PDA

View Full Version : Another controversy with Mike Dechaine. This is beyond imagination...


HelloBaby-
10-29-2015, 12:56 PM
From Denis Grabe FB:

That's sick!!!!!!! 7-4 im leading and dechaine tells the rack was over the cushion and the white ball touched the rack after hitting?!? The ref comes and says i did not see but the audience can decide, what u think if 95% of the audience is american what they said of course a foul, if theres no ref how can 70year old guys with glasses who dont even know rules call a foul on me ?!?!? Dechaine cant win honestly only cheating!!!!
Then he comes to 7-7 i go to 10-7 and he misses combo 7-9 leaves me hooked and that was the last shot i got.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited... new evidence showed up.

Still unsportsmanship for me, but probably not cheating.

NYC cue dude
10-29-2015, 12:59 PM
From Denis Grabe FB:

That's sick!!!!!!! 7-4 im leading and dechaine tells the rack was over the cushion and the white ball touched the rack after hitting?!? The ref comes and says i did not see but the audience can decide, what u think if 95% of the audience is american what they said of course a foul, if theres no ref how can 70year old guys with glasses who dont even know rules call a foul on me ?!?!? Dechaine cant win honestly only cheating!!!!
Then he comes to 7-7 i go to 10-7 and he misses combo 7-9 leaves me hooked and that was the last shot i got.

If this is what happened, I want to tell the Ref and Mike Dechaine to go F themselves. I hope they sleep well at night.

Where did you see the ref said the audience could decide ???
What an organization this year, shame on them all.

Who was the ref who made the call? Was it the new tournament director, Scott?

PETROBOY
10-29-2015, 01:01 PM
Wow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ChicagoJoe
10-29-2015, 01:02 PM
I think it's funny that Albin Ouschan calls all Americans except for Shane a bunch of cheaters and says no european would ever do that.

HelloBaby-
10-29-2015, 01:06 PM
Who was the ref who made the call? Was it the new tournament director, Scott?

What different does it make? He was the Ref. He made that call meaning either that's how they (the organization) roll or the organizers hired an incompetent guy who thought this is his weekly tournament. In any case, that's on the organisers and shame on them all.
I am sorry but I really can't believe people can be that cheap, karma is real and they will get what they deserve.

NYC cue dude
10-29-2015, 01:10 PM
What different does it make? He was the Ref. He made that call meaning either that's how they (the organization) roll or the organizers hired an incompetent guy who thought this is his weekly tournament. In any case, that's on the organisers and shame on them all.
I am sorry but I really can't believe people can be that cheap, karma is real and they will get what they deserve.

IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE!! Do your best to find out who made the call.

AtLarge
10-29-2015, 01:11 PM
... Where did you see the ref said the audience could decide ??? ...

Under WPA Regulations:

"If a dispute arises between two players in an unrefereed match, and the area referee is asked to make a decision without having seen the cause of the dispute, he should be careful to understand the situation as completely as possible. This might include asking trusted witnesses, reviewing video tapes, or reenacting the shot."

The ref would decide after gathering whatever information he can.

PhilosopherKing
10-29-2015, 01:13 PM
Wow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed.

HelloBaby-
10-29-2015, 01:14 PM
Under WPA Regulations:

"If a dispute arises between two players in an unrefereed match, and the area referee is asked to make a decision without having seen the cause of the dispute, he should be careful to understand the situation as completely as possible. This might include asking trusted witnesses, reviewing video tapes, or reenacting the shot."

The ref would decide after gathering whatever information he can.
The Ref said "the audience" means he addressed the audience in general = random people. That's "trusted witnesses" ??? Come on give me a break.

BRussell
10-29-2015, 01:14 PM
That was a Boyes move from Dechaine. And Grabe implied that it was a lie and the American audience was in on it, which is an even more serious accusation. If someone in the audience saw it and confirmed it, that's different, but still doesn't excuse Dechaine from the APA league type call.

justadub
10-29-2015, 01:15 PM
Someone posted on facebook that the ref asked the crowd, and that three people in the front row all said it hit the rack, one of them British.

jay helfert
10-29-2015, 01:16 PM
From Denis Grabe FB:

That's sick!!!!!!! 7-4 im leading and dechaine tells the rack was over the cushion and the white ball touched the rack after hitting?!? The ref comes and says i did not see but the audience can decide, what u think if 95% of the audience is american what they said of course a foul, if theres no ref how can 70year old guys with glasses who dont even know rules call a foul on me ?!?!? Dechaine cant win honestly only cheating!!!!
Then he comes to 7-7 i go to 10-7 and he misses combo 7-9 leaves me hooked and that was the last shot i got.

If this is what happened, I want to tell the Ref and Mike Dechaine to go F themselves. I hope they sleep well at night.

Where did you see the ref said the audience could decide ???
What an organization this year, shame on them all.

I NEVER ask the audience or anyone in it to decide anything! I agree with Denis that's the wrong way to handle something like this. There are other ways to make a ruling like this and it begins with talking to each player separately. Sometimes a warning is in order. A good official must be able to use good judgement in the interest of fair play.

P.S. the rack is paper thin and just touching the edge of it would not alter the path of a ball. JUDGEMENT!

PhilosopherKing
10-29-2015, 01:16 PM
The Ref said "the audience" means he addressed the audience in general = random people. That's "trusted witnesses" ??? Come on give me a break.
If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

f210
10-29-2015, 01:19 PM
Don't they have cameras rolling so they can review the tape? It is just so silly and crazy to ask the audience who of course would tend to side with the American.

sjm
10-29-2015, 01:20 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

jburkm002
10-29-2015, 01:22 PM
I was watching a stream and it appeared the rack was a good inch over the rail. I was Suprised they left it like that. Was waiting for someone to hit it. Just to see if a foul would be called. Never hit the rack. Different game than this one.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

HelloBaby-
10-29-2015, 01:23 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, is explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.
My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

Thanks for the infos,
I believe in your words then what come after my line "if this is what happened,..." is not applied.

BRussell
10-29-2015, 01:23 PM
sjm - so Mike did not initiate the call? Who did, if not Mike or a ref?

TCo
10-29-2015, 01:25 PM
Not say he did or did not but how do you call a foul on yourself if you believe you didn't foul?

Also, when in question with the match not being actively refereed, wouldn't a decision be made in FAVOR of the shooter?

NYC cue dude
10-29-2015, 01:25 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

Thank you for the clarity.

OLD NO 9
10-29-2015, 01:26 PM
I NEVER ask the audience or anyone in it to decide anything! I agree with Denis that's the wrong way to handle something like this. There are other ways to make a ruling like this and it begins with talking to each player separately. Sometimes a warning is in order. A good official must be able to use good judgement in the interest of fair play.

P.S. the rack is paper thin and just touching the edge of it would not alter the path of a ball. JUDGEMENT!

Jay, you didn't address if (the cue ball hits the plastic rack hanging over the rail) it is a foul?
Inquiring minds want to know.

P.S. if it did alter the path of the ball would it be the same call?

chandler1968
10-29-2015, 01:28 PM
Well said sjm. Alters my initial take of the situation.

pocket
10-29-2015, 01:30 PM
I was just starting to like Dechaine, seems like he had matured some.

As had been said, this is a Boyes move though. The template rack would not effect the movement of the balls and the sportsmanlike thing to do would be to ignore it, and or simply ask that the rack be moved.

ideologist
10-29-2015, 01:32 PM
IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE!! Do your best to find out who made the call.

Hopefully there was no book on this match... :barf:

PhilosopherKing
10-29-2015, 01:33 PM
Not say he did or did not but how do you call a foul on yourself if you didn't foul?

Also, when in question with the match not being actively refereed, wouldn't a decision be made in FAVOR of the shooter?

A reasonable person would conclude it more likely that he had fouled, then that Mike, in cahoots with the ref and the whole crowd, fabricated it.

HawaiianEye
10-29-2015, 01:33 PM
The Ref said "the audience" means he addressed the audience in general = random people. That's "trusted witnesses" ??? Come on give me a break.

There are no trusted witnesses in pool!

alstl
10-29-2015, 01:39 PM
Two questions:

1. Is it even a foul? Isn't the magic rack commonly left on the table until balls are cleared away from it and the cue ball frequently "touches" the rack? Isn't that the whole idea behind the magic rack - balls can "touch" it without causing a problem?

2. Who racked and put the template on the rail?

HawaiianEye
10-29-2015, 01:40 PM
P.S. the rack is paper thin and just touching the edge of it would not alter the path of a ball. JUDGEMENT!

