When are MISCUE and SCOOP Shots Fouls?

dr_dave

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
FYI, I just posted a new video that fully explores miscue and scoop shots in detail and makes it totally clear when they are legal or not. Several recent calls from recent pro tournament matches are also examined in detail, including the recent controversial scoop shot by Patric Gomez against Jayson Shaw in the recent Philippines Open. Check it out:


Supporting Resources:
- rules resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/rules/
- WPA “official rules of pool:” https://wpapool.com/rules/
- foul resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/
- miscue resource page: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/miscue/
- scoop shot resource page: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/scoop/
- more examples of bad calls: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/examples/

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!
 
dr_dave said:
FYI, I just posted a new video that fully explores miscue and scoop shots in detail and makes it totally clear when they are legal or not. Several recent calls from recent pro tournament matches are also examined in detail, including the recent controversial scoop shot by Patric Gomez against Jayson Shaw in the recent Philippines Open. Check it out:


Supporting Resources:
- rules resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/rules/
- WPA “official rules of pool:” https://wpapool.com/rules/
- foul resources: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/
- miscue resource page: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/miscue/
- scoop shot resource page: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/scoop/
- more examples of bad calls: https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/foul/examples/

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!
Click to expand...

FYI, Here are other recent relevant videos:


 
FYI, I just expanded and improved the miscue resource page on my website, and I thought the new last section would be of interest here:

If most miscues involve secondary contact, should all miscue be called as fouls?​

As shown with numerous examples in the videos above, high-speed-video footage does seem to imply that most miscues involve sliding contact and secondary hits by the tip or side of the shaft. However, a miscue is not considered a foul unless it is intentional, to achieve some advantage. One might make an argument that all miscues should be fouls. However, there are compelling reasons to not do this:

  1. Tradition. Miscues have never been considered automatically fouls in the past, so this would be a major change to the sport, and many people will find it difficult to accept. Rules should not be changed unless there are compelling reasons to do so.
  2. A miscue is a mistake that is usually penalty enough since the shot objectives are not achieved. Adding a ball-in-hand penalty might be considered a bit harsh.
  3. Rarely, a miscue is a clean hit with no secondary contact.
  4. It is not always possible to be sure a miscue occurred. You can’t judge them by sound, especially in a noisy environment, and especially with many people playing at once on surrounding tables. For more info and demonstrations, see: using sound to judge fouls.
  5. Sometimes “partial miscues” occur, where the tip slips during contact, but not at the beginning of contact. These shots sometimes sound a little funny, they might not involve secondary contact, they leave a different type of mark on the tip, and the CB might deflect a little more than normal, but they are not “blatant miscues.” Calling “partial miscues” might be difficult and require too much judgment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top