| Author |
 Topic  |
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
 Posted - 04/19/2008 : 09:42:44 AM
|
I haven't been playing APA long, but in every match I've played (except the one I'll describe) when someone wanted to coach a player they called a time out, went to the table, and discussed the situation. No problem at all.
When I was at the Southwest Challenge, I was playing a 3 and earlier in the match, when she was about to foul by double hitting the cue ball, I asked for someone to watch the hit. She fouled, the foul was called, and we moved on. In a later game the same situation came up and I again asked for the independent look at the hit. The 6 on her team then yelled at her something like "shoot from a 45 degree angle". She moved her cue to do that and I then stopped the game and called for a referee, since in my view it was an illegal coach.
The "referee" came over and said it was not a foul, that this would be her time out for a coach, and the person who yelled out then moved to the table and showed her how he wanted her to shoot the ball.
My question is this: was this really not a foul? Or, is this something that is quirky in the APA? I think the referee was very liberal in allowing the prior act to not be a foul, and even if it weren't, it was clearly a coach and by allowing additional time for that person to coach the shooter she really got a second coach (which is OK in this case since she was a 3). But he counted it as one coach.
This could be viewed as splitting hairs, but if I hadn't stopped the game she would have taken a different shot and nobody would have marked a coaching session. Or, is something like that a coaching session all the time, even if no time out is called and nobody goes to the shooter to give advice?
I guess it boils down to this: Is it ever illegal to yell out coaching information to a shooter if there is a time out still available?
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 10:48:58 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by poolguy[/i]
I guess it boils down to this: Is it ever illegal to yell out coaching information to a shooter if there is a time out still available?
Nope. If you coach a player it is considered a time out, whether you voice the words "time out" or not. Additionally, the time out isn't over until the player actually attempts a shot, so in this case it was a single time out.
If you have already used up your time out(s) in the game, it is STILL not a foul. Refer to the bold print at the top of page 26 in the Team Manual for clarification.
Phil
|
 |
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 11:01:49 AM
|
Phil,
The reason I posted this is that I read the item you point to but I also read the item on page 50, which lists one of the causes of a ball in hand foul:
"Receiving illegal aid (coaching from person(s) other than the coach)
during your turn at the table. To determine what is and is not considered coaching, refer to COACHING in the General Rules Section of this manual."
I can read the above several ways. One way would be to treat a coach from the sidelines as a time out and a legal coach *if* the player has a time out available. But if there are no time outs available, I fail to see how this wouldn't be a foul. Can you clarify given the above quote from the Team Manual?
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/20/2008 : 09:26:40 AM
|
John,
I don't blame you for being confused, since you haven't been around long enough to remember the earlier version of the coaching rules. Until the current version of the Team Manual, a player's coach was required to be the same person for the entire match. Therefore, if anyone besides the designated coach were to offer advice during a player's turn at the table, it would be a foul. Now, the coach can change from time out to time out, so the only time the "illegal aid" clause comes into effect is if a player is coached by more than one person during the same time out (or during the same non-time out, if the player is out of time outs).
Mistakenly calling a time out or coaching when the player has no time outs left is not a foul. Coaching when you know the player is out of time outs is also not a foul, but is a sportsmanship issue.
Phil
|
|
|
|
katolin007
USA
51 Posts |
Posted - 04/20/2008 : 8:04:45 PM
|
I have an additional situation Phil. What to we do in this scenario "SL5 has ball in hand and is attempting to decide which ball to start with. There are 3 of his balls plus the 8-ball. He has already had a time-out. He lines up the cue ball with one of his 3 balls and gets ready to stroke; his team captain doesn't like it and calls for a time-out. We inform him that the SL5 no longer has a time-out. Team captain smiles and apologizes. The SL5 looks at the table again and decides against his first shot - and picks another shot". Is that considered a foul?
