Wowwwww!!!!!!
- Thread starter Black Cat 5791
- Start date
Old news...been posted and argued about. Shot went to the shooter.
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
I can't believe it went as far as it did, It was obvious. I just hate the fact that it happened.
Black Cat
Black Cat
This is the first time I have seen this.
Let me be real clear here:
I can't stand Earl, but obviously (and common sense) Earl was shooting at the 10 ball.
There was no play on the 2 ball.
Oral mistakes do happen at times. but if we're going to do away with common sense here, then we will just have to be robots.
EDIT after seeing the full video:
The tournament director who made the final call, was very logical. Good job.
INTENT is very important here. If we lose that in our game, then we're in trouble, folks.
Earl CLEARLY intended to shoot the 10 ball into the lower right corner pocket.
Last edited:
I love Scottish accents
That is all I will say
That is all I will say
Suppose things had gone really weird and somehow the 2 ball had gone in and suppose it was sitting down by a head pocket so the pocket would have been obvious. Should it have counted?
The real problem: there was no ref on the table.
What complicates things is that earlier there was a brain-freeze call on a combo and the ruling was that the ball didn't count.
if he had missed the 10 and somehow made the 2, would he have tried to stay at the table?
Interesting hypothetical.
I think if the 2 ball HAD gone in, Shaw would NOT have said anything.
Why would he, right?
In this case, I think Earl would have just looked at the 2 ball going in as coincidental.
Yes, Earl would have continued at the table because he INTENDED to make the
10 ball despite what his mouth said.
Now, I'm not privy to the earlier problem in this match, but
yes, it sounds like it complicated things because of the apparent inconsistency.
Yet here are a bunch of people enjoying talking about it again. But thanks for the daily dose of grumpy forum cop negativity!
Yes, but Earl pointed to the lower right corner pocket, so the 2 would have to go in that pocket to be valid, technically.
I'll share 2 insidents that happened in snooker and how they were handled.
1) Peter Ebdon getting down on the shot and shooting the brown when he needed to hit a red. The brown was nowhere near a red, it was clear that he thought it was a red (brown was not on its spot, but again nowhere near a red), John Virgo who was commentating said that Peter Ebdon is colorblind and normaly in situations like this he asks the referee if he is in doubt about the color of the ball. Ref called a foul and a miss. No one told Ebdon that he is about to shoot the wrong ball, and if you are unfamiliar with Ebdon he is not the fastest player in the world, both the red and his opponent had plenty of time to tell him he is shooting the wrong ball. Nobody said anything, foul was called and the frame continued normaly.
2) Opponent of Selby fouls with 1 red on the table. Foul called but not a free ball. Selby thought it was a free ball, got down and shot the pink (if i remember correctly). Again, no one told him that hey, it's not a free ball. Foul called on Selby.
Why should anyone correct Strickland? He made a mistake and should not count. Furthermore, if you follow this insident Jayson argues that Strickland made the same mistake earlier in that match, meaning he had called another ball and shoot another, and it didn't count. Why all of a suddenl this one counts??
Last edited:
Yes, thats one way to play, but after reading all the posts, I believe the "intent" rule fits 14.1 better, at least when the shot is obvious. A "strict" rule is better perhaps when the shot is not obvious.
(10 ball obvious here)
The question still is, if a player makes the same mistake twice in a single game, why the first time gets called that it doesn't count and the 2nd time gets called that it counts?? Doesn't make any scense.
I can't believe it went as far as it did, It was obvious. I just hate the fact that it happened.
Black Cat
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=...age=17&usg=AFQjCNEHxWoVAdQM1l-g5QcMzb2lO349cA
It's been in the snooker rules for a lot of decades that in case of colorblindness...
...the ref must inform the player that he is shooting a brown for a red.
I doubt if that rule has been changed....the ref made a foul?
Are you sure about that rule?
Because Peter says "wasn't the first time I've done that and I'm sure it won't be the last"... And he says that "But fortunaly we do have the option of askig the ref where a ball is on the table, so if in doubt ask the ref"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIonVI2vI90
I don't think he would be saying that if the ref was obligated to tell him without him asking..
The Markster
Banned
1. If Shaw saw Earl was shooting the 10 ball, but called the 2...and didn't say anything, or even clarify just so he could call a foul, then he is a poor sport.
2. If Shaw thought Earl called the 2 and was shooting it in the corner where he pointed, while clearly lining up for the 10 ball then he is a moron.
So Shaw is either a poor sport or a moron...take your pick.
2. If Shaw thought Earl called the 2 and was shooting it in the corner where he pointed, while clearly lining up for the 10 ball then he is a moron.
So Shaw is either a poor sport or a moron...take your pick.
Last edited:
PoolChump?
This game is a battle. Do not ask me to be your game's keeper, or for me to proceed through it with your best result in mind. Truth be told, i hope you develop temporary blindness in the earliest moment of our match.
Asking me to have your best interest in mind is tantamount to asking me to surrender.
This game is a battle. Do not ask me to be your game's keeper, or for me to proceed through it with your best result in mind. Truth be told, i hope you develop temporary blindness in the earliest moment of our match.
Asking me to have your best interest in mind is tantamount to asking me to surrender.
Last edited:
The Markster
Banned
Who is Poolchump? This is true of any sport. It's like in soccer when they take a dive to get a penalty kick to win the game. It's a tarnished win plain and simple. You can try to justify your actions all you want.