Rules are rules! If you can't or won't follow the rules that you established and agreed to, then there are no need for rules.

The same thing could be said about not calling a ball that is sitting directly in the pocket during call-pocket games or shots.

Calling a player on it is trivial and BS in most people's minds, but the minute you don't enforce them you open the can of worms for other infractions and offenses.

Who was the dumbass who took the rack off the table and placed it on the rail? The way I play, the person who has the shot DIRECTLY AFTER the break should be the one to remove the rack from the table and place it somewhere off the table. It should be standard practice to REMOVE the rack before shooting after the break.

OLD NO 9
10-29-2015, 01:40 PM
There are no trusted witnesses in pool!

sjm is as close as you'll ever get.

7forlife
10-29-2015, 01:43 PM
If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

This statement right here ^^^^

To me Mike is the only person here who is right. If it was an issue of "did it hit or not" then Mike had all right to question, if it was indeed a hit and known as a foul and Grabe saw it then he should of been ok with the call, the Ref should not of asked the crowd. "did the ball hit the rack guys? it's a foul Grabe as stated in the rule book ball in hand to Mike"

See I think the issue here is moral, whats a foul and and what isn't just like when Shane didn't call that ball overseas

BRussell
10-29-2015, 01:43 PM
Two questions:

1. Is it even a foul? Isn't the magic rack commonly left on the table until balls are cleared away from it and the cue ball frequently "touches" the rack? Isn't that the whole idea behind the magic rack - balls can "touch" it without causing a problem?

That's a good point: The magic rack (actually outsville rack?) is an exception to the normal rule about other objects being touched. No way this should have been called a foul, even if it did happen, IMO.

mudball
10-29-2015, 01:45 PM
I long for the day when "prestigious" tournaments aren't filled with moves. Mike in the wrong, or Denis in the wrong, this isn't the kind of crap that should be deciding matches in the US Open. Sigh.

ChicagoJoe
10-29-2015, 01:45 PM
That's a good point: The magic rack (actually outsville rack?) is an exception to the normal rule about other objects being touched. No way this should have been called a foul, even if it did happen, IMO.

Sitting over the rail and lying flat on the table are two completely different scenarios.

PhilosopherKing
10-29-2015, 01:45 PM
Two questions:

1. Is it even a foul? Isn't the magic rack commonly left on the table until balls are cleared away from it and the cue ball frequently "touches" the rack? Isn't that the whole idea behind the magic rack - balls can "touch" it without causing a problem?

2. Who racked and put the template on the rail?

I would think the rack is to be removed immediately following the break, unless doing so would disturb the lay of the balls. I would also think that once the rack is removed from the playing surface, it is no longer considered a part of the playing surface.

I don't believe your second question should factor into a ruling.

EL'nino
10-29-2015, 01:47 PM
I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed. I agree with this 1000%

7forlife
10-29-2015, 01:51 PM
I was just starting to like Dechaine, seems like he had matured some.

As had been said, this is a Boyes move though. The template rack would not effect the movement of the balls and the sportsmanlike thing to do would be to ignore it, and or simply ask that the rack be moved.

This is the problem here, deciding what one should and should do based on the level of some lame moral call. If you were playing for 100,000 hill-hill with Ko or Darren or whoever and it was the 6,7,8,9 on the table wide open would you of called it?

Or are you the guy who give everyone a pass "ah just shot, you only touched the ball it didn't move" then talk about how you gave the guy a pass and probably would of won.

If it's a foul then it's a foul, you call it, no hard feelings.

9andout
10-29-2015, 01:56 PM
It's not a Magic Rack!
And it's not plastic!
It's Chris Renfro's Accu-Rack and it's made of fabric.
I hang mine on a little hook after breaking. They should do the same at the Open.
In fact REQUIRE it!

BRussell
10-29-2015, 01:57 PM
Sitting over the rail and lying flat on the table are two completely different scenarios.

I can't think of another object that the balls are allowed to touch on the table but not when it's on the rail.

The template seems to violate the letter of this rule: 6 Touched Ball
It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of any object ball except by the normal ball-to-ball contacts during shots. It is a foul to touch, move or change the path of the cue ball except when it is in hand or by the normal tip-to-ball forward stroke contact of a shot. The shooter is responsible for the equipment he controls at the table, such as chalk, bridges, clothing, his hair, parts of his body, and the cue ball when it is in hand, that may be involved in such fouls. If such a foul is accidental, it is a standard foul, but if it is intentional, it is 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
So were "violating" or amending that rule for the template. If you allow it to touch the rack while it's on the table, I think you should be pretty lenient about it touching when it's on the rail.

wahcheck
10-29-2015, 01:59 PM
I don't like drama headlines that just suck you into reading lesser or phony issues.
After reading SJM's fine post, I see that Dechaine was not anywhere near the ogre that the headline seems to imply; according to SJM, the other guy was the jerk in this case......I guess OP is a Dechaine hater.........

justadub
10-29-2015, 02:00 PM
I don't like drama headlines that just suck you into reading lesser or phony issues.
After reading SJM's fine post, I see that Dechaine was not anywhere near the ogre that the headline seems to imply; according to SJM, the other guy was the jerk in this case......I guess OP is a Dechaine hater.........

Plenty of those here on AZB

Poolplaya9
10-29-2015, 02:05 PM
What different does it make? He was the Ref. He made that call...
The difference is that the tournament director has been accused of being a bookie for bets on this tournament. An obvious very serious conflict of interest if true.

On a side note, it seems that half the people in this thread have missed that the claim about the rack is that it was on the rail and hanging over the edge of the cushion, and that the cue ball hit it where it was overhanging the cushion. It was not on the surface of the table.

Bella Don't Cry
10-29-2015, 02:06 PM
This is what happens when new equipment is introduced into the game without updating the official world rules...

...Honesty and integrity should be made compulsory in this world. :thumbup:

pocket
10-29-2015, 02:08 PM
This is the problem here, deciding what one should and should do based on the level of some lame moral call. If you were playing for 100,000 hill-hill with Ko or Darren or whoever and it was the 6,7,8,9 on the table wide open would you of called it?

I don't have that kind of cash, but if we were playing all ball fouls, yes I hope I would call this on myself. With no ref it is assumed that players call fouls on themselves, and if they do not it is cheating plain and simple not a "lame moral call". Playing a friend or for 10 kajillian lira.

Or are you the guy who give everyone a pass "ah just shot, you only touched the ball it didn't move" then talk about how you gave the guy a pass and probably would of won.

If it's a foul then it's a foul, you call it, no hard feelings.

You make some fair points, not sure why you had to insult me to do it (I guess that's business as usual on AZB or internet forums in general).

pt109
10-29-2015, 02:11 PM
I was wondering when this was going to happen....a lot of players are careless with the
racking template.

I like how snooker handles it...
..a ball hitting a foreign object is a foul.
(and it doesn't matter who left the template hanging)
...it is up to each player to see that the table is in order on his turn.

Get_A_Grip
10-29-2015, 02:16 PM
This one is a tougher one for me to call. Mike apparently didn't call a foul. He saw that it hit the rack hanging over the edge of the rail and simply asked for a ruling. I think that doing this is a little less nitty that what Boyes did, but it's close.

The ref asked around to obtain a consensus as to whether the cue ball did indeed hit the rack, and then made a ruling that the cue ball hitting the template would be a foul. It seems like the rules allow consulting with others, but I think he should have looked at a replay -- since there was precedence already established in this tournament for the ref's to consult a replay.

I think that if the ref had witnessed it himself and if he saw that hitting the template did not affect the speed or direction of the cue ball, that he may have been able to use judgment to say that it wasn't a foul -- but maybe he just took a hard line that the shooter should have moved the template so it wasn't hanging off the edge before he shot and called a foul. Viewing a replay could have helped with this too, but since a replay wasn't consulted, maybe the ref already determined that if the cue ball hit the template it was a foul no matter what.

Definitely some interesting drama at this tournament!

HOB Weert
10-29-2015, 02:17 PM
So the cueball hit the magic rack, that can happen, play on.
What a loser!

MH

alstl
10-29-2015, 02:18 PM
I would think the rack is to be removed immediately following the break, unless doing so would disturb the lay of the balls. I would also think that once the rack is removed from the playing surface, it is no longer considered a part of the playing surface.

I don't believe your second question should factor into a ruling.

If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

JumpinJoe
10-29-2015, 02:23 PM
It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

Colonel
10-29-2015, 02:24 PM
It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.


We have a Bingo!

