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

[tucson9ball]

I noticed Bergman wearing a pretty lose shirt. This is all balls foul. I guess the next debate could be over someones shirt touching a ball. Silly fouls but all the players know them. If I were Justin I would be wearing a tighter shirt.

It would be a foul if his shirt touches a ball.

I recall about a year ago, an Italian player was called for a hair on his arm brushing an object ball. He was cueing over the ball and his forearm hair touched this ball and a foul was called by the ref.

It does happen, rules are rules.

 

[BJTyler747]

How do you feel about what Karl Boyes did to Shannon Daulton? Just curious since you make this an American thing?

Since you asked...

Same way Shane called foul on Orcullo when Orcullo took a ball out of the pocket to measure a shot. I could've told Orcullo that he couldn't do that and move on.
Shane and Karl did not cheat, they enforced the rule. Not very fair play but hey, that's how they roll.
FYI, people even cheer for guys like Earl who disrespect and disturb his opponents and the audience, that's pool moral standard for you. What Shane and Karl do is nothing compare to Earl.

 

[AtLarge]

... 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. ...

This wasn't a streamed match, so there was no recording to replay (unless a spectator was recording it).

 

[AtLarge]

Your word is good enough for me. I wish they would just make you an honorary official for the TV table and be done with it. ...

This match was not on the streaming table, so sjm had left his normal perch.

 

[7forlife]

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).

Apologies, not the intention. I try not to be the "norm" on azb

 

[bral]

If Grabe had called the foul on himself like a normal human being, neither the ref nor the audience would have been involved.

Exactly. Let's move on.

 

[K2Kraze]

Reading all posts in this thread, I am reminded of the issues that pop up in my home games, league games, and local tournaments as well as observing everyone playing at each...there seem to be THREE types of people/pool players:

1) those that "sort of" play by the rules and allow things to slide by - even when they do the offending. Like all-ball fouls or interference with racks, etc. And their opponents for the most part agree with this way of play and (usually) go along. IMO this happens the majority of all times in all scenarios. No issues and no hard feelings. Casual play. Casual rules. Nothing at stake other than winner's rights. Friendly games.

2) those that follow the rules exactly as they are written and expect others to do the same. They call for reviews, judgements and rulings and accept them as final. Even between just the two of them playing. No lingering issues or feelings. The game moves on. The rules are appreciated to be as important to the overall game as the equipment or the player or the actions of the opponents. IMO that's called he integrity of the game - and the integrity of the people. This is one of the core requirements in many rules that the player be obligated to call fouls on themselves. Like our 14.1 league. All rules all of the time. No allowances or changes and reference is made to them (the rules) when needed. They are respected. And honored. Always. Still friendly but "professional".

And then we have the third category:

3) those that think playing this game and all of the rules in general are only good until one of these "rules" apply to them or affect their opponent in some negative way - or arise in a posted forum thread - then these same rules are either complete and utter BS or by golly just a cheap move by some nit and they wouldn't call that a foul if it was them......and on and on. Excuses, allowances, rationalizations or whatever you want to call it - and they'll find some past example to prove their point and build their case and credibility for having their "ruling".

A rule is a rule. But rules can be played three ways it seems. By definition a rule is a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity....hmm.

This happened in a recent 14.1 league match:

Both players are back and forth for two hours - neck and neck in a match to 125. Score about 95 each so far. All ball fouls. Player A is known to all of us (and himself admittedly) to be somewhat sloppy with touching balls and disliking the all balls foul rule - he thinks it should be cue ball fouls only - and will even ask that they both relax that one rule for play that day for his matches. That was asked and denied for this match. So ---- Player A is shooting with his back to his opponent and moves the cue ball with his cue while lining up his shot - he keeps that to himself and fires away. No witnesses that saw the offense. He continues his run and eventually has to play safe. He's up 123. Player B comes from behind back and forth a few innings and Player A ends the match losing 123/125. Here's what follows...

Player A to winning Player B as they filled out the league paperwork: "man, I'm sort of glad I ended up not winning that match because I was feeling kinda guilty about a foul that I didn't call on myself a few minutes ago for fear of losing the run and the match to ya - I don't know how good I would have felt going home tonight with the win...." and chuckled. Player B was speechless. Not a word. Just looked at him and then back to the paperwork. Game over.

My point?

There will always be those that think rules allow for exceptions and loose interpretations and no matter the "ruling" they will always criticize the outcome. Opinions are important and often lead the way to change. Rules change and adapt to advances with the times. But when we as players think our opponents are anything less than honorable, however "within rights" to ask for a ruling - AND then accept the outcome - but cry wolf afterward or make excuses, they shame and dishonor themselves and the game in the process.

Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

 

[dmgwalsh]

I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

When SJM, Bob Jewett and Karl Kantrowitz are involved, you know it is on the up and up.

 

[justadub]

When SJM, Bob Jewett and Karl Kantrowitz are involved, you know it is on the up and up.

Tap, tap, tap.

