2016 UK Championship

[DeanH]

I think Higgins has been practising doubles, as he seems to do quite a few nowadays

[DeanH]

Like Williams and Highfield yesterday with the Red, Yellow and Blue in the jaws of the yellow pocket

Billiards skills come in handy sometimes

[VillaGuy]

Higgins gone for his hip flask appointment again

[daffie]

Weird situation!

[VillaGuy]

Money is on selby now

[daffie]

...first blood to Selby....

--

[DeanH]

Deciders - won
Mark Selby 150/246 = 60.98%
John Higgins 141/241 = 58.51%

[armstm]

You can guess! you might not be right though.

[VillaGuy]

you can guess the winner

You mean can('t)

[daffie]

...And a decider it is! Amazing every time how surprising a snooker match can pan out with these twists and turns.

So who do I want to come through? That's like choosing your favorite peanut...impossible!

:snooker:

[armstm]

you can guess the winner

[VillaGuy]

what a match, everyone knew you couldn't guess the winner

[DeanH]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understand that the ref shouldn't remind a player of the game's current status unless asked, but that incident just then when Higgins put Selby back in after Selby had gone in-off, it appears that's exactly what the ref did. When Selby came to the table he looked as though he may have forgotten is was ball-in-hand and was about to play it from the cushion where the ref had placed it.

By picking up the cueball as Selby was weighing up the reds (it almost looked like the ref pretended he'd seen a mark on the cueball, as an excuse to pick it up) and cleaning it, he reminded Selby it was ball-in-hand.

I'm not suggesting Selby had forgotten it was ball-in-hand and I'm sure Higgins would have told him if he went to play it from the cushion, but still interesting what the ref did there.

hm, Mark was the offending player and was put back in but Higgins.
Not that Mark addressed the cue ball at all, but went straight round to look at the reds (ref then picked up the cue ball during this time)
Interesting one, "am I ball in hand?" can the referee answer that question? LondonLad?

[daffie]

Looks like Higgins going one up again on Selby. Barring snookers that is.

[VillaGuy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understand that the ref shouldn't remind a player of the game's current status unless asked, but that incident just then when Higgins put Selby back in after Selby had gone in-off, it appears that's exactly what the ref did. When Selby came to the table he looked as though he may have forgotten is was ball-in-hand and was about to play it from the cushion where the ref had placed it.

By picking up the cueball as Selby was weighing up the reds (it almost looked like the ref pretended he'd seen a mark on the cueball, as an excuse to pick it up) and cleaning it, he reminded Selby it was ball-in-hand.

I'm not suggesting Selby had forgotten it was ball-in-hand and I'm sure Higgins would have told him if he went to play it from the cushion, but still interesting what the ref did there.

Wasn't the question on whether Higgins knew it was an in off or not, Selby had just played an in off shot and with the ball in hand he put Selby back in, Selby clearly knew but Higgins might have missed it. I think that's what the commentators wondered.