What’s your take on this?

Jeff sparks

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
3,317
From
Houston, Texas
Two object balls and the cue ball are the only balls left on the table after player A shoots in what he thinks is his game ball... He says to his opponent, “I’m out.” Then starts taking balls out of his opponents pockets, setting them on the table next to the pockets from where they came... His opponent ( player B ) is doing the same thing on the other side of the table, taking balls out of player A’s pockets and setting them on the table next to the pockets where they came from... When player B removes the last ball out of player A’s pocket with his right hand, he picks up the cue ball with his left hand and realizes player A isn’t out, he’s a ball short...

What’s your ruling if you’re the TD at DCC...

And would it be the same if it was a friendly match for $20.00 a game?

This happened today at Bogies, I wasn’t sure how to rule on it when asked, but I did, of course one guy wasn’t happy as almost always is the case...
 

Tobermory

Verified Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
1,881
From
San Francisco, CA
If it is a tournament and there are written rules that govern what happens if a player miscalls game completion then I suppose those rules apply.

If there are no such rules, then it might be argued that Player B commits a foul by picking up the CB in the middle of Player A's turn. What is the penalty for intentionally disrupting the other player's inning by picking up the CB?

On the other hand, since Player A started the problem by miscalling the situation, then equity would call for the CB to be put back on the table as close to where it was and it is still Player A's turn.
 

Patrick Johnson

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
1,447
If it’s a refereed match, then it seems to me that moving the cue ball because player A prematurely declared the game over has to work against player A, either by ball-in-hand foul (if the remaining 2 balls weren’t moved) or by loss of game. I have no authoritative basis for this whatsoever.

If it’s just the boys playing for this week’s custody of the mad money, then of course it’s whoever’s loudest, as usual.

pj
chgo
 

Frank Almanza

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
2,569
From
Upland, California
I believe player B has unwillingly conceded the game by picking up the cue ball, same as raking the balls. Even if he was duped into doing so by player A.
 

vapros

Verified Member
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
4,806
From
baton rouge, la
Jeff, the first thing that comes to my mind is that there wasn't anything good that could happen to you in that position, as you noted. Were they asking if you knew a rule that would apply, or just to name a winner in the argument? You were in a trap, but at least one of the players should have known the correct score. Bad one pocket.
 

One Pocket Ghost

Verified Member
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
9,711
From
Ghosttown
If it was a $50 a game gambling match and both players agreed to abide by my decision - period - with no bitching and moaning afterwards...this would be my decision, for sure...

Imo both players erred, and so I say these errors cancel out each other...therefore my decision is that nobody wins or loses the the game - it is to be replayed.

- Ghost
 

Billy Jackets

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
2,735
The guy that said I'm out , initiated anything that happened afterward, therefore it should all be on him.
Player B can't foul after the fact unless he has been misled.
Whether intentional or not.
 
Last edited:

El Chapo

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
1,649
If I had to call this I’d put the cb and ob back where they were in spots both players agreed upon. This happens every frame in snooker it’s not the end of the world. It’s different if it was a stack of balls or something of course, but it’s not here.

Don’t think too much, that’s an easy and fair solution.

Personally, if I was to punish someone somehow it would be the player who declared erroneously the game was over when it wasn’t and thus erred first. In other words, if he wasn’t such a Duffus or wasn’t such a cheat, this never woulda happened so it’s easy to call who needs to pay.
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
I believe player B has unwillingly conceded the game by picking up the cue ball, same as raking the balls. Even if he was duped into doing so by player A.