 

[Keith Jawahir]

Reading all posts in this thread, I am reminded of the issues that pop up in my home games, league games, and local tournaments as well as observing everyone playing at each...there seem to be THREE types of people/pool players:

1) those that "sort of" play by the rules and allow things to slide by - even when they do the offending. Like all-ball fouls or interference with racks, etc. And their opponents for the most part agree with this way of play and (usually) go along. IMO this happens the majority of all times in all scenarios. No issues and no hard feelings. Casual play. Casual rules. Nothing at stake other than winner's rights. Friendly games.

2) those that follow the rules exactly as they are written and expect others to do the same. They call for reviews, judgements and rulings and accept them as final. Even between just the two of them playing. No lingering issues or feelings. The game moves on. The rules are appreciated to be as important to the overall game as the equipment or the player or the actions of the opponents. IMO that's called he integrity of the game - and the integrity of the people. This is one of the core requirements in many rules that the player be obligated to call fouls on themselves. Like our 14.1 league. All rules all of the time. No allowances or changes and reference is made to them (the rules) when needed. They are respected. And honored. Always. Still friendly but "professional".

And then we have the third category:

3) those that think playing this game and all of the rules in general are only good until one of these "rules" apply to them or affect their opponent in some negative way - or arise in a posted forum thread - then these same rules are either complete and utter BS or by golly just a cheap move by some nit and they wouldn't call that a foul if it was them......and on and on. Excuses, allowances, rationalizations or whatever you want to call it - and they'll find some past example to prove their point and build their case and credibility for having their "ruling".

A rule is a rule. But rules can be played three ways it seems. By definition a rule is a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity....hmm.

This happened in a recent 14.1 league match:

Both players are back and forth for two hours - neck and neck in a match to 125. Score about 95 each so far. All ball fouls. Player A is known to all of us (and himself admittedly) to be somewhat sloppy with touching balls and disliking the all balls foul rule - he thinks it should be cue ball fouls only - and will even ask that they both relax that one rule for play that day for his matches. That was asked and denied for this match. So ---- Player A is shooting with his back to his opponent and moves the cue ball with his cue while lining up his shot - he keeps that to himself and fires away. No witnesses that saw the offense. He continues his run and eventually has to play safe. He's up 123. Player B comes from behind back and forth a few innings and Player A ends the match losing 123/125. Here's what follows...

Player A to winning Player B as they filled out the league paperwork: "man, I'm sort of glad I ended up not winning that match because I was feeling kinda guilty about a foul that I didn't call on myself a few minutes ago for fear of losing the run and the match to ya - I don't know how good I would have felt going home tonight with the win...." and chuckled. Player B was speechless. Not a word. Just looked at him and then back to the paperwork. Game over.

My point?

There will always be those that think rules allow for exceptions and loose interpretations and no matter the "ruling" they will always criticize the outcome. Opinions are important and often lead the way to change. Rules change and adapt to advances with the times. But when we as players think our opponents are anything less than honorable, however "within rights" to ask for a ruling - AND then accept the outcome - but cry wolf afterward or make excuses, they shame and dishonor themselves and the game in the process.

Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. People forget that this is the US Open, a professional tournament. Not APA night at the corner bar.

 

[JoeyA]

I'll take SJM's word for what happened.
JoeyA

I was front row for this match and the cue ball did hit the magic rack which was leaning over the front rail. I saw it and a few other fans vouched for it having happened. Grabe denied it, but he was in the wrong here.

The referee, not present for the shot, explicitly under the rules as written, has the right to solicit input from spectators in this situation. Bob Jewett, often cited as the single greatest authority on the rules, looked up the rule and confirmed this. Bob himself made this ruling, in collabotion with head referee Karl Kantowitz.

Personally, I don't care for the rule that says that this is foul, and Mike did not call the foul. All he did was request a ruling, and this is how it was adjudicated.

My opinion is that Grabe should have called a foul on himself here.

If the entire story is to be told here, Grabe made some extremely inappropriate remarks suggesting that had input been solicited from European onlookers, they might have backed him up, ane that Mike was getting a hometown call. He openly questioned the integrity of both the referees and the fans and Karl Kanrtowitz gave him a sportsmanship warning which was, in my opinion, well deserved. It didn't sink in, though, as Grabe found it fitting to talk to Mike while Mike was shooting in the subsequent rack. Mike took exception, but did so with civility and good sportsmanship, and Grabe kept quiet for the remainder of the match.

Mike conducted himsel impeccably, and only the worst Dechaine haters would've Been inclined to find fault with him here.

Let the truth be know.

Incidentally, Dechaine won this match by breaking and running the last three racks, which is to say went out and got it.

Grabe is a wonderful player who was unlucky here, but he also got way out of line and ought to apologize to Mike.

 

[JB Cases]

sjm is as close as you'll ever get.

100% agree. I would trust SJM to accurately depict the situation if my life hung in the balance.

 

[jay helfert]

Once again this is a tough call here. I know I'm in the minority on this thread, but it would be hard pressed for me to call a foul here and not issue a warning to make sure the ENTIRE magic rack (accu-rack) is removed from play.

