You make the call: Bridge Stick? (Billiards Digest, Feb issue)

[BC21]

Has anyone else seen this article, and its incorrect answer?

You decide...

Playing 9ball under the World Standardized Rules, Player A uses a bridge to help line up a shot. Since the rules prohibit placing your cue on the table and leaving it there with no hand touching it, Player A decides to place the bridge on the table (unattended) to show the line of aim while he studies the shot.

Player B calls a foul, and rightfully so, but the "answer" given in Billiards Digest is: "Player A has found a loophole in the rules."

The explanation goes on to say..."What Player A did appears legal under the rules, but you might want to consider whether it was 'using equipment inappropriately', which is unsportsmanlike conduct."

Really? There is no loophole here. There is nothing to consider because it is 100% against the rules (6.17 - Unsportsmanlike Conduct, (h) using equipment inappropriately).

Section 1.3 (Player’s Use of Equipment) is very specific with how the bridge is to be used, stating that the mechanical bridge is "used to support the cue stick during the shot." So using it for any other purpose should be an obvious foul, according to the rules.

I think this type of stuff is a big problem at the amateur level in tournament play. I mean, the rules are plain and simple, but so many players and referees just don't know the rules, don't understand them, or simply choose to ignore them. And the "answer" to this scenario in Billiards Digest sure doesn't help.

 

[straightline]

Good catch. Needs a committee.

 

[hang-the-9]

Has anyone else seen this article, and its incorrect answer?

You decide...

Playing 9ball under the World Standardized Rules, Player A uses a bridge to help line up a shot. Since the rules prohibit placing your cue on the table and leaving it there with no hand touching it, Player A decides to place the bridge on the table (unattended) to show the line of aim while he studies the shot.

Player B calls a foul, and rightfully so, but the "answer" given in Billiards Digest is: "Player A has found a loophole in the rules."

The explanation goes on to say..."What Player A did appears legal under the rules, but you might want to consider whether it was 'using equipment inappropriately', which is unsportsmanlike conduct."

Really? There is no loophole here. There is nothing to consider because it is 100% against the rules (6.17 - Unsportsmanlike Conduct, (h) using equipment inappropriately).

Section 1.3 (Player’s Use of Equipment) is very specific with how the bridge is to be used, stating that the mechanical bridge is "used to support the cue stick during the shot." So using it for any other purpose should be an obvious foul, according to the rules.

I think this type of stuff is a big problem at the amateur level in tournament play. I mean, the rules are plain and simple, but so many players and referees just don't know the rules, don't understand them, or simply choose to ignore them. And the "answer" to this scenario in Billiards Digest sure doesn't help.

We are probably safe from this ruling since most players I know have no idea you can't use the cue to aim and have it leave your hand in the first place, and those that do know the rule do not likely read Billiards Digest or specifically that article to find this LOL

I do agree that you should not be allowed to use a bridge to aim either, even if the rules specifically do not list everything you could possibly use to aim with. I think the rule prohibiting aiming aids also would cover this.

 

[straightline]

I relate aiming to carpentry; measure twice, cut once kind of thing. I do see some of these sighting taboos as akin to journeyman certification codes (for carpenters of course) outlawing straight edges and squares. The entire bunch of pro players has issues with aiming/shooting and with rules like the one mentioned, you have the rest of the pooling population clueless about marksmanship and precision - because that's how the pros do it. I don't see any merit or logic to restricting reasonable aiming/sighting strategies.

 

[garczar]

Has anyone else seen this article, and its incorrect answer?

You decide...

Playing 9ball under the World Standardized Rules, Player A uses a bridge to help line up a shot. Since the rules prohibit placing your cue on the table and leaving it there with no hand touching it, Player A decides to place the bridge on the table (unattended) to show the line of aim while he studies the shot.

Player B calls a foul, and rightfully so, but the "answer" given in Billiards Digest is: "Player A has found a loophole in the rules."