I also agree with Frank on this one. Player A still has control of the table if, in fact, he's not out. With that understanding, he then should be allowed to evaluate the situation without any interference from player B. If player B impulsively intercedes with the evaluation process and picks up the cue ball he then concedes the game. It's not a pretty picture, but one that is technically correct. There is ..no replaying the game.. unless you're having a friendly type of competition. :sorry IMO

Dr. Bill
 

lll

Verified Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
19,057
From
vero beach fl
first of all
its really amazing BOTH players didnt know the score....:eek:
i think i agree with frank above
"I believe player B has unwillingly conceded the game by picking up the cue ball, same as raking the balls. Even if he was duped into doing so by player A."
that being said
putting the balls on the table to count them didnt disturb the balls on the table so no foul
declaring i won but not disturbing the balls on the table ,,,,no foul
picking up the cue ball ...foul at the least and concession of game
what i think is the fair thing is
put the balls back in the pockets
replace the cue ball as best as possible and continue play
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
I also agree with Frank on this one. Player A still has control of the table if, in fact, he's not out. With that understanding, he then should be allowed to evaluate the situation without any interference from player B. If player B impulsively intercedes with the evaluation process and picks up the cue ball he then concedes the game. It's not a pretty picture, but one that is technically correct. There is ..no replaying the game.. unless you're having a friendly type of competition. :sorry IMO

Dr. Bill

Let's say there were several more balls on the table and player B impulsively moves several of them figuring that player A was out but snaps and realizes that player A is not out, what then? where do you draw the line on the liability of player B's impulsive mistake? There really isn't a line..technically..it's a lack of good judgment on player B's part, and should be handled like the rules stipulate. Interference from player B.:sorry:eek:n calling interference on player B.

Of course, there are many ways this can be handled based on the type of relationship the two players have with one another, but "technically" I stand by my decision, interference on player B.


Dr. Bill
 

NH Steve

Administrator
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
12,283
From
New Hampshire
This is interesting...

This is interesting...

Our rules did make an attempt at laying groundwork to define this sort of mistaken interference at what is thought to be the end of a game. From our rules:
10. Keeping score

10.1 It is the responsibility of the shooting player to verify their own ball count as they approach their out ball, and the non-shooting player should avoid making comments about how many balls are needed. However, if the non-shooting player disturbs the balls, or breaks down their stick, or in the judgment of the acting official otherwise significantly disturbs the shooter in the assumption that the shooter is already out, such acts are considered a concession, and the shooter is considered to have won, regardless of whether a subsequent count reveals that more balls are needed. Likewise, if it can be verified that the non-shooting player’s mistaken statement of the number of balls needed leads directly to the shooter pocketing said number of balls and the assumption of the game being over, then the shooter wins, even if it is subsequently determined that the non-shooting player’s statement of balls needed was in error.

10.2 If the shooting player disturbs only one of the remaining balls on the table under their own mistaken assumption that the game is over, play continues under the terms of rule 6.1. However, if the shooting player disturbs two or more of the remaining balls in play on their own mistaken assumption that the game is over, then it is the shooting player that forfeits the game.

Players should refrain from moving or removing balls from their opponent’s pocket or scoring tray for any reason, except to spot a ball following a scratch or to sufficiently clear a pocket to permit entry of additional balls for an impending shot, and should only do so with respect for their opponent’s scoring preferences.

Just speaking from my heart, I believe I would have said replace the cue ball and carry on. Because the shooting player never did disturb any of the balls on the table, so they never violated the hard rule of disturbing "two or more" of the remaining balls (which would be loss of game for them). Both players disturbed the "soft rule" of reaching into the opponent's pocket. Player B took it one step further and picked up the cue ball. Technically that is only one ball disturbed so the balls go back and player A continues (granted, if it was player A). I don't think I would call a foul on player B because it was not their shot and there were extenuating circumstances. If player A had picked up the cue ball I would say they fouled, a ball spots and player B shoots. But simply based on both players seemingly having a hand in the kerfuffle so to speak, that would probably have been my off the top of my head ruling.

But looking closely at our official rules, there is a definite penalty for player 'B' disturbing any balls at all, thinking the game is over -- highlighted in red above. So technically it looks like by our rules as written, player 'B' has conceded, basically like Dr. Bill noted.
 

Jeff sparks

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
3,317
From
Houston, Texas
Friendly competition for $20.00 a game... They both agreed to abide by whatever I decided before I would even listen to the problem... one guy I know for a long time, the other, 1st time I met him...

I listened and thought about what had happened and decided what I would do if I was involved as either player in this type of friendly competition...

