Last edited:
Foul or not, YMTK.
- Thread starter gxman
- Start date
No rail from what I saw
usually on a tiki (rail/ ball/ rail ) the second hit on the rail can happen so fast you don't see it
but
the cue ball will rebound away from the rail
in this case the cue ball went straight since she hit the one very full and in slow motion it did not seem to graze the rail
FOUL
jmho
icbw
but
the cue ball will rebound away from the rail
in this case the cue ball went straight since she hit the one very full and in slow motion it did not seem to graze the rail
FOUL
jmho
icbw
What does ymtc stand for?
I think it was a foul but I suck at calling hits.
I think it was a foul but I suck at calling hits.
You Make The Call
Agreed. I slowed it down to 0.25X, went full-screen, and zoomed in. The cue ball does not hit the rail after the kick.
It clearly appeared to be a foul to me. With all the running spin that was on the cue ball, it would have noticeably picked up speed if it had contacted the side rail at all, which it did not. Since there was not a referee for the match, and a referee was not called to judge the shot by the opponent, the call has to go with the shooter's call. Bottom line is neither player were in the correct position to be able to make an accurate call on this shot from where they were standing / sitting at the time.
Although she certainly would have had a better chance to 3-foul Kelly if this foul was called, I'm not sure this missed call would have changed the outcome of this hill/hill match which Kelly won. The way the 2-ball was tied up anyway, Siming would have likely ended up playing a safety just as she did, leaving Kelly hooked and having to successfully execute a kick shot, just as she did. This was a near 15 minute game with both players executing numerous safeties and kick safeties before Kelly won the game - excellent match.
Last edited:
It was a foul, but if nobody was standing over the shot to watch you can't call it. The proper position for the referee in a case like this is to be standing at the side rail where the one ball is, looking at the path of the cue ball coming toward the ball. Just prior to contact the ref should lean in and get close to the balls when the hit happens. That way he can get it right.
Unfortunately, I see very few referees that know where to stand in situations like this. They somehow are afraid to stand in the player's line of sight and that's wrong. You should stand where you need to be to see the shot clearly and just stay still when the player is shooting. In this case a ref standing behind Kelly or at the head of the table could not make this call correctly!
Unfortunately, I see very few referees that know where to stand in situations like this. They somehow are afraid to stand in the player's line of sight and that's wrong. You should stand where you need to be to see the shot clearly and just stay still when the player is shooting. In this case a ref standing behind Kelly or at the head of the table could not make this call correctly!
Easy. FOUL.
I didn't watch the rest of the match to see if there was a ref at that table but if so, I def agree with you on where a ref should have been. With that said, if no ref was there to watch for it, this is one of those shots where you would almost never think you could kick and hit the 1b and *not* get a rail.
It was actually pretty amazing how unlikely that was for either ball to not hit the rail after contact, but imo, they didn't.
Foul.
best,
brian kc
Is that really so? I mean, is there a rule in the rule book that states this?
What would be the protocol if the non-shooter calls a foul and the shooter simply refuses to acknowledge it; and the non-shooter refuses to concede, unlike this case??
Kelly Fisher offered to give BIH even though it was not an obvious foul here. That is class.
On other hand, JB kept quiet even though it was obvious foul :grin-square:
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=487024
On other hand, JB kept quiet even though it was obvious foul :grin-square:
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=487024
Foul
Amazing how it ran down that rail and never touched it.
Amazing how it ran down that rail and never touched it.
The assumption in the WPA rules is that there will be a referee at the table and the referee will make the determination of what happened. In case there is no referee, the following part of the regulations (separate from the rules) is applicable:
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. If the area referee is asked to determine whether a foul occurred and there is no evidence of the foul except the claim of one player while the other player claims that there was no foul, then it is assumed that no foul occurred.
I think that if they were able to review the video -- which is often not easy during a televised/streamed match -- a foul would have been called. It appears to me that the cue ball did not return to the side cushion after hitting the one ball.
The rules and regulations can be found here:
https://wpapool.com/
https://wpapool.com/rules-of-play/
https://wpapool.com/rule-regulations/
It is surprising to me how many players have never read through any set of rules.