9andout
10-29-2015, 02:26 PM
It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.
Except it's not so simple unless a ref racks.

pt109
10-29-2015, 02:26 PM
I was wondering when this was going to happen....a lot of players are careless with the
racking template.

I like how snooker handles it...
..a ball hitting a foreign object is a foul.
(and it doesn't matter who left the template hanging)
...it is up to each player to see that the table is in order on his turn.

If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

See my post, Al....it should always be the shooter's responsibility to see that things are right
on his shot.
I have seen some players always take it away to the side table after the break....
.....and they get help when the template is covered after the break.

BmoreMoney
10-29-2015, 02:27 PM
it's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. Very very simple.

+1.............

HelloBaby-
10-29-2015, 02:28 PM
Another opinion, just opinion :)

http://s27.postimg.org/oadx48b6b/New_Bitmap_Image_2.png

one stroke
10-29-2015, 02:28 PM
I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed.

LOL now that's funny


1

BRussell
10-29-2015, 02:29 PM
Mike apparently didn't call a foul. He saw that it hit the rack hanging over the edge of the rail and simply asked for a ruling.




Good post, but I want to take issue with this. Mike called this on him. Let's not try to say he was "asking for a ruling" or something. Let's just call it for what it was. He's allowed to do that, but we're also allowed to judge the nittiness of him calling it.

watchez
10-29-2015, 02:30 PM
So I understand about these magic racks/outville racks -

You can leave the rack on the bed cloth and not remove it as we see players do all the time. They shoot the cue ball over this rack, shoot object balls over this rack.

But if the rack is on the rail and a ball hits it, it is a foul?

Ok - once again Pool fails.

pt109
10-29-2015, 02:30 PM
It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

I like that....if a third party does the racking....
....and move the break-box back to a diamond from the end rail.

Get_A_Grip
10-29-2015, 02:31 PM
Good post, but I want to take issue with this. Mike called this on him. Let's not try to say he was "asking for a ruling" or something. Let's just call it for what it was. He's allowed to do that, but we're also allowed to judge the nittiness of him calling it.

Right, but it sounds like Jay (as a ref) may have made a ruling that this was NOT a foul....so......

Oh....I also had edited my post before your post.....to indicate, "I think that doing this is a little less nitty that what Boyes did, but it's close." So I did realize that what initial statement appeared to be letting Mike off the hook a bit too much. :-)

PhilosopherKing
10-29-2015, 02:36 PM
If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

If a player inadvertently knocks a cube of chalk on the table while shooting and his opponent hit's that chalk with a ball during his turn, who committed a foul?

Get_A_Grip
10-29-2015, 02:39 PM
If a player inadvertently knocks a cube of chalk on the table while shooting and his opponent hit's that chalk with a ball during his turn, who committed a foul?

I would say the shooter. It's the shooter's responsibility to make sure that the table is clear of objects before shooting -- but others can chime in on this that know the rules better.

thewhiffer
10-29-2015, 02:40 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

Well put, SJM, thanks for the input. I watched Mike's match against Hsu and I thought he handled himself very well, professionally and with poise, when, what I call, the crap happens in pool, rolls were mostly against him.

white1
10-29-2015, 02:43 PM
Get rid of the stupid magic whatever the junk is and rack the balls like mosconi racked them or anyone else.....too many get rich quick gimmick garbage entering the game. And while I am on a rant expecting to get blistered.....put the front ball on the spot where it belongs. Players should have enough honor to call a foul on themselves when they see it. And everyone should go out and buy a break cue, a jump cue, 30 playing cues, and ten thousand dollars worth of leather cases, and magic chalk, and shooting gloves and wrap your arm in duct tape.......and on and on and on......puke!

pt109
10-29-2015, 02:44 PM
Another opinion, just opinion :)

http://s27.postimg.org/oadx48b6b/New_Bitmap_Image_2.png

That is bar league thinking....a snooker ref is allowed to ask the audience for opinions...
...the ref still makes the final decisions.
That's how a game is run that produces millionaires....can we learn from it?

At the famous Rack in Detroit....the spectators were often asked "did anybody see it?"
....and the call was made...no arguing.

thewhiffer
10-29-2015, 02:48 PM
I was wondering when this was going to happen....a lot of players are careless with the
racking template.

I like how snooker handles it...
..a ball hitting a foreign object is a foul.
(and it doesn't matter who left the template hanging)
...it is up to each player to see that the table is in order on his turn.

Works for me. Those who would argue that this style of rack is sometimes left on the table and there should be no difference etc. are off base. I like the simplicity of the snooker approach.

Celtic
10-29-2015, 02:51 PM
I think it's funny that Albin Ouschan calls all Americans except for Shane a bunch of cheaters and says no european would ever do that.

I think it is funny Albin has never met Karl Boyes.

Celtic
10-29-2015, 03:01 PM
Two questions:

1. Is it even a foul? Isn't the magic rack commonly left on the table until balls are cleared away from it and the cue ball frequently "touches" the rack? Isn't that the whole idea behind the magic rack - balls can "touch" it without causing a problem?

2. Who racked and put the template on the rail?

Those are both two very interesting points, especially the first one. The magic rack is hit constantly when it is on the table, and more than once in this event I have seen it greatly alter the path of a ball.

On the rail the ball hitting the rack will cause next to no effect on the actual path of a ball whatsoever.

That said a lot of the pros were being rather flippant with putting the magic rack on the rail and having the edge over on the table. Maybe I am jus too OCD but I noticed every time it as placed somewhere it could actually be contacted by a ball and I would have likely put the thing off to the side on a pole like many of the pros did so it is out of the way.

OLD NO 9
10-29-2015, 03:04 PM
That is bar league thinking....a snooker ref is allowed to ask the audience for opinions...
...the ref still makes the final decisions.
That's how a game is run that produces millionaires....can we learn from it?

At the famous Rack in Detroit....the spectators were often asked "did anybody see it?"
....and the call was made...no arguing.

Oh come on PT Johan Ruysink is a totally unbiased, remember him urging all those Euro fans to show respect to the American team when they were at the table during the Mosconi Cup? Neither do I.

Johnnyt
10-29-2015, 03:10 PM
How about a rule about taking the template AWAY/OFF the table? How about a ref on every table? Why am I wasting my typing finger!!. Johnnyt

BrianaBrown13
10-29-2015, 03:15 PM
Why was the template even sitting on the table. When removed from the playing surface, put it over on the table where the cues are sitting.

Hungarian
10-29-2015, 03:16 PM
How do you feel about what Karl Boyes did to Shannon Daulton? Just curious since you make this an American thing?

From Denis Grabe FB:

That's sick!!!!!!! 7-4 im leading and dechaine tells the rack was over the cushion and the white ball touched the rack after hitting?!? The ref comes and says i did not see but the audience can decide, what u think if 95% of the audience is american what they said of course a foul, if theres no ref how can 70year old guys with glasses who dont even know rules call a foul on me ?!?!? Dechaine cant win honestly only cheating!!!!
Then he comes to 7-7 i go to 10-7 and he misses combo 7-9 leaves me hooked and that was the last shot i got.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited... new evidence showed up.

Still unsportsmanship for me, but probably not cheating.

PETROBOY
10-29-2015, 03:33 PM
I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed.

I would bet it did too, I was shocked he would ask the audience for the ruling unless someone working for the tournament was present.

King T
10-29-2015, 03:35 PM
If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

What if it happened and he didn't see it??? Cant call him a cheat if he didn't see it.

King T
10-29-2015, 03:45 PM
I NEVER ask the audience or anyone in it to decide anything! I agree with Denis that's the wrong way to handle something like this. There are other ways to make a ruling like this and it begins with talking to each player separately. Sometimes a warning is in order. A good official must be able to use good judgement in the interest of fair play.

P.S. the rack is paper thin and just touching the edge of it would not alter the path of a ball. JUDGEMENT!

I have to agree.

jburkm002
10-29-2015, 03:49 PM
I noticed Bergman wearing a pretty lose shirt. This is all balls foul. I guess the next debate could be over someones shirt touching a ball. Silly fouls but all the players know them. If I were Justin I would be wearing a tighter shirt.

HOB Weert
10-29-2015, 03:49 PM
That is bar league thinking....a snooker ref is allowed to ask the audience for opinions...
...the ref still makes the final decisions.
That's how a game is run that produces millionaires....can we learn from it?

At the famous Rack in Detroit....the spectators were often asked "did anybody see it?"
....and the call was made...no arguing.


A Snooker ref is allowed to ask the audience for opinions, hahaha dream on!
What movie did you watch...