The magic rack is a unique piece of equipment since it is often left on the table and balls touch it and roll over it constantly. It becomes neutral in terms of being an outside object like a piece of chalk or a pool cue. There is currently no specific rule to abide by when it comes to defining what the magic rack is or isn't and when it is in play or no longer in play.

I have the utmost respect for Bob Jewett, Stu and Karl but we may not agree on everything all the time. In the interest of fair play sometimes a tournament director must make a ruling based on what is most fair for all concerned, There have actually been times where something happens that is completely outside the written rules and it is impossible to make a fair ruling, so I've asked who broke the balls and we started that game again!

Once again, good judgement being the key here. When both players know you are making a decision based on fair play they tend to concur even if it is not the decision they necessarily wanted.

I'm proud of my record as a tournament director and that most pro players would prefer me to be the one making the tough calls. How much longer I do this job is in question now with situations like I encountered earlier this week. I've always done my best to make sure any tournament I worked on adhered to the highest professional standards. I do this out of respect for the game and it's players.

 

[sonny_burnett]

Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[jay helfert]

Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I'm not sure there was a TD to call in.

 

[alstl]

Those are both two very interesting points, especially the first one. The magic rack is hit constantly when it is on the table, and more than once in this event I have seen it greatly alter the path of a ball.

On the rail the ball hitting the rack will cause next to no effect on the actual path of a ball whatsoever.

That said a lot of the pros were being rather flippant with putting the magic rack on the rail and having the edge over on the table. Maybe I am jus too OCD but I noticed every time it as placed somewhere it could actually be contacted by a ball and I would have likely put the thing off to the side on a pole like many of the pros did so it is out of the way.

Right, and I revert to my two points.

1. Is it a foul? This isn't a rack, it is a template which by definition is not the same as a rack because it is left on the table during the game and is contacted by the balls.

I have a hard time seeing how it is a foul for a ball to touch the template since balls touch the template on every rack.

2. If it is a foul - which I'm not willing to concede - then whoever put the template in the wrong place is the guilty party.

 

[BRussell]

Come on people. Rules are rules. Read them. Understand them. Accept them. Play by them. Honor them. And your opponent.

There are many great examples of honor in this game. You know it when you see it.

Game over.

So what is the letter of the rule here? As far as I know there is no rule specifically about the template, and when balls are allowed to touch it. Maybe rules about it were distributed at the US Open, but Jay, the (former) tournament director says there wasn't a rule on this specific situation.

To people who are saying that Mike's nittiness here was OK because he was following the exact rules: Would it change your mind if there actually aren't exact rules about this situation?

 

[cardiac kid]

Have to agree with Jay. That was pretty close to a no win decision.

Not trying to stir the pot Jay, but could the TD been called in, like in the PGA, if the player isn't sure the referee was correct?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Sonny,

What is the referee's job? When a ref is called to the table I'm playing on, I go sit in my chair. Once called, the ref's decision good or bad, right or wrong is final. Calling the TD only creates confusion. If you don't like the TD's decision do you call the promoter? Someone has to be the final decider. Wasn't at the USO but to me this is common sense. JMHO.

I'm in agreement with JB and JoeyA, SJM is a most trusted member of this forum.

Also, in a PGA event, isn't there a person on course at all times who is a expert on PGA rules? Thought he was the first person called in a questionable situation.

Lyn

 

[alstl]

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.

I saw your post and I like you so I wasn't going to respond.

In snooker there are no foreign objects near the table. The players keep their chalk in their pocket. Unless Jay Helfert is playing and his toupee falls off his head and lands on a ball there is zero chance of a foreign object being on the table - just joking Jay.

The template by definition is not a foreign object or every break would be a foul.

 

[OLD NO 9]

Once again this is a tough call here. I know I'm in the minority on this thread, but it would be hard pressed for me to call a foul here and not issue a warning to make sure the ENTIRE magic rack (accu-rack) is removed from play.

The magic rack is a unique piece of equipment since it is often left on the table and balls touch it and roll over it constantly. It becomes neutral in terms of being an outside object like a piece of chalk or a pool cue. There is currently no specific rule to abide by when it comes to defining what the magic rack is or isn't and when it is in play or no longer in play.

I have the utmost respect for Bob Jewett, Stu and Karl but we may not agree on everything all the time. In the interest of fair play sometimes a tournament director must make a ruling based on what is most fair for all concerned, There have actually been times where something happens that is completely outside the written rules and it is impossible to make a fair ruling, so I've asked who broke the balls and we started that game again!

Once again, good judgement being the key here. When both players know you are making a decision based on fair play they tend to concur even if it is not the decision they necessarily wanted.

I'm proud of my record as a tournament director and that most pro players would prefer me to be the one making the tough calls. How much longer I do this job is in question now with situations like I encountered earlier this week. I've always done my best to make sure any tournament I worked on adhered to the highest professional standards. I do this out of respect for the game and it's players.

Jay you are the best, keep a stiff upper lip.:thumbup: