whats the rule ?

[Grantstew]

This just sounds so strange to me, here in Netherlands if the player makes unintentional contact with a ball either with cue, clothing, or hand / arm, then it is ball in hand to the opponent. How bad are these "2 and 3" players? Are they at a level where they find it tricky to play a legal shot? I don't think there is a low enough level league for this over here!

 

[hang-the-9]

This just sounds so strange to me, here in Netherlands if the player makes unintentional contact with a ball either with cue, clothing, or hand / arm, then it is ball in hand to the opponent. How bad are these "2 and 3" players? Are they at a level where they find it tricky to play a legal shot? I don't think there is a low enough level league for this over here!

There are many tournaments, even pro ones, there it's OK to move a ball accidentaly during a shot as long as that ball does not touch anything else or if the path of any other ball does not go through the old location. Before you shoot if you nudge a ball, you are obliged to stop the shot and ask the opponent if he wants to move the ball back or leave it where it was.

The APA it looks like got rid of the "contact with any other ball" and simply said that if the moved ball does not hit the cueball it's OK. So in the APA case, you can move a ball, have it contact another ball, that second ball can go in a pocket, and it's all OK.

 

[mbvl]

I think I get it now. So when the OP said "after looking the situation over my opponent elected not to put the 6 back because it was blocking the 4 ball", why didn't he accidentally move the six out of the way and then shoot the four?:grin:

 

[Hits 'em Hard]

in the name of sportmanship i elected to just shoot from where it rest instead of benefiting twice by him moving it back.

In the name of sportsmanship, you play by the ****ing rules. It was a nit move on your opponent to not move the ball back.

 

[lorider]

well fellas i have been doing some research on this rule. it seems that i can not find any thing that answers this situation fully. i guess rule books would be thicker than phone books in order to cover every situation fully.

with the apa being a cue ball foul only it appears that it would have been a foul only if the disturbed ball had touched the cue ball. in that case the rule states it is a foul but the disturbed ball remains where it stopped " same as in bcapl...more on that later.

while browsing i came across this rule concerning balls frozen on the rail. it is a foul in apa to hit the rail and object ball simultaneously with out either hitting another rail. it is ok to hit the object ball 1st then the same rail. bcapl states it is not a foul to hit the object ball and rail at the same time.

it is not a foul to accidently disturb a ball in bcapl unless it affects the out come of the shot.

in the case of disturbed ball not hitting anything your opponent has the option of respotting it or leaving it. if the disturbed ball hits hits any ball the disturbed ball must stay where it came to rest " same as apa

found another interesting bcapl rule.

called shots.

if you call a combo. say if you hit the 5 intending for the 5 to knock the 7 into the corner pocket. .you make legal contact with the 5 but your aim is off and it does not contact the 7 but ....the cue ball continues rolling forward making contact with the 7 ...knocking it into the called pocket. legal shot. thought you guys said there was no slop allowed in bcapl. :grin:

 

[lorider]

I think I get it now. So when the OP said "after looking the situation over my opponent elected not to put the 6 back because it was blocking the 4 ball", why didn't he accidentally move the six out of the way and then shoot the four?:grin:

dang ....never thought of that.

 

[lorider]

In the name of sportsmanship, you play by the ****ing rules. It was a nit move on your opponent to not move the ball back.

agree with you but as you know....not every one follows rules. that is why jails are over crowded . :grin-square:

 

[hang-the-9]

found another interesting bcapl rule.

called shots.

if you call a combo. say if you hit the 5 intending for the 5 to knock the 7 into the corner pocket. .you make legal contact with the 5 but your aim is off and it does not contact the 7 but ....the cue ball continues rolling forward making contact with the 7 ...knocking it into the called pocket. legal shot. thought you guys said there was no slop allowed in bcapl. :grin:

That is not exactly "slop", but if you start with the "call shot" as bar players like to use it, you need to start calling everything that happens to the ball including it touching a rail on the way to the pocket and how and where on the facing it hits. The occurance of a ball going into a pocket someone called with chance is a lot less than having a missed ball going around 2-3 rails into another pocket.

If you play position and you happen to rub a ball, or hit the point of a pocket but get in line for the shot, do you then pretend you are not where you are and kick at a ball you can see or move the cueball where it may have been if you did not hit anything? Is accidental position treated like a missed shot?

