Rules question

[SactownTom]

5.2 Any scratch or foul results in the end of the shooter’s inning, as well as a standard one ball penalty. All balls pocketed in the shooter’s pocket as a result of a stroke that includes a foul do not count for the shooting player and are to be immediately spotted, along with the standard one ball penalty. Also, any balls pocketed in the opponent’s pocket on a stroke that ends in either a pocket scratch or with the cue ball off the table are not to be counted for the opponent, and are to be immediately spotted. However, in the event that any balls are pocketed in the opponent’s pocket on any other illegal stroke (such as a push shot or a double hit), the opponent may elect to have the balls stay down and be counted, or be replaced to their original positions, at their option .

I have to admit, I've never seen or heard this (see in bold above) 'option.

I have also asked some 1PKT players about this they admit it's the first time they had heard about it.

I see this as a table foul the same penalty as a scratch or OB or CB off the table, NOT an intentional foul (penalty difference).


Or maybe it's me and having a bad MONDAY? :eek:

[NH Steve]

I have to admit, I've never seen or heard this (see in bold above) 'option.

I have also asked some 1PKT players about this they admit it's the first time they had heard about it.

I see this as a table foul the same penalty as a scratch or OB or CB off the table, NOT an intentional foul (penalty difference).


Or maybe it's me and having a bad MONDAY? :eek:A pocket scratch or jumped cue ball scratch both result in ball-in-hand. All other fouls are played where the cue ball lies. The purpose of this rule is to prevent using an intentional other sort of foul to eliminate a ball hanging in your opponent's pocket while sneaking the cue ball to a safe location -- especially tempting if your opponent has balls over the head string line for easy pickens if you pocket scratch or jump the cue ball. (there is a story in one of Eddie Robin's books that describes just such a move!)

Even the BCA rules for One Pocket say: "If the shot constitutes a foul other than a scratch, the opponent is allowed to keep the ball." Okay, they're "allowed to keep the ball" -- but what if they don't want to? What I have done is to clarify what the opponent's option is if they don't want to "keep the ball" (say they need more than one, for example).

What do you suggest?

[NH Steve]

A pocket scratch or jumped cue ball scratch both result in ball-in-hand. All other fouls are played where the cue ball lies. The purpose of this rule is to prevent using an intentional other sort of foul to eliminate a ball hanging in your opponent's pocket while sneaking the cue ball to a safe location -- especially tempting if your opponent has balls over the head string line for easy pickens if you pocket scratch or jump the cue ball. (there is a story in one of Eddie Robin's books that describes just such a move!)

Even the BCA rules for One Pocket say: "If the shot constitutes a foul other than a scratch, the opponent is allowed to keep the ball." Okay, they're "allowed to keep the ball" -- but what if they don't want to? What I have done is to clarify what the opponent's option is if they don't want to "keep the ball" (say they need more than one, for example).

What do you suggest?
Actually, if I think of it from the ref or TD point of view, the simplest thing is just to leave it that a ball made in the opponent's pocket always counts for the opponent, unless the cue ball jumps the table or pocket scratches -- that would take a whole lot of controvery out of a situation where a player might have 'double hit' or might have 'pushed'. You still have an argument about whether it was a push or double hit or not, but there is no question as to whether the ball stays down or not!

[vapros]

I dunno about that, Steve, let's think about it some more. As you noted, you would still have to make a decision on the alleged foul. As soon as you have done that, you immediately know whether the option is there or not. It's the same decision, ain't it? :rolleyes:

[SactownTom]

Actually, if I think of it from the ref or TD point of view, the simplest thing is just to leave it that a ball made in the opponent's pocket always counts for the opponent, unless the cue ball jumps the table or pocket scratches -- that would take a whole lot of controvery out of a situation where a player might have 'double hit' or might have 'pushed'. You still have an argument about whether it was a push or double hit or not, but there is no question as to whether the ball stays down or not!

The same would hold true for a 'no rail' foul.

Intentional fouls can be ruled 'unsportsmanlike' conduct and can be penalized either the game or match.

Calling a 'push' or 'double hit' for an experienced Ref isn't that big of a problem.

I still can't see a good reason for the 'option'. Cue ball will be 'inplace' on any table foul. Why or how could balls behind the head string come into play with this rule?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to know to be able to explain to these one pocket players. I've never heard of the rule where a ball pocketed illeagaly wasn't spotted in one pocket.

[NH Steve]

The same would hold true for a 'no rail' foul.