I told the guy that said he was out, that he was wrong in saying that before counting the balls, however he didn’t disturb any of the remaining balls on the table, so technically he was ok within the written rules as I knew them...

I explained to the other guy that even though I sympathized with his error of picking up the cb, that he was at fault under the rules as I understood them... He should lose the game...

However, neither player had touched either one of the object balls, and both knew where the cb was before it was picked up, so I recommended replacing the cb and continuing the game to a conclusion... The player didn’t have a gimme shot at his out ball, so they agreed and continued... I sensed the player who picked up the cb was unhappy with the decision, but I thought it was fair and would rule that way again in a friendly game in the unlikely event this ever happened again...

I do believe in a tournament environment, he would have been even more unhappy, I think he would have lost the game...
 

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
What’s your take on this?

I believe player B has unwillingly conceded the game by picking up the cue ball, same as raking the balls. Even if he was duped into doing so by player A.



This is also my take. Lesson learned to count the balls before moving anything on the table. Sucks but even if it were me who did it I would accept it the loss and lesson.
 

jalapus logan

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
307
I also agree with Frank on this one. Player A still has control of the table if, in fact, he's not out. With that understanding, he then should be allowed to evaluate the situation without any interference from player B. If player B impulsively intercedes with the evaluation process and picks up the cue ball he then concedes the game. It's not a pretty picture, but one that is technically correct. There is ..no replaying the game.. unless you're having a friendly type of competition. :sorry IMO

Dr. Bill

Conceding a game is inherently a willful act, therefore one can not unwillingly concede a game. Player B did nothing impulsive here, rather he acted on good faith that player A was correct, which he was not. Player A caused the confusion, player B finished it. It is my sense of fairness that the game should be replayed, so I agree with Ghost. If I were in either players shoes, I'd offer to replay the game. Just IMHO. Probably no hard and fast right or wrong here. Of course, if in tourney play, must go by the letter of the law, whatever that may be.
 

jalapus logan

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
307
Our rules did make an attempt at laying groundwork to define this sort of mistaken interference at what is thought to be the end of a game. From our rules:


Just speaking from my heart, I believe I would have said replace the cue ball and carry on. Because the shooting player never did disturb any of the balls on the table, so they never violated the hard rule of disturbing "two or more" of the remaining balls (which would be loss of game for them). Both players disturbed the "soft rule" of reaching into the opponent's pocket. Player B took it one step further and picked up the cue ball. Technically that is only one ball disturbed so the balls go back and player A continues (granted, if it was player A). I don't think I would call a foul on player B because it was not their shot and there were extenuating circumstances. If player A had picked up the cue ball I would say they fouled, a ball spots and player B shoots. But simply based on both players seemingly having a hand in the kerfuffle so to speak, that would probably have been my off the top of my head ruling.

But looking closely at our official rules, there is a definite penalty for player 'B' disturbing any balls at all, thinking the game is over -- highlighted in red above. So technically it looks like by our rules as written, player 'B' has conceded, basically like Dr. Bill noted.

This is the first I've heard of this rule, but I'm good with it. If in a friendly game, I'll just respot the cue ball or replay the game, otherwise, I'm going with this rule. Thanks for digging it up.
 

Island Drive

Verified Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
5,192
From
florence, colorado
This is also my take. Lesson learned to count the balls before moving anything on the table. Sucks but even if it were me who did it I would accept it the loss and lesson.

Period, as a seated player it's ''your job''.


The seated player could of possibly won the game legally if he would of left opponent alone in his ball gathering, and then do the final count with his ''hands off'' approach. One you touch balls, it's an act of conceding.

In 8 ball, if your opponent shoots your ball group and you don't inform him of the foul right away, then once he makes the second ball a foul cannot be called.
 

