Rulings for the 6th Edition
The following rulings have been formally adopted:
||Start and end of a game and turn - handicap play
||A stroke and the striking period - interrupting the swing
||States of a ball - misplaced balls not outside agencies
||Wiring lift - instances where the striker is responsible for ball position
through 'deemed to have played'
||Roquet - balls in contact at start of turn
||Errors, General principles - limit of claims in handicap games
||Faults, exemptions - definition of 'is caused by'
||Interference with the playing of a stroke - special damage; interpretation
|| States of a ball - ball placed on baulk is a yard-line ball
Faults in Bisque Play Laws 28, 37 and
4(e) For handicap
play, reference is made to Law 37, but this does not explicitly state how Law
4(e) should be modified for handicap play, when the following turn is a bisque
or half-bisque turn. It should be interpreted by modifying it as follows when
applied to this case:
(a) delete "with the adversary as striker"
(b) delete "and clips"
(c) replace (2) by "(2) the striker, having indicated his intention to take
a half-bisque or bisque (see Law 37(d)), plays a stroke."
the swing" should be interpreted to include "deviates the mallet from its intended
path so that it passes over or to the side of the striker's ball"; it is not
necessary to bring the mallet to rest before it reaches the striker's ball
to abort a stroke.
on the court" should be interpreted to include "left in a misplaced position
on the court at the start of the next stroke" to avoid such misplaced balls
being treated as outside agencies.
he is deemed to have played" should be interpreted as though it read "that
he played or is deemed to have played", so as to include cases where strokes
are played under Law 5(d) but in which the striker's ball is not moved or shaken.
the striker plays the first stroke of his turn by taking croquet" should be
interpreted as giving the striker choice as to which ball he elects as the
striker's ball, and its position if he is entitled to a lift, until he plays
a stroke (see Laws 9(b) and 19(c)), not a choice as to whether or not that
stroke should be a croquet stroke, if it is played with the ball he finally
elects as the striker's ball in contact with another ball.
22(e) For handicap
play, this law should be interpreted as though "adversary's" was omitted if
the next turn is a half-bisque or bisque turn.
28(d) "Is caused
by" should be interpreted so as to exclude cases where the striker's ball has
made contact with a hoop, another ball, or (except in (2)), the peg, since
one of the events specified. Thus a stroke in which the striker's ball makes
a roquet, bounces off a hoop, and back onto the mallet, is a fault, but one
in which it bounces off a hoop then makes a roquet before the mallet hits it
is not. "Law 16(b)" should be interpreted as including "Law 17"; the distinction
is between balls actually roqueted and those deemed to have been roqueted under
34(c) "Divot" should
be interpreted to include isolated damage to the surface of the court by animals,
birds, machinery, installation of sprinkler systems, vandals and other discrete,
rather than gradually operating, causes.
definition of a yard-line ball should be extended to include a ball placed
on a baulk-line at the start of the game or after being lifted.
Faults in Bisque Play
Laws 28, 37 and 50
A player, having bisques, commits a fault. The referee then needs to know
a) Whether the player wishes to take a bisque, in which case the balls
must be replaced.
b) If no bisque is taken, whether the opponent wishes the balls to be replaced
It seems logical to question the player and the opponent (if necessary)
in that order to establish these facts, but in doing so, the referee might
be reminding players of options they had forgotten and thus (perhaps) giving
Could asking these questions count as advice, and if so, how can the problem
1. Marking procedure. In such a situation the referee should
mark the ball(s) affected by the fault stroke in the post-fault stroke ball
position(s) as a matter of course. The pre-fault stroke ball positions will
have been marked before the stroke was played by the referee if he was called
to watch the stroke in the usual manner. In cases where no referee was called
or the rare case where the fault is discovered or admitted after one further
stroke, the pre-fault and/or post-fault stroke ball position(s) must be reconstructed
and marked before the following procedure is carried out.
2. Questioning of striker by the referee. If the striker
has not made it clear what he intends to do or is dithering, the referee should
remind him of his duty to ask the adversary where the ball(s) should be placed
under Law 28(b)(2). If the striker has no bisques
(i.e. a level game or striker is the bisque-giver or striker has run out of
bisques), there is no question of giving any advice. If the striker has a bisque
(not a half-bisque, by the way) and is dithering, it will only be because he
is uncertain whether to use it. Again the referee will not be giving advice.
3. Questioning of adversary by the referee. This is not an
issue because the Laws give the adversary the right to be consulted by the
striker anyway. The referee is merely ensuring that the striker discharges
4. Practicalities. The ball(s) will usually simply be left
in the post-fault stroke position(s) and the adversary will normally be able
to decide from inspecting the balls and looking at the pre-fault markers. If
the adversary cannot make up his mind from the pre-fault stroke markers alone,
the ball(s) should be placed in the pre-fault stroke position(s) to help him
decide. This will not offend Law 50(d). The referee
and not either player should be responsible for replacing the balls in the
pre-fault position(s) and, if necessary, replacing them in the post-fault stroke
All rights reserved © 2004