Intentional fouls can be ruled 'unsportsmanlike' conduct and can be penalized either the game or match.

Calling a 'push' or 'double hit' for an experienced Ref isn't that big of a problem.

I still can't see a good reason for the 'option'. Cue ball will be 'inplace' on any table foul. Why or how could balls behind the head string come into play with this rule?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to know to be able to explain to these one pocket players. I've never heard of the rule where a ball pocketed illeagaly wasn't spotted in one pocket.
Tom,
Check this situation out --
START(
%Ac7D7%ED3C7%JE4S2%LD3H0%MD0R0%NG3S7%OL2P1%Pg9V9%QA7[3%RA8A9
%UG5E0%Vd4U0%f7%_D4F4%`E5D1%aF1D1%be6U7%cf0U9%df8V3
)END

Player A lines up as if to 'take out' the hanging ball, but instead weakly bumps the shot, and then immediately follows through in an obvious double hit which pockets the hanging ball and leaves the cue up against the ball on the foot rail. Player A was in a real pickle, because they couldn't just follow the ball into the pocket, because of the 1-ball just over the headstring line -- with ball in hand player B was out for sure. If the hanging ball stays down -- player B wins; if it comes out because of the foul -- player A has gotten away with one :)

Now what if Player B needs two instead of one? He sure wouldn't want his opponent to get away with that maneuver, even if the ball counts for him!

That's the point of the sentence you were questioning.

[hemicudas]

Tom,
Check this situation out --
START(
%Ac7D7%ED3C7%JE4S2%LD3H0%MD0R0%NG3S7%OL2P1%Pg9V9%QA7[3%RA8A9
%UG5E0%Vd4U0%f7%_D4F4%`E5D1%aF1D1%be6U7%cf0U9%df8V3
)END

Player A lines up as if to 'take out' the hanging ball, but instead weakly bumps the shot, and then immediately follows through in an obvious double hit which pockets the hanging ball and leaves the cue up against the ball on the foot rail. Player A was in a real pickle, because they couldn't just follow the ball into the pocket, because of the 1-ball just over the headstring line -- with ball in hand player B was out for sure. If the hanging ball stays down -- player B wins; if it comes out because of the foul -- player A has gotten away with one :)

Now what if Player B needs two instead of one? He sure wouldn't want his opponent to get away with that maneuver, even if the ball counts for him!

That's the point of the sentence you were questioning.I totally agree with you, Steve, if player B needs only one ball. But if he needs 2 balls then player A has no reason to double hit the cue ball. He just makes the hanging ball and freezes to the ball on the end rail. Player B still needs one ball.

[SactownTom]

Tom,
Check this situation out --
START(
%Ac7D7%ED3C7%JE4S2%LD3H0%MD0R0%NG3S7%OL2P1%Pg9V9%QA7[3%RA8A9
%UG5E0%Vd4U0%f7%_D4F4%`E5D1%aF1D1%be6U7%cf0U9%df8V3
)END

Player A lines up as if to 'take out' the hanging ball, but instead weakly bumps the shot, and then immediately follows through in an obvious double hit which pockets the hanging ball and leaves the cue up against the ball on the foot rail. Player A was in a real pickle, because they couldn't just follow the ball into the pocket, because of the 1-ball just over the headstring line -- with ball in hand player B was out for sure. If the hanging ball stays down -- player B wins; if it comes out because of the foul -- player A has gotten away with one :)

Now what if Player B needs two instead of one? He sure wouldn't want his opponent to get away with that maneuver, even if the ball counts for him!

That's the point of the sentence you were questioning.

Steve,

In your example, according to the rule 5.2, the non-shooting player WINS. If they only need one ball.

If the non-shooting player needs 2 balls, then the only question I have is would a ref rule it was an 'unsportsmanlike' flagrant foul. The penalty could be loss of game or match.

But in an un-officiated match;

If you were the non-shooting player in this game, would you call a foul? Not if you suspect your opponent was trying to get away with something? Now you win.

If you were the shooting player, you could call this against yourself. But, that also allows for the shooter to 'invent' a double hit, resulting the ball be spotted. Another situation for arguments.

I understand this situation and you've made a good point. But, at the same time, the rule is giving the shooter an excuse to make a gaff of the game. Intentional fouls are part of the game, but to do it in a flagrant fashion is also, IMO, not the intention of good playing.

[hemicudas]

Simple solution is the non shooting player has the option to call the foul or not. Shooting player has no option.