NH Steve

Administrator
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
12,283
From
New Hampshire
Conceding a game is inherently a willful act, therefore one can not unwillingly concede a game. Player B did nothing impulsive here, rather he acted on good faith that player A was correct, which he was not. Player A caused the confusion, player B finished it. It is my sense of fairness that the game should be replayed, so I agree with Ghost. If I were in either players shoes, I'd offer to replay the game. Just IMHO. Probably no hard and fast right or wrong here. Of course, if in tourney play, must go by the letter of the law, whatever that may be.
Part of the reason the concession rule is in place, is that when the opponent accidentally or on purpose (they will almost always say accidentally -- even if you repeatedly see it from certain players lol), but when they make those moves it is generally a disruption of the shooting player's momentum, i.e. those moves have the effect of potentially sharking the shooter.

I had a guy 40 years ago (back in the 9-ball days), who would very often reach for the rack, before I shot in the 9-ball. After I missed the 9 a few times, and knowing that it bugged me, but damned if I was going to acknowledge that to my opponent, I came up with what turned out to be a lucky genius solution. From then on when he did that, I stopped shooting, and began to reach into the pockets and pull out the other 8 balls -- but I did it subtly and carefully, so as not to disturb either the 9 or the cue ball. That forced his hand and he had to either go ahead and concede the 9 or learn that he needed to stay put if he wanted me to shoot the 9. I never really had that problem with him again!!

Plus this has served me very well ever since with many other players -- including in One Pocket. (Although after one guy balked at conceding the last ball when that played out he did threaten to squash me like a bug when I followed up with something like, "Well, If you want me to shoot, you need to stay sitting in your seat and shut up.")

Now Jeff's story makes me wonder just a little teeny bit -- did player 'B' happen to get up, reach for the cash, or say something prior to player 'A' taking the balls out? If he did, that exactly parallels the kind of thing I am talking about, and further reinforces why player 'B' gets the loss in Jeff's situation :D:D
 

NH Steve

Administrator
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
12,283
From
New Hampshire
This is also my take. Lesson learned to count the balls before moving anything on the table. Sucks but even if it were me who did it I would accept it the loss and lesson.

I did exactly that in a local tournament once -- I was the shooter and I mistakenly raked the last two balls thinking I was out, when in fact I still needed one. It knocked me out of the money. Lesson learned -- maybe lol. :D:D
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
12,654
From
Gulfport, Mississippi
10.1 It is the responsibility of the shooting player to verify their own ball count as they approach their out ball, and the non-shooting player should avoid making comments about how many balls are needed. However, if the non-shooting player disturbs the balls, or breaks down their stick, or in the judgment of the acting official otherwise significantly disturbs the shooter in the assumption that the shooter is already out, such acts are considered a concession, and the shooter is considered to have won, regardless of whether a subsequent count reveals that more balls are needed. Likewise, if it can be verified that the non-shooting player’s mistaken statement of the number of balls needed leads directly to the shooter pocketing said number of balls and the assumption of the game being over, then the shooter wins, even if it is subsequently determined that the non-shooting player’s statement of balls needed was in error.

10.2 If the shooting player disturbs only one of the remaining balls on the table under their own mistaken assumption that the game is over, play continues under the terms of rule 6.1. However, if the shooting player disturbs two or more of the remaining balls in play on their own mistaken assumption that the game is over, then it is the shooting player that forfeits the game.

Players should refrain from moving or removing balls from their opponent’s pocket or scoring tray for any reason, except to spot a ball following a scratch or to sufficiently clear a pocket to permit entry of additional balls for an impending shot, and should only do so with respect for their opponent’s scoring preferences.
Rule 10.1 doesn't really apply here. The non-shooting player did nothing on his on volition. He was acting on information attested to by the shooting player. It would have been a concession only if the non-shooting player decided on his own that the shooter was out, and then subsequently picked up or raked balls.

In this example the shooting player was wrong on two counts. He mistakenly announced that he was out, then he removed balls from his opponent's pockets. His actions caused the opponent to believe that the shooting player was out, and to pick up the cueball. Obviously the shooting player should have removed balls from his own pocket in order to demonstrate that he was out.

In a formal tournament game it should be ruled loss of game against the shooting player. In a private match, if the non-shooting player was willing to replace the cueball, then I think most contestants would simply continue the game.

~Doc
 
Top