SVB foul vs. Kaci?

BRussell

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
https://youtu.be/3222FbMVzvY

Here is the finals match in the Netherlands, SVB vs. Kaci. Great comeback by SVB.

But look at SVB’s shot at 50:30. He uses the bridge and pulls it away quickly as the cue ball comes back at his stick after the shot. Turn the volume up and you can hear a noise that might be the cue ball hitting his tip, and it looks like the cue ball might deviate from its path just a little. No foul was called.

Guilty or not guilty?
 
Z

Z-Nole

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't think so. Cue balls comes hard off the rail and the English took. The ref was right on top of it and would have had to seen or heard it. I think what you heard was the stick in the rake.

But I'm blind and could be wrong.
 
D

Denis The Kid

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I watched it 3 times and each time I felt like the cue ball did touch his tip as he was pulling his cue back. It can also be heard ever so lightly. Given Shanes impeccable personality I would , I would guess he did not realize it.
 
BRussell

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Here's the shot. But you need to watch it on YouTube to hear the audio.

5d0EKX.gif
 
pt109

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
Looks good to me.
...the deviation of the cue ball is the effect of top spin coming off a rail on new cloth.
...that spin becomes back spin and at some point it grabs the cloth.
 
gregcantrall

gregcantrall

Center Ball
Silver Member
It definitely hit the cue.
He might not have felt it because of the interaction of the cue and bridge.
 
claymont

claymont

JADE
Gold Member
Silver Member
Looks like a foul to me. Here's an over head view of the shot.

https://youtu.be/3222FbMVzvY?t=3102

The bridge didn't cause the sound; it looks like it's got a felt liner. The sound had to come from tip/cue ball contact. :groucho:
 

Attachments

  • shane_bridge.png
    shane_bridge.png
    164.1 KB · Views: 2,220
Last edited:
MattPoland

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I hear what you’re hearing and see the cueball path alter at the same time. I was watching at first for a foul when he strikes the ball but that’s clean. The foul is later near the second diamond as the ball is rebounding and the bridge is pulling back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tin Man

Tin Man

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Very hard to tell. I couldn't tell if he had his cue high enough to be out of the cueball's path and the sound was the bridge and cue stick, or if the cueball caught the tip the second time. Yes, top spin would bend the ball in a similar path, but if it was good it was an odd coincidence that the cueball bent precisely when the potential foul took place. It was reminiscint of Boyes banging his cue on the table right when the cueball rolled away from the rail vs. his Soquet match.

If I had to bet I would bet it was a foul, but that isn't how it works. Fouls have to be decisive. We have a bunch of pool fans watching and rewatching this in slow motion and there still isn't a total consensus. In the heat of battle the ref has to make a call, and I think since it wasn't clear he made the right call.

I certainly don't think SVB tried to get away with anything. Maybe he wasn't sure but since the ref didn't call anything he figured he hit it good and it was just the bridge and cue colliding to make that impact. Or maybe he didn't feel anything. Or maybe it was a good hit.

So whether or not it is a foul, I think play continued as it should. Pool is played by humans on a table, and as in all sports imperfection is baked in to the equation.
 
MattPoland

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
While it looked like a foul to me, it certainly is in enough of a gray area that I don’t expect a ref to necessarily catch it in the moment. It’s okay for some fouls to be missed, especially those requiring HD slow-mo playback to catch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jay helfert

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
First of all the referee is out of position to make the call. He should have stationed himself at the end of the table where the cue was traveling toward him. Many referees think they should not be in the line of sight of the player when he's shooting. Wrong! A good referee gets into the best position possible to see the shot develop, particularly on a shot like this. Then he needs to stand still! That way he's in a better position to see what happens before and after contact. Where he was standing, behind Shane, he has no chance to make the correct call here.

Interestingly enough, we can actually see the shot better on this video than he could, because we are in the line of sight of the cue ball path. This is the hard part, making the call. It all happens very fast and you need to watch closely the path of the cue ball. Something definitely happens to deviate it's course, and it isn't English taking after the cue ball is a diamond off the rail. As the ref, if you see the shot and hear a sound, it's a foul. After watching it several times, I believe the cue ball came into contact with his tip after the shot. That caused the quick deviation in the path of the cue ball.

You'd have to slo-mo this to really see the foul more clearly. Notice where his tip is when the cue ball swerves abruptly. Shane probably felt the contact as well. One more thing, if you watch closely, Shane hits center ball on the cue ball, so there wouldn't be any English coming off the rail. The correct way to shoot this shot is center ball with no English. It's just too hard a shot to add English to the equation. He fouled!
 
Last edited:
pt109

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
pt109 said:
Looks good to me.
...the deviation of the cue ball is the effect of top spin coming off a rail on new cloth.
...that spin becomes back spin and at some point it grabs the cloth.
Click to expand...

jay helfert said:
First of all the referee is out of position to make the call. He should have stationed himself at the end of the table where the cue was traveling toward him. Many referees think they should not be in the line of sight of the player when he's shooting. Wrong! A good referee gets into the best position possible to see the shot develop, particularly on a shot like this. Then he needs to stand still! That way he's in a better position to see what happens before and after contact. Where he was standing, behind Shane, he has no chance to make the correct call here.

Interestingly enough, we can actually see the shot better on this video than he could, because we are in the line of sight of the cue ball path. This is the hard part, making the call. It all happens very fast and you need to watch closely the path of the cue ball. Something definitely happens to( deviate it's course,) and it isn't English taking after the cue ball is a diamond off the rail. As the ref, if you see the shot and hear a sound, it's a foul. After watching it several times, I believe the cue ball came into contact with his tip after the shot. That caused the quick deviation in the path of the cue ball.

You'd have to slo-mo this to really see the foul more clearly. Notice where his tip is when the cue ball swerves abruptly. Shane probably felt the contact as well. One more thing, if you watch closely, Shane hits center ball on the cue ball, so there wouldn't be any English coming off the rail. The correct way to shoot this shot is center ball with no English. It's just too hard a shot to add English to the equation. He fouled!
Click to expand...
Jay, the deviation of the cue ball doesn't prove it was touched..if you go into a rail with
top spin, it becomes draw coming back...we all know how to make a ball and stop
the cue ball with a top hit...this is what happens on Shane's hit.

Here's Dr Dave showing that effect....

http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV4-3.htm

I wouldn't bet my life that the cue ball wasn't touched, but the ball curving once it
settles down and grabs the cloth is a normal reaction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top