect a ball back onto table. That is the only time a ball can go back on the table. waht I meant earlier was that a hanging ball cannot be stopped from being pocketed.
Click to expand...

Regarding what you state Cuebacca, there are many instances where a referee will call foul the moment you lay a cue or bridge on the table and you are no longer in physical contact with it. If it is obvious that you are not using it for measuring purposes (ie., tying your shoe), it's different. I'm not sure using the pocket as a cue-holder is quite the same thing.
 
Neil said:
I'm not sure where he is getting this from??? If a player shoots a ball hard dead center in the pocket, and it goes down and comes back up onto the table, (I'm sure most have seen this happen), it is a miss.

Now, in the given situation, there was an obstruction in the pocket that was unknown about. That is why I would say the shot gets replayed.
Click to expand...

LOL, he is not even reading this thread and coming to interestingly similar conclusions.

Then I still think ball is down and player continues to shoot.
You could set the shot up again and claim outside interference but not really needed if the ball was down and no other balls affected. But that is still probably the best call claim outside interference and reset and reshoot the shot
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top