MH

PETROBOY
10-29-2015, 03:51 PM
Why is the magic rack ever left on the playing surface? If a ball rests on it they can mark the ball and lift it. would it not be a foul every time someone hits a ball over it when its on the table? as the rules are written. It seems lazy to me that its left there when 99.9% of the time there isn't even a ball close to being sitting on it.

PoolBum
10-29-2015, 03:52 PM
What if it happened and he didn't see it??? Cant call him a cheat if he didn't see it.

According to sjm's firsthand account:

"I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here."

How could Grabe deny that the cueball touched the rack if he didn't see whether or not it touched the rack?

pt109
10-29-2015, 04:13 PM
According to sjm's firsthand account:

"I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here."

How could Grabe deny that the cueball touched the rack if he didn't see whether or not it touched the rack?

I would trust SJM's call....don't need anybody else.

banditgrrr
10-29-2015, 04:20 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.


Your word is good enough for me. I wish they would just make you an honorary official for the TV table and be done with it. You would have a great view of the matches you want to see and there would be no questions about decisions. It's a win/win for everyone.

Poolplaya9
10-29-2015, 04:32 PM
Mike called this on him. Let's not try to say he was "asking for a ruling" or something. Let's just call it for what it was. He's allowed to do that, but we're also allowed to judge the nittiness of him calling it.

Have to agree. Asking for a ruling is identical to saying "ref, I want to call a foul on this if it is a foul, I just don't know for sure yet if it is in fact a foul so can you let me know so I can have the foul enforced if it is one?".

tucson9ball
10-29-2015, 05:21 PM
I noticed Bergman wearing a pretty lose shirt. This is all balls foul. I guess the next debate could be over someones shirt touching a ball. Silly fouls but all the players know them. If I were Justin I would be wearing a tighter shirt.


It would be a foul if his shirt touches a ball.

I recall about a year ago, an Italian player was called for a hair on his arm brushing an object ball. He was cueing over the ball and his forearm hair touched this ball and a foul was called by the ref.

It does happen, rules are rules.

BJTyler747
10-29-2015, 05:30 PM
How do you feel about what Karl Boyes did to Shannon Daulton? Just curious since you make this an American thing?

Since you asked...

Same way Shane called foul on Orcullo when Orcullo took a ball out of the pocket to measure a shot. I could've told Orcullo that he couldn't do that and move on.
Shane and Karl did not cheat, they enforced the rule. Not very fair play but hey, that's how they roll.
FYI, people even cheer for guys like Earl who disrespect and disturb his opponents and the audience, that's pool moral standard for you. What Shane and Karl do is nothing compare to Earl.

AtLarge
10-29-2015, 06:13 PM
... I think he should have looked at a replay -- since there was precedence already established in this tournament for the ref's to consult a replay.

I think that if the ref had witnessed it himself and if he saw that hitting the template did not affect the speed or direction of the cue ball, that he may have been able to use judgment to say that it wasn't a foul -- but maybe he just took a hard line that the shooter should have moved the template so it wasn't hanging off the edge before he shot and called a foul. Viewing a replay could have helped with this too, but since a replay wasn't consulted, maybe the ref already determined that if the cue ball hit the template it was a foul no matter what. ...

This wasn't a streamed match, so there was no recording to replay (unless a spectator was recording it).

AtLarge
10-29-2015, 06:15 PM
Your word is good enough for me. I wish they would just make you an honorary official for the TV table and be done with it. ...

This match was not on the streaming table, so sjm had left his normal perch.

7forlife
10-29-2015, 06:25 PM
You make some fair points, not sure why you had to insult me to do it (I guess that's business as usual on AZB or internet forums in general).

Apologies, not the intention. I try not to be the "norm" on azb

bral
10-29-2015, 06:25 PM
If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

Exactly. Let's move on.

K2Kraze
10-29-2015, 06:39 PM
Reading all posts in this thread, I am reminded of the issues that pop up in my home games, league games, and local tournaments as well as observing everyone playing at each...there seem to be THREE types of people/pool players:

1) those that "sort of" play by the rules and allow things to slide by - even when they do the offending. Like all-ball fouls or interference with racks, etc. And their opponents for the most part agree with this way of play and (usually) go along. IMO this happens the majority of all times in all scenarios. No issues and no hard feelings. Casual play. Casual rules. Nothing at stake other than winner's rights. Friendly games.

2) those that follow the rules exactly as they are written and expect others to do the same. They call for reviews, judgements and rulings and accept them as final. Even between just the two of them playing. No lingering issues or feelings. The game moves on. The rules are appreciated to be as important to the overall game as the equipment or the player or the actions of the opponents. IMO that's called he integrity of the game - and the integrity of the people. This is one of the core requirements in many rules that the player be obligated to call fouls on themselves. Like our 14.1 league. All rules all of the time. No allowances or changes and reference is made to them (the rules) when needed. They are respected. And honored. Always. Still friendly but "professional".

And then we have the third category:

3) those that think playing this game and all of the rules in general are only good until one of these "rules" apply to them or affect their opponent in some negative way - or arise in a posted forum thread - then these same rules are either complete and utter BS or by golly just a cheap move by some nit and they wouldn't call that a foul if it was them......and on and on. Excuses, allowances, rationalizations or whatever you want to call it - and they'll find some past example to prove their point and build their case and credibility for having their "ruling".

A rule is a rule. But rules can be played three ways it seems. By definition a rule is a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity....hmm.

This happened in a recent 14.1 league match:

Both players are back and forth for two hours - neck and neck in a match to 125. Score about 95 each so far. All ball fouls. Player A is known to all of us (and himself admittedly) to be somewhat sloppy with touching balls and disliking the all balls foul rule - he thinks it should be cue ball fouls only - and will even ask that they both relax that one rule for play that day for his matches. That was asked and denied for this match. So ---- Player A is shooting with his back to his opponent and moves the cue ball with his cue while lining up his shot - he keeps that to himself and fires away. No witnesses that saw the offense. He continues his run and eventually has to play safe. He's up 123. Player B comes from behind back and forth a few innings and Player A ends the match losing 123/125. Here's what follows...

Player A to winning Player B as they filled out the league paperwork: "man, I'm sort of glad I ended up not winning that match because I was feeling kinda guilty about a foul that I didn't call on myself a few minutes ago for fear of losing the run and the match to ya - I don't know how good I would have felt going home tonight with the win...." and chuckled. Player B was speechless. Not a word. Just looked at him and then back to the paperwork. Game over.

My point?

There will always be those that think rules allow for exceptions and loose interpretations and no matter the "ruling" they will always criticize the outcome. Opinions are important and often lead the way to change. Rules change and adapt to advances with the times. But when we as players think our opponents are anything less than honorable, however "within rights" to ask for a ruling - AND then accept the outcome - but cry wolf afterward or make excuses, they shame and dishonor themselves and the game in the process.

Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

dmgwalsh
10-29-2015, 06:51 PM
I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

When SJM, Bob Jewett and Karl Kantrowitz are involved, you know it is on the up and up.

justadub
10-29-2015, 07:55 PM
When SJM, Bob Jewett and Karl Kantrowitz are involved, you know it is on the up and up.

Tap, tap, tap.

Keith Jawahir
10-29-2015, 08:36 PM
Reading all posts in this thread, I am reminded of the issues that pop up in my home games, league games, and local tournaments as well as observing everyone playing at each...there seem to be THREE types of people/pool players:

1) those that "sort of" play by the rules and allow things to slide by - even when they do the offending. Like all-ball fouls or interference with racks, etc. And their opponents for the most part agree with this way of play and (usually) go along. IMO this happens the majority of all times in all scenarios. No issues and no hard feelings. Casual play. Casual rules. Nothing at stake other than winner's rights. Friendly games.

2) those that follow the rules exactly as they are written and expect others to do the same. They call for reviews, judgements and rulings and accept them as final. Even between just the two of them playing. No lingering issues or feelings. The game moves on. The rules are appreciated to be as important to the overall game as the equipment or the player or the actions of the opponents. IMO that's called he integrity of the game - and the integrity of the people. This is one of the core requirements in many rules that the player be obligated to call fouls on themselves. Like our 14.1 league. All rules all of the time. No allowances or changes and reference is made to them (the rules) when needed. They are respected. And honored. Always. Still friendly but "professional".

And then we have the third category:

3) those that think playing this game and all of the rules in general are only good until one of these "rules" apply to them or affect their opponent in some negative way - or arise in a posted forum thread - then these same rules are either complete and utter BS or by golly just a cheap move by some nit and they wouldn't call that a foul if it was them......and on and on. Excuses, allowances, rationalizations or whatever you want to call it - and they'll find some past example to prove their point and build their case and credibility for having their "ruling".