 

[mantis99]

i had an unbelievable crazy incident come up last night. its the 1st time i have done this in 4 years of playing apa.....heck its the 1st time i have ever done this in my life lol.

playing apa 9 ball. i am shooting at the 3 ball intending on banking it back down table to the lower right corner. during my stroke my hand hits the 6 ball at the same time i hit the cue ball. the 6 follows the path of the cue ball and makes contact with the 3 which is coming back down table from the top rail . the 6 makes contact with the 3 knocking it into the right side pocket.

again ...what it the rule on such an incident ?

tell you later what we decided. lol. :grin:

The 3 stays down and your opponent gets ball in hand.

 

[mantis99]

Opponent places the six wherever he wants,three stays down and he gets ball in hand. nine o nine

This is incorrect. The 6 ball gets placed as close to its original position as it was as possible. The opponent does not get to put it wherever he wants.

 

[mantis99]

None of the above are correct. Since you didn't mention that the 6 or 3 came into contact with the cb after you made legal contact with the 3 then I am going to assume that the shot happened exactly as described.

The 3 stays down and the 6 goes back to the original position. There is no BIH with this and you continue to keep shooting. However if the CB comes into contact with either of the balls afterwards then it is BIH for your opponent.

Check APA rule book.

That is an interesting rule. I can't believe they would use something like that. I was of course speaking of the ruling from a WPA stand point and did not know the APA was that different. Even when playing CB fouls only, this would still be a foul because it touched another ball in the WPA rules.

 

[lorider]

That is not exactly "slop", but if you start with the "call shot" as bar players like to use it, you need to start calling everything that happens to the ball including it touching a rail on the way to the pocket and how and where on the facing it hits. The occurance of a ball going into a pocket someone called with chance is a lot less than having a missed ball going around 2-3 rails into another pocket.

If you play position and you happen to rub a ball, or hit the point of a pocket but get in line for the shot, do you then pretend you are not where you are and kick at a ball you can see or move the cueball where it may have been if you did not hit anything? Is accidental position treated like a missed shot?

i am not refering to nit picking bar rules where you have to call every nuance regarding your shot.

i am refering to an attempt to combo the 5 into the 7...pocketing the 7. yes the intended ball did fall into the intended pocket. however the shot did not happen as it was intended. in my opinion...any shot that does not go as intended is slop your opinion may differ:grin:

i am going to use an extreme scenario a poster on here once stated concerning your opinion but the analogy is the same .

he was countering my opinion on the defintion of slop much the same as you are. he stated if he called a certain ball in a certain pocket and the object ball went 4 rails and collided with another ball before it fell into the called pocket it was not slop...simply because he made a legal hit on the object ball and it fell into the called pocket.

i found the scenario i described that you quoted in the bcapl rules along with this interesting tidbit concerning obvious shots.

you have the 6 ball hanging in the corner pocket with the 12 right behind it .the 10 ball is just inches in front of the 12 and the cue ball behind it.

you hit the 10 with the intention of knocking the 12 in with the 6 falling 1st ...of course.

now when you hit the 10 it is obvious to every one what your intentions are. how ever if you do not call it ...it is a foul.

here is another interesting bcapl rule . this time concerning the use of improper equipment ; ex; a tip.

player a asks player b if his tip is legal.

player a does not answer or replies i dont know but actually does know the answer and lets player a shoot with said item.

its a foul on player a but a loss of game to player b for unsportsmanship for intentionally letting player a commit the foul.

who the heck and how the heck is it determined whether player b knew the rule or not?

 

[lorider]

That is an interesting rule. I can't believe they would use something like that. I was of course speaking of the ruling from a WPA stand point and did not know the APA was that different. Even when playing CB fouls only, this would still be a foul because it touched another ball in the WPA rules.

i happen to agree with you.

i have studied the apa rule book and can only find where it is a foul if the moved ball comes in contact with the cue ball....nothing on if it comes in contact with any other ball.

both apa and bcapl state if disturbed ball comes in contact with the cue ball its a foul.

both also state ..in such an event the disturbed ball remains where it stopped.

 

[Dockter]

I had something kind of like this happen in a VNEA league but the cb hit the obstructed ball. A player on my team made the 8, hit a ball with his cue which drifted over into by the top corner and the cb came back and hit that ball in. The other team thought they just got the extra point for the bal that got knocked in, my teammate didn't think that point should count because the 8 was already down ( he was a new player ) unfortunately I had to be the voice of reason and tell him it was actually a foul and he just lost the game. Honestly if he wouldn't have hit that ball into the corner he was about a 98% favorite to scratch on that shot.

