While I can understand the comparison, I think the analogy fails in this instance because once a broadcast is going on then any pool player's (or any professional athlete's) job is to entertain their audience. In a private money match, sure anything goes. But once a match is being streamed, and there's revenue because of that stream, and sponsors trying to attract eyeballs, then the player's job is no longer one of "win the match" but one of "give a show people want to watch." That's why all these major tournaments have shot clocks now. And why people are complaining about pace in these smaller streams. If the audience doesn't get what they want then they will stop watching, with all the financial ramifications of that.
That said, 30 seconds with one extension can be a little too abrupt at times. How about a 30 second shot clock with a 2 min per rack time bank that can be dipped into automatically and what's left carries over? Pace can still be snappy, while not rushing key moments that makes the outcome of some matches seem somewhat arbitrary.
People can come up with whatever rules suits their own match. But the ones that will attract and retain viewers, thereby being more successful, will have some rules to keep games moving along.