A rule is a rule. But rules can be played three ways it seems. By definition a rule is a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity....hmm.

This happened in a recent 14.1 league match:

Both players are back and forth for two hours - neck and neck in a match to 125. Score about 95 each so far. All ball fouls. Player A is known to all of us (and himself admittedly) to be somewhat sloppy with touching balls and disliking the all balls foul rule - he thinks it should be cue ball fouls only - and will even ask that they both relax that one rule for play that day for his matches. That was asked and denied for this match. So ---- Player A is shooting with his back to his opponent and moves the cue ball with his cue while lining up his shot - he keeps that to himself and fires away. No witnesses that saw the offense. He continues his run and eventually has to play safe. He's up 123. Player B comes from behind back and forth a few innings and Player A ends the match losing 123/125. Here's what follows...

Player A to winning Player B as they filled out the league paperwork: "man, I'm sort of glad I ended up not winning that match because I was feeling kinda guilty about a foul that I didn't call on myself a few minutes ago for fear of losing the run and the match to ya - I don't know how good I would have felt going home tonight with the win...." and chuckled. Player B was speechless. Not a word. Just looked at him and then back to the paperwork. Game over.

My point?

There will always be those that think rules allow for exceptions and loose interpretations and no matter the "ruling" they will always criticize the outcome. Opinions are important and often lead the way to change. Rules change and adapt to advances with the times. But when we as players think our opponents are anything less than honorable, however "within rights" to ask for a ruling - AND then accept the outcome - but cry wolf afterward or make excuses, they shame and dishonor themselves and the game in the process.

Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. People forget that this is the US Open, a professional tournament. Not APA night at the corner bar.

JoeyA
10-29-2015, 09:27 PM
I'll take SJM's word for what happened.
JoeyA

I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

JB Cases
10-29-2015, 10:19 PM
sjm is as close as you'll ever get.

100% agree. I would trust SJM to accurately depict the situation if my life hung in the balance.

jay helfert
10-30-2015, 07:11 AM
Once again this is a tough call here. I know I'm in the minority on this thread, but it would be hard pressed for me to call a foul here and not issue a warning to make sure the ENTIRE magic rack (accu-rack) is removed from play.

The magic rack is a unique piece of equipment since it is often left on the table and balls touch it and roll over it constantly. It becomes neutral in terms of being an outside object like a piece of chalk or a pool cue. There is currently no specific rule to abide by when it comes to defining what the magic rack is or isn't and when it is in play or no longer in play.

I have the utmost respect for Bob Jewett, Stu and Karl but we may not agree on everything all the time. In the interest of fair play sometimes a tournament director must make a ruling based on what is most fair for all concerned, There have actually been times where something happens that is completely outside the written rules and it is impossible to make a fair ruling, so I've asked who broke the balls and we started that game again!

Once again, good judgement being the key here. When both players know you are making a decision based on fair play they tend to concur even if it is not the decision they necessarily wanted.

I'm proud of my record as a tournament director and that most pro players would prefer me to be the one making the tough calls. How much longer I do this job is in question now with situations like I encountered earlier this week. I've always done my best to make sure any tournament I worked on adhered to the highest professional standards. I do this out of respect for the game and it's players.

sonny_burnett
10-30-2015, 07:20 AM
Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

jay helfert
10-30-2015, 07:49 AM
Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I'm not sure there was a TD to call in.

alstl
10-30-2015, 07:52 AM
Those are both two very interesting points, especially the first one. The magic rack is hit constantly when it is on the table, and more than once in this event I have seen it greatly alter the path of a ball.

On the rail the ball hitting the rack will cause next to no effect on the actual path of a ball whatsoever.

That said a lot of the pros were being rather flippant with putting the magic rack on the rail and having the edge over on the table. Maybe I am jus too OCD but I noticed every time it as placed somewhere it could actually be contacted by a ball and I would have likely put the thing off to the side on a pole like many of the pros did so it is out of the way.

Right, and I revert to my two points.

1. Is it a foul? This isn't a rack, it is a template which by definition is not the same as a rack because it is left on the table during the game and is contacted by the balls.

I have a hard time seeing how it is a foul for a ball to touch the template since balls touch the template on every rack.

2. If it is a foul - which I'm not willing to concede - then whoever put the template in the wrong place is the guilty party.

BRussell
10-30-2015, 07:53 AM
Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

So what is the letter of the rule here? As far as I know there is no rule specifically about the template, and when balls are allowed to touch it. Maybe rules about it were distributed at the US Open, but Jay, the (former) tournament director says there wasn't a rule on this specific situation.

To people who are saying that Mike's nittiness here was OK because he was following the exact rules: Would it change your mind if there actually aren't exact rules about this situation?

cardiac kid
10-30-2015, 07:53 AM
Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Sonny,

What is the referee's job? When a ref is called to the table I'm playing on, I go sit in my chair. Once called, the ref's decision good or bad, right or wrong is final. Calling the TD only creates confusion. If you don't like the TD's decision do you call the promoter? Someone has to be the final decider. Wasn't at the USO but to me this is common sense. JMHO.

I'm in agreement with JB and JoeyA, SJM is a most trusted member of this forum.

Also, in a PGA event, isn't there a person on course at all times who is a expert on PGA rules? Thought he was the first person called in a questionable situation.

Lyn

alstl
10-30-2015, 08:06 AM
See my post, Al....it should always be the shooter's responsibility to see that things are right
on his shot.
I have seen some players always take it away to the side table after the break....
.....and they get help when the template is covered after the break.

I saw your post and I like you so I wasn't going to respond.

In snooker there are no foreign objects near the table. The players keep their chalk in their pocket. Unless Jay Helfert is playing and his toupee falls off his head and lands on a ball there is zero chance of a foreign object being on the table - just joking Jay.

The template by definition is not a foreign object or every break would be a foul.

OLD NO 9
10-30-2015, 08:09 AM
Once again this is a tough call here. I know I'm in the minority on this thread, but it would be hard pressed for me to call a foul here and not issue a warning to make sure the ENTIRE magic rack (accu-rack) is removed from play.

The magic rack is a unique piece of equipment since it is often left on the table and balls touch it and roll over it constantly. It becomes neutral in terms of being an outside object like a piece of chalk or a pool cue. There is currently no specific rule to abide by when it comes to defining what the magic rack is or isn't and when it is in play or no longer in play.

I have the utmost respect for Bob Jewett, Stu and Karl but we may not agree on everything all the time. In the interest of fair play sometimes a tournament director must make a ruling based on what is most fair for all concerned, There have actually been times where something happens that is completely outside the written rules and it is impossible to make a fair ruling, so I've asked who broke the balls and we started that game again!

Once again, good judgement being the key here. When both players know you are making a decision based on fair play they tend to concur even if it is not the decision they necessarily wanted.

I'm proud of my record as a tournament director and that most pro players would prefer me to be the one making the tough calls. How much longer I do this job is in question now with situations like I encountered earlier this week. I've always done my best to make sure any tournament I worked on adhered to the highest professional standards. I do this out of respect for the game and it's players.

Jay you are the best, keep a stiff upper lip.:thumbup:

fastone371
10-30-2015, 08:21 AM
That said a lot of the pros were being rather flippant with putting the magic rack on the rail and having the edge over on the table. Maybe I am jus too OCD but I noticed every time it as placed somewhere it could actually be contacted by a ball and I would have likely put the thing off to the side on a pole like many of the pros did so it is out of the way.

I notice the same thing when the Magic Rack is used, they often haphazardly set it on the rail with it over hanging the cushion. Why even take the risk of this being called a foul? Get it off the table surface completely.
As others have mentioned earlier, get rid of the Magic Rack and use the wooden rack, if they are worried about competitors playing with the rack just outline the rack location on the table.

sonny_burnett
10-30-2015, 08:36 AM
I'm not sure there was a TD to call in.
[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Celophanewrap
10-30-2015, 08:44 AM
That was a Boyes move from Dechaine. And Grabe implied that it was a lie and the American audience was in on it, which is an even more serious accusation. If someone in the audience saw it and confirmed it, that's different, but still doesn't excuse Dechaine from the APA league type call.

In The APA this wouldn't have been an issue. If there was no referee, by rule the shooter would have made the call.
- jus' sayin' ...

Sloppy Pockets
10-30-2015, 08:47 AM
I'm with Jay in just issuing a warning first.