[titanic jerry]

I would hope that everyone is able to agree on the call en masse and make it only one way.

To be honest as we all know one of the quirks of this game is that so many egos interact with opinionated people in this sport and so controversy will always be there.

As I posted previously, when I was learning to play there were just some things you did not do. The question at hand is a perfect example. If a person flagrantly and obviously made a move like that,his opponent would quit and after it was known what had transpired that guy could not get a game because no one would play with him. And when he asked someone to play they would tell him why they did not want to play with him.

That gave the guy two options.....to see the error of his ways, make an apology and if there was money involved settle that score........or........spend a lot of time practicing because guys who hung out in certain rooms stuck together.

Here is another dilemna....You scratch on the break....during play you make a couple of balls and forget to spot one up........the game continues and you get a shot make a ball and blow the position.....you remember you owe one and you are in line to not only make the spotted ball but easy position on the out ball. Can you spot the ball and win? Do you care enough about the game that you would not want to win that way?

I do not intend to preach about gambling versus non gambling because I am not a hypocrite. I have gambled on pool games for 50 years. But you must admit it is interesting how differently these scenarios would play out based on whether or not the game was being played for money.

What I have never liked is when a person is put down because they choose not to gamble. So many people say things like yeah he plays good but he doesn't come with it when the cash is on the line. I have played people for a Coca Cola and had a great time and saw some great shots. If you know someone who does not gamble but plays well do yourself a favor and try them. You might get a pleasant surprise.

I got beat once in San Francisco playing 8 Ball on a 5 x 10 with a guy with no arms. He had two hooks and used a table brush for a bridge. That game cost me a chocolate milkshake and I was more than happy to pay for it. He had lost both arms in World War 2. He passed away about five years ago. I hope I made him feel good that day and believe me he beat me fair and square. He could even draw his ball with that brush.

This forum is without a doubt the best thing that has happened to one pocket in a very long time.It is rich with humor, statistics and pool stories. The camaraderie we felt in the old days comes through on these threads. Please do not stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Titanic Jerry

[jrhendy]

I would hope that everyone is able to agree on the call en masse and make it only one way.

To be honest as we all know one of the quirks of this game is that so many egos interact with opinionated people in this sport and so controversy will always be there.

As I posted previously, when I was learning to play there were just some things you did not do. The question at hand is a perfect example. If a person flagrantly and obviously made a move like that,his opponent would quit and after it was known what had transpired that guy could not get a game because no one would play with him. And when he asked someone to play they would tell him why they did not want to play with him.

That gave the guy two options.....to see the error of his ways, make an apology and if there was money involved settle that score........or........spend a lot of time practicing because guys who hung out in certain rooms stuck together.

Here is another dilemna....You scratch on the break....during play you make a couple of balls and forget to spot one up........the game continues and you get a shot make a ball and blow the position.....you remember you owe one and you are in line to not only make the spotted ball but easy position on the out ball. Can you spot the ball and win? Do you care enough about the game that you would not want to win that way?

I do not intend to preach about gambling versus non gambling because I am not a hypocrite. I have gambled on pool games for 50 years. But you must admit it is interesting how differently these scenarios would play out based on whether or not the game was being played for money.

What I have never liked is when a person is put down because they choose not to gamble. So many people say things like yeah he plays good but he doesn't come with it when the cash is on the line. I have played people for a Coca Cola and had a great time and saw some great shots. If you know someone who does not gamble but plays well do yourself a favor and try them. You might get a pleasant surprise.

I got beat once in San Francisco playing 8 Ball on a 5 x 10 with a guy with no arms. He had two hooks and used a table brush for a bridge. That game cost me a chocolate milkshake and I was more than happy to pay for it. He had lost both arms in World War 2. He passed away about five years ago. I hope I made him feel good that day and believe me he beat me fair and square. He could even draw his ball with that brush.

This forum is without a doubt the best thing that has happened to one pocket in a very long time.It is rich with humor, statistics and pool stories. The camaraderie we felt in the old days comes through on these threads. Please do not stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Titanic Jerry Reading some of the stories does bring back memories. You mentioned earlier that we knew each other but never played, as I came to the Bay area later. Your right, most of my pool playing was in Socal from the late 50's to the early 80's. I came up here in th early 80's & went back down for a few years, then back up here to stay about 12 years ago. I used to go to San Francisco with Poker Paul & Memo if you remember them. I just turned 65 & only play once & while at Hard Times in Sac. Keep the stories coming, I'll try and remember a few of my own.