Wouldn't it be a lot of fun if we could just get a standardized set of rules and rating systems??? Although I know APA is a bit different and the reason I've never played APA is because I'm not a fan of games that you don't have to call pocket, same reason I'm not a big fan of 9 ball. I've just lost to many to hit and hope shooters that it turned me off to the game.

 

[cleary]

This is a foul 100% of the time.

 

[Billiardsfan]

In my humble opinion there is no clear ruling from the APA rules book. They are as follows under 8 ball game rules 10. Fouls G)

Causing even the slightest movement or altering the course of the cue
ball, even accidentally, is a foul. Even dropping the chalk on the cue ball
is a foul. It is not a foul, however, to accidentally move any other balls
(including the 8-ball) unless, during his turn at the table, a player moves a
ball and it in turn comes in contact with the cue ball. Any balls moved
accidentally during a shot must be replaced by the opponent after the
shot is over and all balls have stopped rolling. If it occurs before the shot,
it must be replaced by the opponent before the shot is taken.

EXCEPTION: If an accidentally moved ball comes in contact with the
cue ball, creating a foul, no object ball will be replaced.

I have a request into the APA for more clarification on what they would rule in this scenario.

 

[tatcat2000]

you have the 6 ball hanging in the corner pocket with the 12 right behind it .the 10 ball is just inches in front of the 12 and the cue ball behind it.

you hit the 10 with the intention of knocking the 12 in with the 6 falling 1st ...of course.

now when you hit the 10 it is obvious to every one what your intentions are. how ever if you do not call it ...it is a foul.

That is not correct. It is not a foul, the shooter simply loses their turn. The shot you refer to, diagrammed in Figure 10-1 of the CSI Applied Ruling for "Combination Shot", is included in the applied rulings specifically to demonstrate two things:

* First, that the called ball might not be the first ball to enter the called pocket, and
* Second, that the shot meets the definition of a "Combination Shot" under the rules, and therefore must be overtly called and can never, per the CSI rules, be considered "obvious".

here is another interesting bcapl rule . this time concerning the use of improper equipment ; ex; a tip.

player a asks player b if his tip is legal.

player a does not answer or replies i dont know but actually does know the answer and lets player a shoot with said item.

its a foul on player a but a loss of game to player b for unsportsmanship for intentionally letting player a commit the foul.

who the heck and how the heck is it determined whether player b knew the rule or not?

The verbiage you provide is neither complete nor accurate, and is therefore a little misleading. The complete verbiage, quoted verbatim from CSI Applied Ruling 1-45 Situation 2, follows:

"During a match, Player A asks Player B if it is legal to use a certain cue or piece of equipment. Player B, knowing that the cue or equipment is illegal and that it would be a foul to use it: (a) remains silent or responds "I don't know"; (b) gives a response that specifically or implicitly gives Player A permission to use the cue or leads Player A to believe that the cue is legal. Player A uses the cue to execute a shot.

Ruling: (a) foul on Player A; (b) unsportsmanlike conduct by Player B with loss of game for the first violation.

Discussion: Players are not required to assist their opponents in any way. In (a), Player A proceeds at their own peril, and should consult a referee if they desire further information. In (b), it is willful unsportsmanlike conduct for Player B to trap Player A into a foul."

(a) and (b) are completely separate situations.

In (a), Player B has no culpability , but also is not required to educate Player A as to the rules concerning the equipment.

In (b), the description is intended to illustrate that Player B, knowing full well that the cue is illegal, intentionally leads Player A to believe that it is legal and, per the effect of the Applied Ruling, gives Player A permission to use the illegal equipment.

The wording could be improved slightly - my bad for some inadequate writing. In (a), there is a presumption that Player B calls a foul after the shot, or a referee is there to witness the shot and call a foul. In (b) the intent of the rule assumes that Player B calls a foul on Player A after telling them that the equipment is OK. However, in the event that Player B did not call a foul or no referee called a foul for the use of illegal equipment, there would be no penalty for Player B under the rule.

The Situation under the applied ruling was created because of that specific sequence of events occurring at BCAPL Nationals several years ago.

Buddy

 

[nine o nine]

This is incorrect. The 6 ball gets placed as close to its original position as it was as possible. The opponent does not get to put it wherever he wants.