I was sitting at a table at Turning Stone last year, watching Mike Dechaine play Fred Gokey in an early round. Mike was having problems with a new tip he just had installed. He miscued badly twice in one game. After one of his miscues he decided to change shafts. Fred saw him doing this and said something about it being technically a concession to unscrew while it was Fred's turn at the table. Mike just laughed it off and said, "I'm not conceding, I'm just changing shafts. Do you really want to win like that?" It is in the rules, and Fred had the right to call in a ref on the matter, but he was basically just issuing a warning.

So I have to ask Mike, "Do you really want to win like that?"

PoolBum
10-30-2015, 08:50 AM
So I have to ask Mike, "Do you really want to win like that?"

I'm guessing that's one of them there rhetorical type questions.

pt109
10-30-2015, 08:52 AM
I saw your post and I like you so I wasn't going to respond.

In snooker there are no foreign objects near the table. The players keep their chalk in their pocket. Unless Jay Helfert is playing and his toupee falls off his head and lands on a ball there is zero chance of a foreign object being on the table - just joking Jay.

The template by definition is not a foreign object or every break would be a foul.

Al, I think a player has the right to be as sloppy as he feels like.....
....but he doesn't have the right to impose his sloppiness on his opponent.
There is NO reason for the template to be left on the rail...many of the players were putting
it on a side table.....and I think it should be lifted from the break area immediately after
the break, also....many of the players show that this is not a problem also.

A good pool match is also like a dance...you have a responsibility to your opponent.

...and I have also appreciated every time you post, Al....
...we can be AZ friends and still differ once in a while.

regards
pt.....waiting for a vid of you running a 100 on your home table

Celophanewrap
10-30-2015, 09:18 AM
I see the OP stopped posting.
So just a couple of questions for the OP, - Was it a foul?

not "was it a home town call" or anything else...

Was it a foul? and Did Dennis call it on himself?

alstl
10-30-2015, 09:55 AM
Al, I think a player has the right to be as sloppy as he feels like.....
....but he doesn't have the right to impose his sloppiness on his opponent.
There is NO reason for the template to be left on the rail...many of the players were putting
it on a side table.....and I think it should be lifted from the break area immediately after
the break, also....many of the players show that this is not a problem also.

A good pool match is also like a dance...you have a responsibility to your opponent.

...and I have also appreciated every time you post, Al....
...we can be AZ friends and still differ once in a while.

regards
pt.....waiting for a vid of you running a 100 on your home table

That's it - I'm offended and I demand the return of the Balabushka I loaned you years ago.

You are going to wait a long time for me to post a 100 ball run. I think I might have a 50 on video. I need a different table. I was playing recently and the end rail fell off the table onto the floor. The pockets all float loose and spit balls out like they are allergic to them.

Island Drive
10-30-2015, 10:20 AM
The Ref said "the audience" means he addressed the audience in general = random people. That's "trusted witnesses" ??? Come on give me a break.

Having played in the event twice Twenty some years ago, one thing I noticed. Those east coasters Know their 9 ball. And they are all from Europe :thumbup:.

decent dennis
10-30-2015, 10:34 AM
That's a good point: The magic rack (actually outsville rack?) is an exception to the normal rule about other objects being touched. No way this should have been called a foul, even if it did happen, IMO.

It was on the rail not the playing surface.

Skippy27
10-30-2015, 10:53 AM
Another opinion, just opinion :)

http://s27.postimg.org/oadx48b6b/New_Bitmap_Image_2.png

He should consider reading the rules as he clearly does not know them.

Poolplaya9
10-30-2015, 12:11 PM
Right, and I revert to my two points.

1. Is it a foul? This isn't a rack, it is a template which by definition is not the same as a rack because it is left on the table during the game and is contacted by the balls.

I have a hard time seeing how it is a foul for a ball to touch the template since balls touch the template on every rack.

2. If it is a foul - which I'm not willing to concede - then whoever put the template in the wrong place is the guilty party.

For your point 1, I can't possibly see how once the template is on top of the rail it isn't a foreign object. If the cue ball hits anything hanging over the edge of the rail, even a piece of chalk, it is a foul. If the template is still on the playing surface a reasonable argument could be made for it being ok for a ball to contact it. If it is on the top of the rail there are no reasonable arguments and it is just another foreign object like any other and if a ball hits it it is a foul.

For point 2, if a piece of chalk is hanging slightly over the edge of the rail and a ball hits is it only a foul if you were the one that left it there but not a foul if it was your opponent that left it there? What if a pocket gets so full of balls that when you shoot your ball into that pocket your object ball comes back out and doesn't stay pocketed? If your opponent was the one that had made every single one of the balls in that pocket is he responsible for your ball coming back out and not you? It has always been the responsibility of the person shooting to make sure the table is clear of anything that could interfere with the balls. I see no reason that a rack left hanging over the edge of the rail is somehow an exception when nothing else is.

Marc
10-30-2015, 12:28 PM
Helfert is 100% right, as usual.

A warning should have been in place here (if decided by the head ref at the Open that that is even a foul to begin with.)

Dechaine clearly felt the pressure too much and moved on Denis.
Simple as that.

He is no saint. He's never been, and he would probably laugh if talking about this incident afterwards and even admit he had to put a move on Denis, trust me, I know him.But I could be wrong. Just hard for me not to see his grind if I was to tell him face to face...

Accept it Stu because that is what happened, maybe I don't like Mike Dechaine as much as you do, but I do like him alright.


I think players from Europe have as many moves as americans, but they use them less, lets just put it this way.
I don't even like differentiating a man by the continent they live at.But if I have to that's what I would have to say between americans and european players. Like it or not,that's a fact.

However,I've seen cheating in all continents I played pool at.
There are cheaters everywhere.And sometimes it's just the heat of the battle talking, or nerves, or thinking you are the one being cheated in the first place when in reality you are the one cheating first! Haha


And nothing wrong with it. I personally like to play by the rules, and if I saw that the present ref. could make a mistake about the rule (wich he probably did when he decided to give ball in hand to Dechaine), I would probably do it too, if I thought I could get away with it and I thought that the opponent was not being fair with me or sharking me in any kind of way during a match. (wich is what sometimes could be the cause of an "unethical" call)


All Pro players,especially the ones who travel internationally, have hit a magic rack template laying on the rail in major tournaments in Japan,China,Qatar,Philippines and in many other major events throught the world,and probably in the USA as well, at one point or another.

That has never been considered a foul, wether the template was left on the table or on the rail.

That is probably the reason why Helfert (who's been all over the world for pool), considers a warning the right call here.

But, people should not absolutize the truth, because no one knows what went down that particular set.

Just like Boyes and Daulton incident, I can't entirely blame Boyes, cuz he may have had reasons to make that call. WE DON'T KNOW.
But either way, Boyes' call was not exactly a move, just a bit unethical, Dechaine's was more of a move, and he probably got the foul when in reality it wasn't a foul at all.

Jay Helfert is right. And Jay's call on Boyes incident would have had to favored Boyes,since Daulton's stick hit a cue ball in movement.

I don't consider myself a mover, but I can't say I never moved on someone during a game. I like to think I've always had a reason to move on someone, but I'm probably wrong there too.


Many Pros like to argue to the end about their good standing integrity. I don't give 2 shits about mine. I make mistakes,I'm not God.
I apologize when I feel I have to, I'm not afraid of making mistakes or being wrong.

Too many drama queens in pool.
And too many Pro events that are not ran properly,not only in the US (wich I think most of them are a joke, and lack professionalism,but also in many other countries)


This is just an opinion.

worldbeater
10-30-2015, 12:45 PM
If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

I'm watching 2013 ultimate 10 ball Reyes vs pagulayan and same thing happened. Magic rack overhanging the rail and Alex hit it with the cueball. They looked at each other for an instant and Alex kept shooting. Because it's a show of mutual respect.

It is most definitely a foul. So if you are playing somebody you don't respect then it's fine to call the foul. In this case the shooter should start by acknowledging he hit the rack. Yet another reason the magic rack creates more problems than it will ever solve.

poolplaya1976
10-30-2015, 12:49 PM
I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed.

I saw the match and mike was 100 percent right.....the ball hit the rack that was hanging over the edge of the table

hang-the-9
10-30-2015, 04:25 PM
That's a good point: The magic rack (actually outsville rack?) is an exception to the normal rule about other objects being touched. No way this should have been called a foul, even if it did happen, IMO.

If it was on the table during the break and a ball rolled over it, or left on the table if there was a ball in the way.

I have seen people leave it on the table when it was easy to remove, I think if a ball hits it then, it should be a foul, same as any other foreign object.

I actually did not even think of that angle till your post.

