When are MISCUE and SCOOP Shots Fouls?

[dr_dave]

I think there’s a huge difference between a miscue and a scoop shot.

Most of the time, in non-recorded matches, these shots are good because it’s hard to prove a double hit.

However, in televised or streamed matches, the referee can simply review the playback, just look to see whether the cue tip moves out of the way immediately after contacting the cue ball. It’s that simple.

As clearly demonstrated in my video, playback of normal video footage does not always reveal the action of the shot. But when it does not, the benefit of the doubt must always go to the shooter.

 

[Renderu]

I was hoping we would get some debate on this.

Do you think all miscues and scoops should be fouls? Is so, how would you respond to the 5 reasons above?

Also, how would you write the new rule so it could be applied accurately, fairly, and consistently?

For reference, here is the current rule:

2.11  MISCUE
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue-ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or due to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue-stick with the cue-ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue-ball at the same time, and this causes the cue-ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. If an unintentional miscue causes the cue-ball to leave the playing surface, including partially or fully jumping over a ball, it is treated like a legal jump shot. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 3.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).

Some of my miscues are only known to me. As mentioned in one of your reasons it sort of slips at the end of the contact period with the cue ball. I even get some drawback.

 

[dr_dave]

Some of my miscues are only known to me. As mentioned in one of your reasons it sort of slips at the end of the contact period with the cue ball. I even get some drawback.

I think those don’t usually result in secondary contact.

 

[MattPoland]

I’m in strong favor that all miscues should be fouls by definition / fiat in the WPA rules.

1. They are sloppy contacts of the cue tip to the cueball.
2. They are going to be double hits more often than not.
3. In honor of pool being a precision sport calling them fouls upholds the game to a higher standard and pedigree.
4. Permitting miscues and scoop jumps is amateurish like “cueball fouls only”.
5. I believe with careful effort a meaningful definition could be worded that doesn’t rely solely on the sound and can be generally accepted by players without too many arguments, especially since as players we all know a real miscue when we see one.
6. Leagues like VNEA, CSI, TAP and APA would maintain their own rules and amateurs would be largely unaffected (like with cueball fouls only)
7. I believe if we made the change, two generations from now would look back on this era and laugh at the fact miscues were ever allowed as legal strokes.
8. You already know it’s a blight by making intentional miscues “unsportsmanlike conduct”

That’s my singular opinion on the matter.