Controversial European Open Push Shot Call – The Myths Busted

iusedtoberich said:
One guy who DID watch it had an interesting comment. He said the snooker/blackball definition of the word "push" is different than the WPA definition of the word "push", and that is where some of the confusion might arise from. He said in the snooker/blackball games if all 3 are in contact at once (which they were) it's a push.
Click to expand...
It's not that different, this is from the official snooker rules:
1773396797268.png
 
thanks for the detailed explanation of the rules and the reason for the shot in question to be NO FOUL
has the ref made any statements since?
i know in other sports the ref or organization comes out after the fact and says there was an error in a call even tho nothing can be done in retrospect to rectify the error
if not i agree with @skor
skor said:
Good video
Send it to the referee
Click to expand...
 
I like your suggestion that Boyes and McMullan should apologize. I realize color commentary has to be spontaneous and occasionally off-the-wall but it also means they should apologize when they call someone a doofus when, actually, they are the dooffuses.

I like the longer video because I beter understand the push/frozen-ball rules as opposed to the bits I learned off AZ and Reddit where I wasn't aware (like the referee?) that I could hit with abandon at a declared cue-ball-frozen-to-object-ball.
 
Last edited:
I'm looking forward to your video D. D. but later.
I've always felt....being frozen they became ''one ball''.
Yrs ago tho gambling, many accepted this shot only if you shoot a cut angle.
 
GideonF said:
By the way, did you get an answer from Marcel on whether it was a Table Referee or an Area Referee? This is supposed to matter a great deal in terms of his ability to do anything on a blown call.

The fact that they had to call him to the table suggests an Area Ref, but it could also be a new ref who didn’t know enough to immediately come inspect the balls once it was clear they might or might not be frozen.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure he was a Table Referee. Regardless, as Head Referee, Marcel did have the authority to reverse the call. That’s why he was asked to intervene. Marcel decided not to reverse the call, as I described in the video.
 
Paul_#_ said:
I like your suggestion that Boyes and McMullan should apologize. I realize color commentary has to be spontaneous and occasionally off-the-wall but it also means they should apologize when they call someone a doofus when, actually, they are the dooffuses.

I like the longer video because I beter understand the push/frozen-ball rules as opposed to the bits I learned off AZ and Reddit where I wasn't aware (like the referee?) that I could hit with abandon at a declared cue-ball-frozen-to-object-ball.
Click to expand...

I’m glad you now know you can “Hit With Abandon.” Sounds like a good band name.
 
Someone on YouTube made an excellent point about why the UK rule of shooting away from frozen balls would be bizarre in rotation games. As Dr Dave mentions, under the UK rule you have to shoot away from the frozen ball but you are deemed to have hit the ball you are frozen to. In 9b that would mean you could shoot away from the 6b and make any ball (including for example the 9b).
 
Karl has posted a video with Pongers now. He gives a weak apology for calling him Bonkers.

Pongers says Marcel told him he thought it was prolonged tip contact, but it could be that Marcel was telling him what the ref had called (which makes sense if Marcel didn’t see the shot).

 
GideonF said:
Someone on YouTube made an excellent point about why the UK rule of shooting away from frozen balls would be bizarre in rotation games. As Dr Dave mentions, under the UK rule you have to shoot away from the frozen ball but you are deemed to have hit the ball you are frozen to. In 9b that would mean you could shoot away from the 6b and make any ball (including for example the 9b).
Click to expand...

i'm doubt that's what anyone, be it boyes or the bosnian ref, would suggest though? bit of a strawman in the discussion. i have never ever seen it done or suggested

the frozen rule here where i play is accepted now but 15 years ago players would do (and be expected to do) a thin cut away from the OB. many are probably still unaware of the rule
 
skogstokig said:
i'm doubt that's what anyone, be it boyes or the bosnian ref, would suggest though? bit of a strawman in the discussion. i have never ever seen it done or suggested

the frozen rule here where i play is accepted now but 15 years ago players would do (and be expected to do) a thin cut away from the OB. many are probably still unaware of the rule
Click to expand...

The died in the wool UK fans do think you should shoot away because that’s what you do at snooker and English pool. And the rule seems weird to us but it actually works in their own sport - if I’m frozen to a solid I can shoot at another solid, or even play a safety by shooting away and hitting a rail. So that rule COULD work for American 8b (it’s being used in the Ultimate Pool series). It just doesn’t work in rotation.
 