When I said the 6 could be put anywhere, yes it should go as close as possible to it's original spot. Having said that, who really would have been paying attention to where the 6 really was? Maybe it was almost blocking the next shot.....or not? Mitch

 

[hang-the-9]

i am not refering to nit picking bar rules where you have to call every nuance regarding your shot.

i am refering to an attempt to combo the 5 into the 7...pocketing the 7. yes the intended ball did fall into the intended pocket. however the shot did not happen as it was intended. in my opinion...any shot that does not go as intended is slop your opinion may differ:grin:

OK then, what if there is a ball near the pocket, you have about a half pocket to shoot in, while going in you brush the other ball, is that also a miss since in your head you did not mean to hit the ball even though you knew you had a 50% chance of hitting it and even then you had a 90% chance of making the shot anyway if you did?

That is why it's way simpler to just call the pocket and not every method it can take to get there.

How about when you play a hit off the rail into that ball to pocket another one but misjudge and it goes clean in. Is that a miss again? Because you called off a rail and off a ball but it went clean?

This is exactly what those stupid bar rules are. You can't say "well you need to call it clean or exactly what it hits or a miss" and then say "well but not with those bar rules" in the same breath.

I've lost with called shot 9 ball when someone missed the shot but still made the 9 in the called pocket, but at least it was a very random chance and not the way many players play with the "spray and pray" play style by hitting every shot at break speed hoping if they miss something else will go in.

What if you miscue but the ball you hit still goes in? Or you wanted to draw but only got a stop shot? All those shots did not go as intended are they all misses now?

 

[lorider]

That is not correct. It is not a foul, the shooter simply loses their turn. The shot you refer to, diagrammed in Figure 10-1 of the CSI Applied Ruling for "Combination Shot", is included in the applied rulings specifically to demonstrate two things:

* First, that the called ball might not be the first ball to enter the called pocket, and
* Second, that the shot meets the definition of a "Combination Shot" under the rules, and therefore must be overtly called and can never, per the CSI rules, be considered "obvious".



The verbiage you provide is neither complete nor accurate, and is therefore a little misleading. The complete verbiage, quoted verbatim from CSI Applied Ruling 1-45 Situation 2, follows:

"During a match, Player A asks Player B if it is legal to use a certain cue or piece of equipment. Player B, knowing that the cue or equipment is illegal and that it would be a foul to use it: (a) remains silent or responds "I don't know"; (b) gives a response that specifically or implicitly gives Player A permission to use the cue or leads Player A to believe that the cue is legal. Player A uses the cue to execute a shot.

Ruling: (a) foul on Player A; (b) unsportsmanlike conduct by Player B with loss of game for the first violation.

Discussion: Players are not required to assist their opponents in any way. In (a), Player A proceeds at their own peril, and should consult a referee if they desire further information. In (b), it is willful unsportsmanlike conduct for Player B to trap Player A into a foul."

(a) and (b) are completely separate situations.

In (a), Player B has no culpability , but also is not required to educate Player A as to the rules concerning the equipment.

In (b), the description is intended to illustrate that Player B, knowing full well that the cue is illegal, intentionally leads Player A to believe that it is legal and, per the effect of the Applied Ruling, gives Player A permission to use the illegal equipment.

The wording could be improved slightly - my bad for some inadequate writing. In (a), there is a presumption that Player B calls a foul after the shot, or a referee is there to witness the shot and call a foul. In (b) the intent of the rule assumes that Player B calls a foul on Player A after telling them that the equipment is OK. However, in the event that Player B did not call a foul or no referee called a foul for the use of illegal equipment, there would be no penalty for Player B under the rule.

The Situation under the applied ruling was created because of that specific sequence of events occurring at BCAPL Nationals several years ago.

Buddy

thanks for taking the time to clarify the rules buddy. to the average player it would appear obvious that the 12 would be the intended ball you are attempting to pocket " after the 6 ball" as it is the one directly in front of the pocket. i guess by some fluke the 10 could fall instead of the 12 and the shooter would claim it was the intended object ball .

in no way am i faulting you for the wording in the second rule. as stated on this forum many times when rules are discussed. actual wording of a rule and the actual intent of the rule can be misconstrued.

do you mean to say ...a bcapl member once knowingly misled another member on a rule during nationals and then said member called foul ? according to most members of this forum...only apa members would stoop to such shenanigans to win a match. :grin: