What are the most disputed "World Pool Rules"

[cyprus-dodger]

I think this will be a interested thread something to get your teeth into.

In my opinion "World Pool Rules" can be somewhat confusing at times, and players and referees often misinterpret these rules which cause many disputes during matches/competitions, I've even witnessed players / referees rolling around in the Car Park over a dispute.

I already started a thread "Following Foul Break Rule" which was covered well by members and showed how many different interpretation of that rule were covered.

Here is one rule that often causes disputes: Following a "Foul Snooker" does the on-coming player with two visits have to be able to hit both sides of his ball as thinly as possible before deciding his other options ie Free Ball or a Lift?

What's your experiences?

dodger

[safe t boy]

I didnt even know a free ball was still allowed under world rules, or a lift for that matter. I only just started using them and the guys I play with seem to think neither of the above are allowed unless its a total snooker then you can lift the white. I think. Its all a bit confusing

[DeanH]

In World Rules the only time you have the option for either a free ball or "ball in hand" (lift?) to the baulk is when a "Foul Snooker" has been declared. Note the "either" not both at the same visit.
The situation for a Foul Snooker is clearly defined in the World Rules poster that is probably displayed in your club/pub or from the EPA website (I am too lazy at the moment to find it )
All other fouls are two visits with no free ball or ball in hand, except for white in from break - only one visit)
I have de ja vu, is this where we came in on the other post

[DeanH]

Forgot to say, that with a Free Ball situation, it is recommended that the player in hand clearly indicates which ball he is play as the free ball. Even to the extent that you indicate that ball as well as what is going to happen after white ball contact, ie that red (indicating which red ball) is going to hit that yellow (indicating which yellow ball) into that pocket (indicating which pocket). Silly I know but it will save problems after.

[safe t boy]

Thanks Dean.

Its much clearer now. I must admit that when I first heard about 'world rules' I was quite skeptical. Especially the fact that a deliberate foul can be played legally. I now understand this as more of a 'tactical foul' and in some situatuions it can be a definate advantage. The new rules do make the game more attatcking and add an interesting new perspective to the tactical side of the game.

[DeanH]

Thanks Dean.

Its much clearer now. I must admit that when I first heard about 'world rules' I was quite skeptical. Especially the fact that a deliberate foul can be played legally. I now understand this as more of a 'tactical foul' and in some situatuions it can be a definate advantage. The new rules do make the game more attatcking and add an interesting new perspective to the tactical side of the game.

I have played world rules at league and interleague level for several years now, and I must admit (but don't tell anyone ) that even now I get a tad confused and then annoyed at some circumstances in a game and the defintion of the rules
"Deliberate Foul" - "tactical foul" yeah ok, quite often I see it played when the player wants to just p*** off his opponent

[safe t boy]

Dont you think the tactical foul can be used to your advantage though? Or is it the principle of being allowed to deliberately foul thats annoying? I can can actually see both sides...

[DeanH]

Dont you think the tactical foul can be used to your advantage though? Or is it the principle of being allowed to deliberately foul thats annoying? I can can actually see both sides...

Yes, I do see that a deliberate foul can and is usually played to and advantage. Earlier I mention that I have seen a delibrate foul done by the player to annoy the opponent - and still that player will usually gain advantage.
"principle" well that could be a can of worms. Morals, ethics, etc. come into this discussion, and probably too heavy a subject for me this evening

[safe t boy]

Yeah I'll second that. Have a good rest of the evening

[old school]

I believe a "foul snooker" is defined as being unable to hit both sides of any of your remaining balls.Your original question was about foul snookers,any true foul snooker gives you the option of nominating any ball on the table (to count as one of your own) or ball in hand to play from baulkline.Two shots carried,in a foul snooker situation.Hope this helps.

[DeanH]

Here is one rule that often causes disputes: Following a "Foul Snooker" does the on-coming player with two visits have to be able to hit both sides of his ball as thinly as possible before deciding his other options ie Free Ball or a Lift?

I think you have this slightly the wrong way round, the incoming player would assess the situation and a Foul was previously committed by the opponent and the incoming player cannot hit both sides of his ball, then the incoming player would ask the referee for a Foul Snooker judgement. If a Foul Snooker exists then the incoming player has Two Visits as well as several options, Free Ball or Ball-in-Hand (lift?). The definitions of these are in the EPA rules, the Foul Snooker Section.
Also remember: "If an opponent fouls and the Cue Ball comes to rest on or near a Jaw (curved part of a cushion), and that Jaw is preventing the player from playing the finest cut possible on both sides of any of that player's own Colour by way of a 'straight - line' shot, the player is deemed to be Foul Snookered and all the rules pertaining to Foul Snookers will apply."

I believe a "foul snooker" is defined as being unable to hit both sides of any of your remaining balls.Your original question was about foul snookers,any true foul snooker gives you the option of nominating any ball on the table (to count as one of your own) or ball in hand to play from baulkline.Two shots carried,in a foul snooker situation.Hope this helps.

Slight definition mistake here:
A Snooker is defined as: A player is Snookered when it is impossible to play the finest cut possible on both sides of any of that player's own Colour by way of a "straight - line" shot. Snookering an opponent is not a foul.
A Foul Snooker is defined as: When an opponent plays a foul shot and this results in the incoming player being snookered, the incoming player is deemed to be Foul Snookered.
The ball-in-hand is played from the “baulk” not the “baulk line”, sorry for the semantics but the baulk is the area the other side of the baulk line from the black spot
You can see the rules and defintions at http://www.epa.org.uk/wrules.php

[old school]

I was trying to define a foul snooker and yes I realise a foul snooker is called off a foul stroke,snookering your opponent.I meant behind the baulk line as I believe you can play the shot from that position ( if you take ball in hand ) I also believe you can play from where the ball stops (in the snooker) but you would obviously nominate another ball,other than your own,to be counted as one of yours.I am very aware that snookering an opponent is not a foul in itself ,unless you commit a foul snooker .Sorry if I was not clear.

[dantuck_7]

Then there is also the situation where you are foul-snookered, you take a re-spot (has been called a 'lift here!) and you are still foul snookered, in this case you still have the option of a free-ball.

[DeanH]

Then there is also the situation where you are foul-snookered, you take a re-spot (has been called a 'lift here!) and you are still foul snookered, in this case you still have the option of a free-ball.

Just to confirm that this is case, yes.
And I have seen it happen a few times.
Foul snookered, Ball-in-hand, still foul snookered, free-ball.
This is clearly defined in the rules, Foul Snooker section - Q4b.