Touching balls

[fkhan]

I don't know if this has been asked previously. Please point me to that thread if it has been.

Here goes: if the cue ball is between two reds and all are touching each other. The first red is touching the top of the cue ball and the second red is touching the bottom part of the cue ball. All are in a straight line. So, in essence the player cannot move the cue ball without moving the red/reds. I am wondering what the ruling is in this scenario.

[DeanH]

if they are in exact line then the cue ball should be able to be moved without the reds moving, if the cue ball trajectory is precisely 90deg to the line of the three

Sec 3.8(f)
It is not a foul if the referee is satisfied that any movement of a touching ball at the moment of striking was not caused by the striker.

As long as the player plays in such a manner that the referee can take the above rule into consideration, no foul will be called
This includes where an object ball may move due to a dent of the cloth, no foul.

[Neil Taperell]

I’ve got touching balls today .......but I think that’s down to the weather

[itsnoteasy]

I’ve got touching balls today .......but I think that’s down to the weather

You should still be maintaining social distancing, at least until July 4th.

[fkhan]

Thanks. I thought the red or reds might move with the cue ball when in a straight line.

[DeanH]

As the rule states, if the referee thinks the movement was not due to the player playing "into" the touching ball then a foul may not be called.

For example the player could be playing in a manner that is clearly "away" from the toughing ball, but the ball moves when the cue ball is moved, i.e. it was the cue ball keeping the object from rolling into a dent or the weave of the cloth.

Just because you see movement it does not necessarily mean the player played into the object ball
This is where the referee has to observe the manner of the stroke and use judgement.

[fkhan]

Thanks for clarifying. So, there is an exception to the single touching ball rule.

[fkhan]

As the rule states, if the referee thinks the movement was not due to the player playing "into" the touching ball then a foul may not be called.

For example the player could be playing in a manner that is clearly "away" from the toughing ball, but the ball moves when the cue ball is moved, i.e. it was the cue ball keeping the object from rolling into a dent or the weave of the cloth.

Just because you see movement it does not necessarily mean the player played into the object ball
This is where the referee has to observe the manner of the stroke and use judgement.

Has this ever happened in a pro match? The chances are next to zero I believe.

[DeanH]

where a movement is noticed but no foul called - I am sure it has but I dont know specifics.

[Londonlad147]

Thanks for clarifying. So, there is an exception to the single touching ball rule.

No, the rule is exactly the same.

[fkhan]

No, the rule is exactly the same.

Dean has already mentioned the difference earlier.

[DeanH]

Thanks for clarifying. So, there is an exception to the single touching ball rule.

apologies, missed this post; as LL147 said, no difference, same rule applies regardless of the number of balls touching

[fkhan]

Ok got it.

[Neil Taperell]

You should still be maintaining social distancing, at least until July 4th.

Brilliant

[fkhan]

I’ve got touching balls today .......but I think that’s down to the weather

Lol Neil. We have quite a hot temperature here too.