K
"Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don't be mean in saying it." - Kato Lin |
|
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 04/20/2008 : 10:43:56 PM
|
Phil,
Thanks for the clarification.
To me, the rules need updating so that this section, on page 50, is much more clear.
It also seems odd to me that a player can call a time out and if he is given advice by two people ... the coach and another player ... it is a foul. But if someone simply shouts out advice it isn't a foul ... but is probably a sportsmanship violation. To me, the latter is much more serious than the former, but the foul only occurs on the former.
As I said, thanks for clarifying this. But this whole area of the APA rules is very, very odd to me.
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 07:54:51 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by katolin007[/i]
[br]I have an additional situation Phil. What to we do in this scenario "SL5 has ball in hand and is attempting to decide which ball to start with. There are 3 of his balls plus the 8-ball. He has already had a time-out. He lines up the cue ball with one of his 3 balls and gets ready to stroke; his team captain doesn't like it and calls for a time-out. We inform him that the SL5 no longer has a time-out. Team captain smiles and apologizes. The SL5 looks at the table again and decides against his first shot - and picks another shot". Is that considered a foul?
K
"Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don't be mean in saying it." - Kato Lin
The text on page 26 is pretty clear on this. It is not a foul, but if you think it was an attempt to take advantage of the rules you should politely remind the other team that it can result in sportsmanship penalties and ask them not to do it again. Sportsmanship penalties can include loss of points...
Phil
|
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 08:06:03 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by poolguy[/i]
[br]Phil,
Thanks for the clarification.
To me, the rules need updating so that this section, on page 50, is much more clear.
It also seems odd to me that a player can call a time out and if he is given advice by two people ... the coach and another player ... it is a foul. But if someone simply shouts out advice it isn't a foul ... but is probably a sportsmanship violation. To me, the latter is much more serious than the former, but the foul only occurs on the former.
As I said, thanks for clarifying this. But this whole area of the APA rules is very, very odd to me.
John
It only hurts if you miss.
I think the main concern is APA's reluctance to penalize a team for honestly losing track of how many time outs have been called. It's a fairly common occurrence and ball in hand would be a substantial penalty. As Kato points out above, simply calling for a time out is a form of coaching, so the same penalty would have to apply whether the player's teammate shouted advice or called time out. On the other hand, coaching by multiple players is not a case of losing track of what has already transpired, it's simply ignorance of (or disregard for) the rules.
Phil
|
|
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 1:51:57 PM
|
Phil,
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here.
It seems to me that the spirit of the rules *should be* that during a coaching time out the player gets advice, and that advice should be from one person. Having a second person give direct advice, to me, should be a lesser offense than a ball in hand foul. Note that the second person can call the coach to one side, give advice, which is then relayed to the player. The difference? The 3rd person relays it through the coach. A very slight change. The spirit here should be that the player gets advice, and how that advice is administered should not result in a foul.
On the other hand, if the player is out of time outs and coaching is given, it is *not* a foul in today's world. Let's take Kato's scenario. Instead of the coach calling time out, which is obvious, what if the coach asks the other team if there is a time out available. More subtle, and hard to call as a sportsmanship violation, but it still gives the player the same information.
To me, the giving of coaching advice outside of time outs is much more severe than how coaching is given during a valid time out. The APA and I differ here, clearly.
Let me lay out a different method of handling timeouts that would solve all of this and solve it easily.
This applies to 8-ball handicaps.
For players with a handicap of 2 or 3, they can have the coach call a timeout for them, or they can call it themselves. How the coaching is given is irrelevant ... one or more coaches is fine (or make more than one coach a sportsmanship violation ... but not ball in hand). The coaching must take place within a reasonably short time period, say one minute.
For players with handicaps of 4 and higher, *only the player* can call a timeout. If any coaching is given from the sidelines, it is a foul and ball in hand to the opponent. This forces the higher skilled players to play the game as they see it and to ask for advice *when they think they need it*.
After a player has had their allotment of timeouts in a game the teams agree that no more timeotus are to be taken or called (during that game), and if this is violated it is a ball in hand foul.
My objective here is to have lower level players get proper coaching, and to have higher level players (4 and above) play the game as best they can, and ask for advice only when they think they need it. That is how players improve ... by making decisions and moving onward, and if the decision is wrong they learn later what they could have done differently.
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
bikercowboy
105 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 2:22:34 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by poolguy[/i]
My objective here is to have lower level players get proper coaching, and to have higher level players (4 and above) play the game as best they can, and ask for advice only when they think they need it. That is how players improve ... by making decisions and moving onward, and if the decision is wrong they learn later what they could have done differently.
Seems to defeat the purpose of "team". Many a match would have been lost if a timeout couldnt be called. On more than occassionI ave seen a 6 or 7 getting input from a 4 or 5. Not often granted, but if we were looking for team play this is where it happens |
|
|
|
Tony
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 4:05:41 PM
|
| Oh My God , MY HEAD HURTS ! |
|
|
|
Rick
65 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 5:31:38 PM
|
| Last week I had a 5 call a coach on me , I'm a 6 , it won the game and the match , you're never too good to learn ! I think one of the best aspects of the APA is coaching , in its self in means that players learn tactics , shots etc whilst in a competitve match . |
|
|
|
BigRigTom
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2008 : 6:19:02 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Rick[/i]
[br]Last week I had a 5 call a coach on me , I'm a 6 , it won the game and the match , you're never too good to learn ! I think one of the best aspects of the APA is coaching , in its self in means that players learn tactics , shots etc whilst in a competitve match .
I am a 7 in nine ball and have had a 4 call time out on me.
I called time on Erwin when I was a 4 and he was a 9
Everyone sees a different strategy when looking at the table.
Anyone can see the better one and anyone can miss seeing the best one.
The coach and rest of the team need to watch the match and help their player avoid tunnel vision ...that is what a team is all about. Helping each other win.
BigRigTom
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-Forum to discuss Billiards and Trucking or anything that interest you! |
|
|
|
ginger
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 12:39:52 PM
|
I don't think I've ever really agreed with Tony about anything until now... I must say I had no idea pool is so complicated!!!
Taz - Phil :
I have a whole new level of respect for you! Here I've always thought, you pick up the cue stick, play the best game you can muster that night, have fun and that was the end of it.
Guess thats why I'm still a 4!
-ginger
*It's better to have loved and lost, then to live with the psycho for the rest of your life* |
|
|
|
movistar
193 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2008 : 4:05:25 PM
|
all score sheets have a place on then to mark "time outs".... every "coach" can see this at any time... I believe that if a player is "down on a shot , getting ready to stroke" and the coach yells "time out" knowing that he has used all of his time outs for that game, and is then told that he is OUT of "time outs" and he smiles and says thank you and sits down.
the shooter thinking that the coach wanted to change his shot.. proceeds to shoot A DIFFERENT shot.... this should be a ball in hand foul!
lets have some thoughts.......
|
|
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2008 : 5:19:51 PM
|
Movistar,
I started this thread because I was confused by the written rules. Phil has clarified them, so now I know how this works.
But I still think it is backwards ... and to be blunt I think the rules are wrong. The only foul in today's rules occurs during a timeout and *if* a player receives a direct coach from someone who is *not* the coach for that specific timeout. That non-coach can talk to the coach and have the information passed along, which is legal. The foul is a mere technicality during a called timeout for the coach.
But it is *not* a foul to shout out coaching information or, more subtlely, call a timeout when non is available.
I think the former is very punitive for what I view as a minor infraction, and that the latter is very lax for what I view as a very serious violation. Just my own opinion.
You seem to agree. I'm glad there are at least two of us.
Sorry to clutter up this thread with yet another post, but I couldn't sit idly by.
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
When is a coach illegal and a foul?