It's especially true if it's not on the table as a rack but as a piece of equipment no longer in use. It's like using the bridge, then leaving it on the side of the rail and having a ball run into it.

I'd like to know who left the rack there over the side. If it was Mike, then no foul should have been called.

alstl
10-30-2015, 05:00 PM
For your point 1, I can't possibly see how once the template is on top of the rail it isn't a foreign object. If the cue ball hits anything hanging over the edge of the rail, even a piece of chalk, it is a foul. If the template is still on the playing surface a reasonable argument could be made for it being ok for a ball to contact it. If it is on the top of the rail there are no reasonable arguments and it is just another foreign object like any other and if a ball hits it it is a foul.

For point 2, if a piece of chalk is hanging slightly over the edge of the rail and a ball hits is it only a foul if you were the one that left it there but not a foul if it was your opponent that left it there? What if a pocket gets so full of balls that when you shoot your ball into that pocket your object ball comes back out and doesn't stay pocketed? If your opponent was the one that had made every single one of the balls in that pocket is he responsible for your ball coming back out and not you? It has always been the responsibility of the person shooting to make sure the table is clear of anything that could interfere with the balls. I see no reason that a rack left hanging over the edge of the rail is somehow an exception when nothing else is.

You are conflating a piece of chalk which never is placed on the table with the template which always is on the table. It isn't a piece of chalk. It isn't a rack. It is a paper thin template.

How can the template be a foreign object when it is on the table to begin with? The whole idea behind the template is it's so thin it won't alter the course of a ball.

Sloppy Pockets
10-31-2015, 07:53 AM
How can the template be a foreign object when it is on the table to begin with? The whole idea behind the template is it's so thin it won't alter the course of a ball.

Well, because it can affect the course of a ball. That's why they like to get it off the table whenever possible. I have the first design of the Accu Rack and a slow rolling ball will take quite a different direction if it hits one of those little arms just before the ball comes to rest. I've had the thing suddenly hook me behind another ball on the last half roll more than once.

More importantly in this case, a ball that hits the rail with anything draping over the edge could certainly come off the rail differently than if it just hit the cloth-covered cushion. If a small change in humidity can affect the cloth, why wouldn't a whole other material added between the ball and the rubber have an even bigger effect? At least that my thinking on the subject.

rjb1168
10-31-2015, 09:35 AM
Another opinion, just opinion :)

http://s27.postimg.org/oadx48b6b/New_Bitmap_Image_2.png

suck it up and move on whinner. :crying:

sheffield6
10-31-2015, 10:13 AM
suck it up and move on whinner. :crying:

theres no "H" in winner

Banks
10-31-2015, 10:30 AM
theres no "H" in winner

I think he means the guy just needs to losen up. :thumbup:

decent dennis
10-31-2015, 10:34 AM
you are conflating a piece of chalk which never is placed on the table with the template which always is on the table. It isn't a piece of chalk. It isn't a rack. It is a paper thin template.

How can the template be a foreign object when it is on the table to begin with? The whole idea behind the template is it's so thin it won't alter the course of a ball.

it wasn't on the playing surface, it was on the rail.

pt109
10-31-2015, 10:47 AM
theres no "H" in winner

Will you stop your wining...you'll end up with a hangover...oh shit.:eek:

BRussell
10-31-2015, 10:48 AM
it wasn't on the playing surface, it was on the rail.


lol people keep repeating this as if it's new information. Everyone has always understood where the template was. But the fact that it's not a foul when it's on the playing surface is relevant to whether it's a foul when it's on the rail, especially if it's not explicitly in the rules, which apparently it's not.

Pidge
10-31-2015, 11:13 AM
You cant say for certain if it would or would not have changed the cue balls path. In that sense, foul.

If Mike placed the rack on the rail, common decency dictates that you stfu and dont mention it.

If the shooter placed the rack on the rail, then they only have themselves to blame and you stfu and deal with it.

If a ref placed the rack on the rail it is their call as to whether its a foul or not, in which case both players stfu and get on with it.

Pro pool is boring enough to watch without having to sit through a group of men discussing the petty side of things for 5 minutes.

Its a shame when players take to the internet and whine about a decision made by a ref. Thats why we have them in pool, to resolve differences of opinion and to enforce the rules. Without them pro pool would be even more dull to watch. Although i do like watching grown men have hissy fits every now and again, people pay to watch the quality pool on show.

worldbeater
10-31-2015, 11:28 AM
These template racks are garbage. How many times do you see a rack broken and the money ball goes back a few inches, hits the rack and stops....leaving an early dead combo in the rack? This sort of thing is killing the game.

I see Brunswick stamped racks from the 1950s selling for 50 bucks average on ebay. You think anybody will pay a dollar for a POS template in 60 years? It's a scourge on pool. Creates more problems than it solves.

hang-the-9
10-31-2015, 01:38 PM
These template racks are garbage. How many times do you see a rack broken and the money ball goes back a few inches, hits the rack and stops....leaving an early dead combo in the rack? This sort of thing is killing the game.

I see Brunswick stamped racks from the 1950s selling for 50 bucks average on ebay. You think anybody will pay a dollar for a POS template in 60 years? It's a scourge on pool. Creates more problems than it solves.

I'd rather have the rack stop a ball 1 cm short than have the 9 shoot in the corner or sit near the corner, or watch someone rack for 5 minutes or re-rack 4 times or get a slug rack, or line up a dead combo anyway because there is a lose ball next to the 9. I did a thread about racking at a recent tournament where they used the best standard rack out there, the Delta. It had a wired 9 ball combo several times every match. Enjoy the read http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=406932

The number of times something "bad" happens due to a loose rack is way more than due to a tight rack.

Just because a $5-10 piece of plastic is not likely to be a collectable in 60 years does not say much. My 04 Matrix won't be worth much in 10 years but it's still a damn reliable car that does everything it should.

sjm
10-31-2015, 01:57 PM
If Mike placed the rack on the rail, common decency dictates that you stfu and dont mention it.

If the shooter placed the rack on the rail, then they only have themselves to blame and you stfu and deal with it.

Agreed. It was Grabe who placed the rack on this occasion. In rack your own format, he broke the rack and was on his way to a possible run-out when the shot that necessitated the ruling occurred on the five ball.

worldbeater
10-31-2015, 02:07 PM
I'd rather have the rack stop a ball 1 cm short than have the 9 shoot in the corner or sit near the corner, or watch someone rack for 5 minutes or re-rack 4 times or get a slug rack, or line up a dead combo anyway because there is a lose ball next to the 9. I did a thread about racking at a recent tournament where they used the best standard rack out there, the Delta. It had a wired 9 ball combo several times every match. Enjoy the read http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=406932

The number of times something "bad" happens due to a loose rack is way more than due to a tight rack.

Just because a $5-10 piece of plastic is not likely to be a collectable in 60 years does not say much. My 04 Matrix won't be worth much in 10 years but it's still a damn reliable car that does everything it should.

With magic rack the 9 or 10 typically doesn't move 5 inches. Sitting there it's ripe for early combos . If I'm playing anything over 100 a set I would refuse the MR. It can decide sets.

To save rotation pool and pro pool altogether some governing body needs to come to a concensus about racking. Watching these highly accomplished pros whine like little girls is getting old.

pt109
10-31-2015, 02:25 PM
You cant say for certain if it would or would not have changed the cue balls path. In that sense, foul.

If Mike placed the rack on the rail, common decency dictates that you stfu and dont mention it.

If the shooter placed the rack on the rail, then they only have themselves to blame and you stfu and deal with it.

If a ref placed the rack on the rail it is their call as to whether its a foul or not, in which case both players stfu and get on with it.

Pro pool is boring enough to watch without having to sit through a group of men discussing the petty side of things for 5 minutes.

Its a shame when players take to the internet and whine about a decision made by a ref. Thats why we have them in pool, to resolve differences of opinion and to enforce the rules. Without them pro pool would be even more dull to watch. Although i do like watching grown men have hissy fits every now and again, people pay to watch the quality pool on show.

Agreed. It was Grabe who placed the rack on this occasion. In rack your own format, he broke the rack and was on his way to a possible run-out when the shot that necessitated the ruling occurred on the five ball.
It's up to the player at the table to see that the table is in order.
it's a very commonsense rule and Pidge should be well aware of it...SNOOKER.