The explanation goes on to say..."What Player A did appears legal under the rules, but you might want to consider whether it was 'using equipment inappropriately', which is unsportsmanlike conduct."

Really? There is no loophole here. There is nothing to consider because it is 100% against the rules (6.17 - Unsportsmanlike Conduct, (h) using equipment inappropriately).

Section 1.3 (Player’s Use of Equipment) is very specific with how the bridge is to be used, stating that the mechanical bridge is "used to support the cue stick during the shot." So using it for any other purpose should be an obvious foul, according to the rules.

I think this type of stuff is a big problem at the amateur level in tournament play. I mean, the rules are plain and simple, but so many players and referees just don't know the rules, don't understand them, or simply choose to ignore them. And the "answer" to this scenario in Billiards Digest sure doesn't help.

So i guess using my laser pointer during a match would be considered 'bad form'?

 

[buckshotshoey]

"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"
----------‐------------
In my short search, I found nothing about sitting the bridge stick on the table "unattended". This is the loophole that was mentioned in Billiad Digest? I've never seen a foul called for laying the bridge on the table... for ANY reason.

I think you are trying to group a cue stick and bridge stick in a single category. Two different pieces of equipment.

The rule also says ...

"
If the player is uncertain about a particular use of equipment, he should
discuss it with the tournament management prior to the start of play. The equipment must be
used only for the purpose or in the manner that the equipment was intended."

Says absolutely nothing about not being able to lay bridge on table unattended. As for equipment use, using a cue stick for aiming, even if it is in hand, is not an intended purpose of the cue stick. But it's allowed.

 

[BC21]

"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"
----------‐------------
In my short search, I found nothing about sitting the bridge stick on the table "unattended". This is the loophole that was mentioned in Billiad Digest? I've never seen a foul called for laying the bridge on the table... for ANY reason.

I think you are trying to group a cue stick and bridge stick in a single category. Two different pieces of equipment.

The rule also says ...

"
If the player is uncertain about a particular use of equipment, he should
discuss it with the tournament management prior to the start of play. The equipment must be
used only for the purpose or in the manner that the equipment was intended."

Says absolutely nothing about not being able to lay bridge on table unattended. As for equipment use, using a cue stick for aiming, even if it is in hand, is not an intended purpose of the cue stick. But it's allowed.

Correct...a bridge can lay on the table unattended when you happen to need a bridge for a particular shot. If the shot does not require the use of a bridge (cue stick does not need to be supported by the bridge) then the bridge is not being used appropriately.

For this particular shot, the cb is near the end rail and the ob is at the other end of the table. It wasn't a bridge shot. The bridge was used as an alignment tool to help the player visualize the shot.

For the record, I wouldn't have called a foul. But as a ref, if a player called a foul on it then I would definitely support the call.

 

[Cornerman]

I think adding the bridge, break and jump sticks to the rule wording would be nice. There are plenty of current rules that are vague or can be looped.

 

[BC21]

"6.12 Cue Stick on the Table
......
As for equipment use, using a cue stick for aiming, even if it is in hand, is not an intended purpose of the cue stick. But it's allowed.

The intended purpose of cue stick is to strike the cb, of course. It's the only tool we have that can be used for shooting a shot.

I don't see any problem with using it for any part of that process, from alignment to aiming to striking the cb - it's all part of shooting the shot. So a player should be allowed to use the cue stick in any manner that helps to pocket the ball or strike the cb accurately, as long as the final stroke is a legal stroke.

 

[BC21]

I think adding the bridge, break and jump sticks to the rule wording would be nice. There are plenty of current rules that are vague or can be looped.

Great point. If the player had laid his break cue or jump cue on the table, instead of the bridge, that would be finding a loophole, because there is nothing in the rules about doing that.

 

[BC21]

I can't imagine needing to place a cue on the table to help with aiming in the first place. I just thought it was an odd solution or answer in the Billiards Digest scenario.

