Another controversy with Mike Dechaine. This is beyond imagination...

[Poolplaya9]

What different does it make? He was the Ref. He made that call...

The difference is that the tournament director has been accused of being a bookie for bets on this tournament. An obvious very serious conflict of interest if true.

On a side note, it seems that half the people in this thread have missed that the claim about the rack is that it was on the rail and hanging over the edge of the cushion, and that the cue ball hit it where it was overhanging the cushion. It was not on the surface of the table.

 

[Bella Don't Cry]

This is what happens when new equipment is introduced into the game without updating the official world rules...

...Honesty and integrity should be made compulsory in this world. :thumbup:

 

[pocket]

This is the problem here, deciding what one should and should do based on the level of some lame moral call. If you were playing for 100,000 hill-hill with Ko or Darren or whoever and it was the 6,7,8,9 on the table wide open would you of called it?

I don't have that kind of cash, but if we were playing all ball fouls, yes I hope I would call this on myself. With no ref it is assumed that players call fouls on themselves, and if they do not it is cheating plain and simple not a "lame moral call". Playing a friend or for 10 kajillian lira.

Or are you the guy who give everyone a pass "ah just shot, you only touched the ball it didn't move" then talk about how you gave the guy a pass and probably would of won.

If it's a foul then it's a foul, you call it, no hard feelings.

You make some fair points, not sure why you had to insult me to do it (I guess that's business as usual on AZB or internet forums in general).

 

[pt109]

I was wondering when this was going to happen....a lot of players are careless with the
racking template.

I like how snooker handles it...
..a ball hitting a foreign object is a foul.
(and it doesn't matter who left the template hanging)
...it is up to each player to see that the table is in order on his turn.

 

[Get_A_Grip]

This one is a tougher one for me to call. Mike apparently didn't call a foul. He saw that it hit the rack hanging over the edge of the rail and simply asked for a ruling. I think that doing this is a little less nitty that what Boyes did, but it's close.

The ref asked around to obtain a consensus as to whether the cue ball did indeed hit the rack, and then made a ruling that the cue ball hitting the template would be a foul. It seems like the rules allow consulting with others, but I think he should have looked at a replay -- since there was precedence already established in this tournament for the ref's to consult a replay.

I think that if the ref had witnessed it himself and if he saw that hitting the template did not affect the speed or direction of the cue ball, that he may have been able to use judgment to say that it wasn't a foul -- but maybe he just took a hard line that the shooter should have moved the template so it wasn't hanging off the edge before he shot and called a foul. Viewing a replay could have helped with this too, but since a replay wasn't consulted, maybe the ref already determined that if the cue ball hit the template it was a foul no matter what.

Definitely some interesting drama at this tournament!

 

[HOB Weert]

So the cueball hit the magic rack, that can happen, play on.
What a loser!

MH

 

[alstl]

I would think the rack is to be removed immediately following the break, unless doing so would disturb the lay of the balls. I would also think that once the rack is removed from the playing surface, it is no longer considered a part of the playing surface.

I don't believe your second question should factor into a ruling.

If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

 

[JumpinJoe]

It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

 

[Colonel]

It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

We have a Bingo!

 

[9andout]

It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

Except it's not so simple unless a ref racks.

 

[pt109]

I was wondering when this was going to happen....a lot of players are careless with the
racking template.

I like how snooker handles it...
..a ball hitting a foreign object is a foul.
(and it doesn't matter who left the template hanging)
...it is up to each player to see that the table is in order on his turn.

If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

See my post, Al....it should always be the shooter's responsibility to see that things are right
on his shot.
I have seen some players always take it away to the side table after the break....
.....and they get help when the template is covered after the break.

 

[BmoreMoney]

it's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. Very very simple.

+1.............

 

[HelloBaby-]

Another opinion, just opinion

 

[one stroke]

I'd bet the ball hit the rack. I'd also bet that the spectators were 100% honest and would have been so had the players' roles been reversed.

LOL now that's funny


1

 

[BRussell]

Mike apparently didn't call a foul. He saw that it hit the rack hanging over the edge of the rail and simply asked for a ruling.

Good post, but I want to take issue with this. Mike called this on him. Let's not try to say he was "asking for a ruling" or something. Let's just call it for what it was. He's allowed to do that, but we're also allowed to judge the nittiness of him calling it.

 

[watchez]

So I understand about these magic racks/outville racks -

You can leave the rack on the bed cloth and not remove it as we see players do all the time. They shoot the cue ball over this rack, shoot object balls over this rack.

But if the rack is on the rail and a ball hits it, it is a foul?

Ok - once again Pool fails.

 

[pt109]

It's very simple. Use the wooden diamond rack that comes with that table and get rid of all these goofy gaffy racks that makes for dead balls everytime. very very simple.

I like that....if a third party does the racking....
....and move the break-box back to a diamond from the end rail.

 

[Get_A_Grip]

Good post, but I want to take issue with this. Mike called this on him. Let's not try to say he was "asking for a ruling" or something. Let's just call it for what it was. He's allowed to do that, but we're also allowed to judge the nittiness of him calling it.

Right, but it sounds like Jay (as a ref) may have made a ruling that this was NOT a foul....so......

Oh....I also had edited my post before your post.....to indicate, "I think that doing this is a little less nitty that what Boyes did, but it's close." So I did realize that what initial statement appeared to be letting Mike off the hook a bit too much.

 

[PhilosopherKing]

If it is a foul - which I'm not convinced of - then which player improperly disposed of the rack is to blame.

If a player inadvertently knocks a cube of chalk on the table while shooting and his opponent hit's that chalk with a ball during his turn, who committed a foul?

 

[Get_A_Grip]

If a player inadvertently knocks a cube of chalk on the table while shooting and his opponent hit's that chalk with a ball during his turn, who committed a foul?

I would say the shooter. It's the shooter's responsibility to make sure that the table is clear of objects before shooting -- but others can chime in on this that know the rules better.