GideonF said:
Karl has posted a video with Pongers now. He gives a weak apology for calling him Bonkers
Click to expand...
Karl Boyes apologized for calling him bonkers, did not state that he himself was right, and let Pongers explain. The apology was okay. Karl was still confused on the rule and that is where he still is slipping up on. Pongers did okay in trying to get Karl up to speed. Pongers admitted that the shot was a little bit out of the box because there is a shot where you would hit the cue ball to the side of the object ball.

From video:

Pongers: Then Marcel came over and he said that the balls were frozen indeed, but it was still prolonged contact. So prolonged,

Boyes: which is when I seen the shot obviously because I've never seen like a a top player just smash through the balls. I I know obviously when they're touching and I've seen all the videos over the years where the both balls move forward. I know all that, but I just thought you still pushing through like long. So that's what he declared a foul for.

Pongers: Uh it looked like because I I I made him at so much speed. Yeah.
That I was like pushing through like all the way, but my queue came up very quick.

Boyes: Yeah. But that's what he said. It's a foul if you keep going sort of thing.

Pongers: Yeah. But even if you do that, it's not possible. Yeah.
It's only possible when your acceleration is like two times in the shot. Like you decelerate and accelerate again. That's the only way it's possible to make prolong contact with frozen ball.
 
Paul_#_ said:
Karl Boyes apologized for calling him bonkers, did not state that he himself was right, and let Pongers explain. The apology was okay. Karl was still confused on the rule and that is where he still is slipping up on. Pongers did okay in trying to get Karl up to speed. Pongers admitted that the shot was a little bit out of the box because there is a shot where you would hit the cue ball to the side of the object ball.

From video:

Pongers: Then Marcel came over and he said that the balls were frozen indeed, but it was still prolonged contact. So prolonged,

Boyes: which is when I seen the shot obviously because I've never seen like a a top player just smash through the balls. I I know obviously when they're touching and I've seen all the videos over the years where the both balls move forward. I know all that, but I just thought you still pushing through like long. So that's what he declared a foul for.

Pongers: Uh it looked like because I I I made him at so much speed. Yeah.
That I was like pushing through like all the way, but my queue came up very quick.

Boyes: Yeah. But that's what he said. It's a foul if you keep going sort of thing.

Pongers: Yeah. But even if you do that, it's not possible. Yeah.
It's only possible when your acceleration is like two times in the shot. Like you decelerate and accelerate again. That's the only way it's possible to make prolong contact with frozen ball.
Click to expand...

The problem with the apology is that he only apologized for calling him Bonkers. As if every other insulting thing he said was okay if only he hadn’t used that name.

Karl isn’t responsible for the call. But he is responsible for his words and he should have said something like “I didn’t understand the rule and what you were trying to accomplish. I realize now that my comments were insulting and I just wanted to apologize to you.”
 
GideonF said:
Karl isn’t responsible for the call. But he is responsible for his words and he should have said something like “I didn’t understand the rule and what you were trying to accomplish. I realize now that my comments were insulting and I just wanted to apologize to you.”
Click to expand...
Karl Boyes may not be the sharpest saw in the woodshed.
He should have been schooled in the rule Dr Dave showed. As it was, he deferred to Pongers and Pongers, hopefully got him up to speed. Sure, he should have done his homework before-hand and had read up on the rule regarding a frozen-to-cue-ball-is-declared rule.
 
Paul_#_ said:
Karl Boyes may not be the sharpest saw in the woodshed.
He should have been schooled in the rule Dr Dave showed. As it was, he deferred to Pongers and Pongers, hopefully got him up to speed. Sure, he should have done his homework before-hand and had read up on the rule regarding a frozen-to-cue-ball-is-declared rule.
Click to expand...
seems like he knows now
click on the link in post #36 by @GideonF
GideonF said:
www.facebook.com

101K views · 1.4K reactions | Karl Boyes, get the rule book out 😅 @Roobet | #EuropeanOpenPool 🇪🇺 | #WNT | Matchroom Pool

Karl Boyes, get the rule book out 😅 @Roobet | #EuropeanOpenPool 🇪🇺 | #WNT
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

The refs blow it again. No ref comes to inspect if it’s frozen or to watch the resulting shot. Based on the shot I think it wasn’t frozen but was a legal shot because the CB went along the tangent line, but someone should have been watching it.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top