Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

White picked up by mistake

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally Posted by DeanH View Post
    there is another pro ref mistake very similar to the OP where a player fouls and Michaela Tabb calls a foul and straight away picks up the white which hadn't dropped. After an amusing moment, she replaces the white where it was and play continues. The clip is on youtube
    Lol yes this was in the now infamous Maguire/Poomjaeng game in Sheffield a couple of years ago I think? But actually she's done it another time as well! Can't remember the other game but sure its on YouTube as well!

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally Posted by timcunnell View Post
      See my post above Great minds and all that!

      I'd be really interested to see how a modern ref (Paul Collier prob a good example) would react in the Dott/Selby situation. I don't think the ref got it right. Should at least have warned Dott, or told Selby he couldn't pick the white up, rather than wait for him to do so.
      Chamberlain was absolutely spot on with his decisions, as the rules were back then.

      The definition of 'forced off the table' has now been expanded in the 2014 rule book, and now reads as follows:

      14. Forced off the table
      A ball is forced off the table if it comes to rest other than on the bed of the table or in a pocket, or if it is picked up by the striker, or intentionally moved by hand whilst it is in play except as provided for in Section 3 Rule 14(g).


      So under the new rules it is clear that when Dott punched the ball away from the pocket it would have become in hand. Under the old rules, because the foul (ie Dott touching the cue ball) was committed with the cue ball on the table, and it didn't leave the bed of the table, the cue ball should have been played from where it came to rest.
      Duplicate of banned account deleted

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally Posted by timcunnell View Post
        Lol yes this was in the now infamous Maguire/Poomjaeng game in Sheffield a couple of years ago I think? But actually she's done it another time as well! Can't remember the other game but sure its on YouTube as well!
        Yes, she first did it about six years or so ago. I remember having a 'Michaela Moment' myself not long after, when I did a very similar thing.
        Duplicate of banned account deleted

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally Posted by Londonlad147 View Post
          Chamberlain was absolutely spot on with his decisions, as the rules were back then.

          The definition of 'forced off the table' has now been expanded in the 2014 rule book, and now reads as follows:

          14. Forced off the table
          A ball is forced off the table if it comes to rest other than on the bed of the table or in a pocket, or if it is picked up by the striker, or intentionally moved by hand whilst it is in play except as provided for in Section 3 Rule 14(g).


          So under the new rules it is clear that when Dott punched the ball away from the pocket it would have become in hand. Under the old rules, because the foul (ie Dott touching the cue ball) was committed with the cue ball on the table, and it didn't leave the bed of the table, the cue ball should have been played from where it came to rest.
          Thanks for this! Really interesting to hear, and also its interesting that the rule has now been amended, or expanded.

          The bit I wasn't sure about with regards to the Dott game is whether Alan Chamberlain ought to have spoken to Dott when he deliberately moved the ball with his hand. I suppose it is down to players to know the rules though - and not be guided my the ref. So Selby was wrong to assume that he could pick the ball up.

          If applying the rules to the letter I am sure Chamberlain got it bang on. And I guess that is what the ref is there to do?

          Comment


          • #20
            I agree that Chamberlain should have *also* had a word with Dott warning him not to touch the balls on the table, as deliberately moving them *could* be seen as ungentlemanly conduct.
            Duplicate of banned account deleted

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally Posted by Londonlad147 View Post
              I agree that Chamberlain should have *also* had a word with Dott warning him not to touch the balls on the table, as deliberately moving them *could* be seen as ungentlemanly conduct.
              Yeah that was my thinking really. I thought Chamberlain would either have taken the view that Dott meant no harm in what he did (which I am sure he didn't) and could have told him that was a daft thing to have done, and thereby warned Selby that he couldn't replace the white, or else seen Dott's actions as rather more serious, and given him a proper warning.

              Still - I can see the point really that he had no obligation to tell Mark he couldn't pick up the white. According to the rules (at the time, at least) he had no right to pick up the CB.

              Comment


              • #22
                The safest thing to do when there's an ambiguous situation is for the referee to pick up the cue ball and give it a clean and place it against the cushion. It's obvious then that it is in hand. Chamberlain's failure to do that might have suggested to Selby that it wasn't in hand.
                Duplicate of banned account deleted

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally Posted by timcunnell View Post
                  This is a similar-ISH situation.
                  Dott knows the white is heading for the corner pocket, and blocks the white from going in. No intention on his part to do anything untoward - but a daft thing to do really! Anyway - the point being, Selby incorrectly picks the white up (incorrectly in the opinion of the ref, anyway!), and the ref calls a foul, and Dott has ball in hand.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1sDiLapr0g
                  I remember that.

                  Though the referee was technically correct, it all seemed a bit unfair on Selby. Even Dott came over and argued that Selby had the right to pick up the cue ball.

                  Like you say, no intention of anything on the part of Dott. If I was him, I'd have then turned round and potted the white ball into the pocket. It'd had been declared a foul, Selby would've got 4 points cancelling out the foul points Dott had been awarded and ended up a situation where Selby would've been allowed to handle the cue ball.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally Posted by Londonlad147 View Post
                    I agree that Chamberlain should have *also* had a word with Dott warning him not to touch the balls on the table, as deliberately moving them *could* be seen as ungentlemanly conduct.
                    There was another incident between Selby and Chamberlain once. As seen here;

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbobYOs_wbY

                    In the Dott case, I think Chamberlain had some right on his side, in that by the letter of the law he was interpreting the rules correctly. Also, he isn't allowed to advise a player what to shot to take on, so telling Selby not to pick the cue ball up would be in breach of the rules. You do feel that maybe a bit of common sense should've prevailed, and I don't think he could've been blamed for warning the players of the situation. But I guess he had to make a split second decision, and chose to adhere literally to the rules. When in doubt, I guess that's the best way.

                    However in the second case, in the link above, I have no sympathy for Chamberlain. I mean, how many other times do you remember a referee refusing to clean a ball on a player's request? It was just pedantic and unnecessary on Chamberlain's part.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I agree, I don't think Chamberlain should have refused there. The rules allow the referee to clean a ball on *reasonable* request, and I don't think this was unreasonable.

                      I presume that Chamberlain's thinking was that it is possible to move any ball very fractionally if you're moving it off and on the table, even with a ball marker, and any fraction might have been crucial as to whether he could see the ball or not. From the tv camera angles we'll never know just how close the call was.
                      Duplicate of banned account deleted

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally Posted by SnookerFan View Post
                        I mean, how many other times do you remember a referee refusing to clean a ball on a player's request?
                        Marcel Eckardt did it as well, I think in Selby's match against Shane Castle in the 2013 UK Championship. Selby was looking at a red to the right middle, but it was so tight that it wasn't sure whether the pot was actually on. Selby asked for the red to be cleaned, Eckardt refused, then Selby played the shot, got a kick and missed the pot. :smile:

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X