Can a player make a call in this situation?

VIProfessor

VIProfessor

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Here's the situation: The two top guns for the teams in the finals of the league championship are playing in a crucial match (the team score is tied 6-6 in a race to nine matches). The match is being presided over by a referee and is thus all ball fouls.

Player A touched an object ball while shooting, and Player B called 'foul', but the referee didn't see the foul and thus ruled that Player A could continue shooting. Player A did indeed touch the ball (but was never asked by the referee), and a number of spectators saw that the ball was touched. The match was being videotaped but was not consulted. It must be added, however, that the tape was consulted later in the match when Player B asserted that Player A did not call a cross-side bank on the eight ball and the referee did not see or hear the call (the review showed that Player A did indeed call the pocket by pointing to it--the new rules requiring verbal designation were not yet in use in the league.).

The incident and the discussion(s!) afterwards ensued raised a number of questions that I submit to my highly esteemed fellow forum members for consideration.

1. Can a player make a call in a match presided over by a referee? If so, what is the best response by the referee if there is a dispute among the players on the issue?

2. Player A said afterwards (and I believe him) that he knew he had touched the ball and would have said so if asked, but that he wasn't going to call it on himself. Should he have?

3. In the second instance, where it was claimed that Player A hadn't called a pocket, should the tape have been used to verify it, considering that it hadn't been used earlier? If not, how should the situation have been resolved?

If Jay and the many other highly experienced folks can weigh in on this it would be greatly appreciated, but I look forward to hearing all viewpoints on the issue. Many thanks!!
 
- A player can call a foul on himself any time, I have never seen a ref argue with a player who said he fouled.

- An opponent can't call a foul on the opposing player, for obvious reasons. He can alert the ref so that the ref can watch for it next time, and by questioning it he gives the shooter a chance to either admit to it, or explain how it wasn't a foul.

Some might see this as sharking though, if he calls lots of marginal fouls that the ref never saw.

- If you know you committed a foul, and keep shooting, you cheated to win. You will know your win wasn't legit. A similar question was posted recently, where someone asked about calling a no-rail foul on yourself if the other guy failed to call the OB frozen. Some players argue "It's not my job to make sure others are watching me. If I get away with a foul, but they failed to spot it or call it, it's their fault". That's being a weasel.

- Since weasels exist and there's no avoiding it, refs should all be taught to question a player about these things. It won't do anything for people blatantly willing to lie, but it will catch the ones who think they're halfway honest (even though they're not).

- Never heard of instant replay in pool. I don't see anything wrong with it, if everyone agrees to it. But the camera should be in control of refs or someone neutral. If one team has a camera and the other doesn't, the team with a camera has an advantage... the guy holding it can watch for subtle fouls that the spectators missed, and call them if it benefits his team, but remain quiet if it doesn't.
 
Most of us are not used to having referees for our matches so calling fouls on ourselves is what we do if we are honest.
That being said... If a bunch of guys get together for a pickup softball game there are no umpires so they make the calls themselves and in the case of close ones, they argue until one side gives in or the game breaks up.
When these same guys play in their softball league, there are umpires. The umpires make ALL the calls. Have you ever seen an umpire ask a baserunner if he was out or safe? How often have you seen a baserunner, when called safe on a close play, walk back to the duggout because he knew he was out? The referees and umpires are there for a reason. It is their job to make the calls. If they miss one, it's on them not the player.
As far as looking at the video... In the case of pool anyway, if the match is being videoed with the intention of using it as a reference, then why bother with a referee? Most of the time, a video is not going to zoom in close enough to pick up the touch fouls.
My summation:
1) The referee makes all calls as he/she sees them. It's the referee's responsibilty to be in a position to see any foul commited.
2) No video "replay" if a referee is presiding the match. Referee's call stands.

Just my 2 cents worth of opinion...
 
VIProfessor said:
Here's the situation: The two top guns for the teams in the finals of the league championship are playing in a crucial match (the team score is tied 6-6 in a race to nine matches). The match is being presided over by a referee and is thus all ball fouls.

Player A touched an object ball while shooting, and Player B called 'foul', but the referee didn't see the foul and thus ruled that Player A could continue shooting. Player A did indeed touch the ball (but was never asked by the referee), and a number of spectators saw that the ball was touched. The match was being videotaped but was not consulted. It must be added, however, that the tape was consulted later in the match when Player B asserted that Player A did not call a cross-side bank on the eight ball and the referee did not see or hear the call (the review showed that Player A did indeed call the pocket by pointing to it--the new rules requiring verbal designation were not yet in use in the league.).

The incident and the discussion(s!) afterwards ensued raised a number of questions that I submit to my highly esteemed fellow forum members for consideration.

1. Can a player make a call in a match presided over by a referee? If so, what is the best response by the referee if there is a dispute among the players on the issue?

2. Player A said afterwards (and I believe him) that he knew he had touched the ball and would have said so if asked, but that he wasn't going to call it on himself. Should he have?

3. In the second instance, where it was claimed that Player A hadn't called a pocket, should the tape have been used to verify it, considering that it hadn't been used earlier? If not, how should the situation have been resolved?

If Jay and the many other highly experienced folks can weigh in on this it would be greatly appreciated, but I look forward to hearing all viewpoints on the issue. Many thanks!!
Click to expand...



Not sure why the ref didn't ask the player if he touched the ball. I imagine it would be difficult to see every little touch (i.e. shooting over a ball the the cue barely touches the ball you are shooting over).
 
Player B saw the foul and called it. Player A chose to ignore this even though he knew he fouled. His explanation aside, he should have accepted the foul call immediately. Once again there are honest players and dishonest ones. The dishonest ones will always find a way to circumvent the rules.

The ref should have been paying closer attention, so he/she is also at fault here. A good ref WATCHES the match! Where was their attention on the shot in question. And why no conversation with the Player A? Poor officiating by this untrained (or uninterested) ref.
 
jay helfert said:
Player B saw the foul and called it. Player A chose to ignore this even though he knew he fouled. His explanation aside, he should have accepted the foul call immediately. Once again there are honest players and dishonest ones. The dishonest ones will always find a way to circumvent the rules.

The ref should have been paying closer attention, so he/she is also at fault here. A good ref WATCHES the match! Where was their attention on the shot in question. And why no conversation with the Player A? Poor officiating by this untrained (or uninterested) ref.
Click to expand...

What he said ^
 
jay helfert said:
... The ref should have been paying closer attention, so he/she is also at fault here. A good ref WATCHES the match! ...
Click to expand...
Like most players, some refs watch the ball go into the pocket. Of course that should be about the last thing they pay attention to especially if they are playing all-ball fouls.
 
Many thanks to the posters for their excellent and insightful replies. I'll be sharing this with other players in the Virgin Islands and I'm sure it will clarify a lot for some folks.

We might also need some contacts for some referee training programs. :grin-devilish:
 
2. Player A said afterwards (and I believe him) that he knew he had touched the ball and would have said so if asked, but that he wasn't going to call it on himself. Should he have?




Yes, if he knew he fouled he should have called it on himself.

Not sure why he didn't pick up the cue ball and hand it to you when he touched the other ball. Let me ask you this, if you had no ref would he have given you BIH? Personally I always call the foul on myself unless I don't believe it was a foul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top