WHEN YOU SHOOT, BE RESPONSIBLE

cleary
10-31-2015, 02:36 PM
So if the rack is left laying on the table and a ball touches it, it's not a foul. If it's on the rail and a ball touches it, it's a foul? LOL That's just stupid. I think template racking is best for tournaments but this kind of stuff ruins it for everyone. Also, the fact that the ref asked the crowd for their opinions is nothing short of comical. "Excuse me, group of people who may or may not know the rules and could possibly be betting on this match, was that a foul?" What could go wrong?

sjm
10-31-2015, 02:54 PM
So if the rack is left laying on the table and a ball touches it, it's not a foul. If it's on the rail and a ball touches it, it's a foul? LOL That's just stupid. I think template racking is best for tournaments but this kind of stuff ruins it for everyone. Also, the fact that the ref asked the crowd for their opinions is nothing short of comical. "Excuse me, group of people who may or may not know the rules and could possibly be betting on this match, was that a foul?" What could go wrong?

Nobody was asked whether it was a foul. The fans were asked whether the rack was touched by the cue ball and several confirmed having seen it happen.

As a 40 year veteran of the tournament trail, I'd guess I've seen spectator input solicited by a referee on at least a dozen occasions. When Bob Jewett, who wrote most of the rulebook, says that the rules explicitly provide for solicitaiton of spectator input in a situation like this one, that should satisfy even the most diehard player or fan.

All that said, I'd rather just have the rule changed to say that this isn't a foul. I'm not a big fan of all ball fouls either. A player touches a ball with his/her shirt and doesn't move it and that's a foul --- just another example of having a rack decided by an incident that had no bearing on the play. Shane's foul that cost him a chance to go double hill with Deuel was an example of a foul that gets in the way of the way things ought to be. He moved a ball that was about seven feet from the one ball, on which he was playing safe, and it would have had absolutely no impact on the play.

To me, the fact that this incident was, in my opinion, handled correctly by the single most knowledgeable scholar on the rules of pool is not sufficiently comforting, because the rules themselves need revisiting.

cleary
10-31-2015, 03:05 PM
Nobody was asked whether it was a foul. The fans were asked whether the rack was touched by the cue ball and several confirmed having seen it happen.

As a 40 year veteran of the tournament trail, I'd guess I've seen spectator input solicited by a referee on at least a dozen occasions. When Bob Jewett, who wrote most of the rulebook, says that the rules explicitly provide for solicitaiton of spectator input in a situation like this one, that should satisfy even the most diehard player or fan.

Can you think of any other sport on earth that spectator input would be used?

I agree the rule is stupid to begin with but anyone (no matter what rule books they've writen) who would say they should ask a spectator for input needs a PhD in common sense. :)

cleary
10-31-2015, 03:07 PM
"Hey, did anyone see if he picked up his pivot foot?"

http://www.thedistractionnetwork.com/images/funny-sports-fans-244.jpg

vagabond
10-31-2015, 06:55 PM
When Bob Jewett, who wrote most of the rulebook, says that the rules explicitly provide for solicitaiton of spectator input in a situation like this one, that should satisfy even the most diehard player or fan.
.

Rule providing for Solicitation of input from the spectators is NOT knew. That rule has been there for very long time. That rule was followed in Professional Billiard Tour ( Don Macky's time) in late 80s and 90s.

Pidge
10-31-2015, 07:00 PM
It's up to the player at the table to see that the table is in order.
it's a very commonsense rule and Pidge should be well aware of it...SNOOKER.

WHEN YOU SHOOT, BE RESPONSIBLE
Thing is snooker has a ref, fully aware of whats going on. If you eff up like williams has done in the past then its your fault...which males me think, who left the rack on the rail. If i left it id be like fair enough, and i would verbally abuse my self whilst sat in my seat.

I forgot pool is like who wants to be a millionaire. Ask the audience is a great asset.

cardiac kid
10-31-2015, 07:09 PM
So if the rack is left laying on the table and a ball touches it, it's not a foul. If it's on the rail and a ball touches it, it's a foul? LOL That's just stupid. I think template racking is best for tournaments but this kind of stuff ruins it for everyone. Also, the fact that the ref asked the crowd for their opinions is nothing short of comical. "Excuse me, group of people who may or may not know the rules and could possibly be betting on this match, was that a foul?" What could go wrong?

Andrew,

When the template is used, as long as it stays in the original spot, all current governing groups agree it is part of the playing surface. Once it has been removed from the playing surface, it becomes a foreign object no different than a piece of chalk, a rack or pocket marker :eek: .If the cue ball strikes the now rack as it travels against the rail it is a foul. Period. If the players don't like the rule, have the governing body change it. JMHO.

Lyn

cleary
10-31-2015, 07:10 PM
Rule providing for Solicitation of input from the spectators is NOT knew. That rule has been there for very long time. That rule was followed in Professional Billiard Tour ( Don Macky's time) in late 80s and 90s.

Clap if it hit the rack!

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-GxvpmpImJZA/UUN3RlfEwBI/AAAAAAABWGk/MCdsbtyfOw4/w426-h361/b.gif

pt109
10-31-2015, 07:11 PM
Thing is snooker has a ref, fully aware of whats going on. If you eff up like williams has done in the past then its your fault...which males me think, who left the rack on the rail. If i left it id be like fair enough, and i would verbally abuse my self whilst sat in my seat.

I forgot pool is like who wants to be a millionaire. Ask the audience is a great asset.

Asking the audience for witness is in instructions to a snooker referee....
....once again...common sense...which works in action also.

That league thinking....no ref, no foul, doesn't get it at the highest level of the game.

Hungarian
10-31-2015, 07:11 PM
I'll get on it right away. Can you send me the number to the governing body?

Andrew,

When the template is used, as long as it stays in the original spot, all current governing groups agree it is part of the playing surface. Once it has been removed from the playing surface, it becomes a foreign object no different than a piece of chalk, a rack or pocket marker :eek: .If the cue ball strikes the now rack as it travels against the rail it is a foul. Period. If the players don't like the rule, have the governing body change it. JMHO.

Lyn

Johnnyt
10-31-2015, 07:13 PM
Templates are not new anymore. They have been around for about 8 years. Promoters, TD's and refs need to get off their asses and make a rule, "Template Must Be Taken Off Table Right After Break and set somewhere away from the table...and enforce it. It seems no one wants to confront players about rules. Johnnyt

pt109
10-31-2015, 07:17 PM
Templates are not new anymore. They have been around for about 8 years. Promoters, TD's and refs need to get off their asses and make a rule, "Template Must Be Taken Off Table Right After Break and set somewhere away from the table...and enforce it. It seems no one wants to confront players about rules. Johnnyt

Works for me....why complicate things?

cleary
10-31-2015, 07:17 PM
Andrew,

When the template is used, as long as it stays in the original spot, all current governing groups agree it is part of the playing surface. Once it has been removed from the playing surface, it becomes a foreign object no different than a piece of chalk, a rack or pocket marker :eek: .If the cue ball strikes the now rack as it travels against the rail it is a foul. Period. If the players don't like the rule, have the governing body change it. JMHO.

Lyn

It's a stupid rule imo. If it's insignificant enough not to make a difference after the break, it won't make a difference when it's moved. But because pool is pool, next year they will play by a different format with different equipment so it really doesn't matter. Regardless, the crowd can just tell the TD it was a foul anyway lol

cardiac kid
10-31-2015, 07:31 PM
I'll get on it right away. Can you send me the number to the governing body?

Do you really need the number for the WPA or BCAPL or USAPL or CSI or or? I would think someone of your stature in the pool world would have them close at hand! I also appreciate you getting right on it. Pretty sure others would agree :grin: .Don't like the rule either. As it is the rule in use, guess I'll just have to abide by it. For the time being of course :thumbup: .

Lyn

cardiac kid
10-31-2015, 07:34 PM
It's a stupid rule imo. If it's insignificant enough not to make a difference after the break, it won't make a difference when it's moved. But because pool is pool, next year they will play by a different format with different equipment so it really doesn't matter. Regardless, the crowd can just tell the TD it was a foul anyway lol

Frankly I think it's a stupid rule the nine ball counts on the break. Regardless of which pocket it goes in. It is called nine ball after all. Sure takes a lot of talent to make it on the break! Don't think they are going to change the rule anytime soon so I won't hold my breath.

Lyn

OLD NO 9
10-31-2015, 07:35 PM
It's a stupid rule imo. If it's insignificant enough not to make a difference after the break, it won't make a difference when it's moved. But because pool is pool, next year they will play by a different format with different equipment so it really doesn't matter. Regardless, the crowd can just tell the TD it was a foul anyway lol

Just so you know, twice while I was watching the stream a ball rolled significantly off after crossing over the template. Once a cue ball another time an object ball.