 

[FeelDaShot]

Any player that needs to use their cue or bridge to aim can go right ahead. They've also got the wild 7. Flip it.

P.S. Any player that calls a foul on their opponent for using their cue to aim can get the wild 5 ball too.

 

[BC21]

Any player that needs to use their cue or bridge to aim can go right ahead. They've also got the wild 7. Flip it.

P.S. Any player that calls a foul on their opponent for using their cue to aim can get the wild 5 ball too.

Seriously...lmao!

 

[buckshotshoey]

Great point. If the player had laid his break cue or jump cue on the table, instead of the bridge, that would be finding a loophole, because there is nothing in the rules about doing that.

But these are both cues, are they not? It's in the name.

They are all "cue sticks".

 

[BC21]

But these are both cues, are they not? It's in the name.

They are all "cue sticks".

That's where ambiguity comes into play. The rules imply that it's the playing cue (the cue you're using to shoot the shot) that must be held in your hand and not lay unattended on the table.

Maybe the rule should read.. "no cue stick is allowed to rest on the table without the player's hand still on the cue".

 

[hang-the-9]

"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"
----------‐------------
In my short search, I found nothing about sitting the bridge stick on the table "unattended". This is the loophole that was mentioned in Billiad Digest? I've never seen a foul called for laying the bridge on the table... for ANY reason.

I think you are trying to group a cue stick and bridge stick in a single category. Two different pieces of equipment.

The rule also says ...

"
If the player is uncertain about a particular use of equipment, he should
discuss it with the tournament management prior to the start of play. The equipment must be
used only for the purpose or in the manner that the equipment was intended."

Says absolutely nothing about not being able to lay bridge on table unattended. As for equipment use, using a cue stick for aiming, even if it is in hand, is not an intended purpose of the cue stick. But it's allowed.

The issue is not just leaving the thing on the table, it's about using it to line up a shot and leaving it on the table. I would never call a foul is someone put a cue down on the table to tie their shoes or go to the bathroom. Nor is it an issue with a bridge on the table, unless the player starts to look at it with some angles to line up a shot instead of just putting it down for a second to do something else. It's not only what you do that counts as a foul it's the reason you do it. Say if you hit a cluster of balls with your hand on a shot by accident, it's a normal foul. You do the same thing with the side of your cue in anger, it's a loss of game foul.

 

[Vahmurka]

First and foremost, "Since the rules prohibit placing your cue on the table and leaving it there with no hand touching it" part is not correct any longer. It used to be like so in the past (probably Bob Jewett could remember the details), which resulted in some stupid calls even at some major events.
Since then sound mind took over, and as it stands now, qualified and properly trained officials judge such actions as unsportmanship conduct only if they clearly notice a player uses the equipment for aligning the shot (i.e. aiming, etc.). Other than that, one is free to lay a cue on a playing surface with no penalty incurred.

 

[Tennesseejoe]

I never did see why see there is a need for Rule 6.12. Eliminate it.

 

[RakRunr]

Just for comparison, CSI General Rule 1-3, section 1f permits you to align a shot with your playing cue without holding it. All other equipment, including bridges, is forbidden.

 

[fiftyyardline]

First and foremost, "Since the rules prohibit placing your cue on the table and leaving it there with no hand touching it" part is not correct any longer. It used to be like so in the past (probably Bob Jewett could remember the details), which resulted in some stupid calls even at some major events.
Since then sound mind took over, and as it stands now, qualified and properly trained officials judge such actions as unsportmanship conduct only if they clearly notice a player uses the equipment for aligning the shot (i.e. aiming, etc.). Other than that, one is free to lay a cue on a playing surface with no penalty incurred.

Yes - this - for instance, if I lay my playing cue on the table while I reach under the table to retrieve the bridge stick, that is NOT a foul since I am not using it for aiming. Sometimes I lay my cue on the table while removing the template rack after a break shot - that also is not a foul.