Anton Raga ban for "suspicious play". Good or Bad decision?

spartan

spartan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Anton Raga (IMHO, top 3 player in Philippines) was banned few months ago by Sharks. Means he cannot play in Sharks events but can still play in any other event.
I think it is too harsh to ban for this 1 instance. Maybe give him a warning or suspend him temporarily (like what Matchroom did to Darren Appleton)
He was apparently banned for this instance of “suspicious play” in the shot from 8 to 9
comm11.JPG
 
This again...?

The guy wanted to punch the shot in and not roll it or rely solely on draw and risk the side pocket. He gets a ton more pop off the rail then he was expecting and end up in a horrible place. Then plays nearly the best safety he could from that spot and Ronnie still manages to drop it.

I don't doubt Raga's ability to move the CB around, but to intentionally get from where he was to where he ended up..? Come on...

The whole suspension is horse crap.
 
if he was dumping he would have missed the 7 ball or got bad on the eight.

there must have been something else in the match to have this happen.
 
The only thing i MIGHT possibly get here is this was a sort-of round-robin deal Maybe the promoters were afraid of some gambling shenanigans. PURELY a guess on my part. I've watched it a few times and still don't see the issue.
 
maha said:
if he was dumping he would have missed the 7 ball or got bad on the eight.

there must have been something else in the match to have this happen.
Click to expand...
For a player of his level, that’s a pretty obvious dump. All he had to do was bring the CB back near the middle of the table, but there was absolutely no reason to come back anywhere near the 9-ball or the corner pocket. It reminds me of the shot that resulted in Stephen Lee’s multi year snooker ban - not that obvious to many of us.
 
I don't see how this is considered dumping lol. Have you never "OVER HIT" a ball before? I would of hit it the same way he did, I'm not rollin that shit in. Especially on a fast table. He just missed his tip position by a mm. He was just trying to go from one rail to another.

Maybe he was nervous, he was down on TV table in score. Everyone gets nervous. Maybe he lost some concentration down on shot, maybe he was going to change his mind on the shot but shot it anyway and so he over hit it? So stupid lol
 
ChrisinNC said:
For a player of his level, that’s a pretty obvious dump. All he had to do was bring the CB back near the middle of the table, but there was absolutely no reason to come back anywhere near the 9-ball or the corner pocket. It reminds me of the shot that resulted in Stephen Lee’s multi year snooker ban - not that obvious to many of us.
Click to expand...
WHO did he dump is the question. Did he have Alcano in some kind of bet? Had to be the only reason just like Lee's match fixing deal.
 
you wouldnt wait to dump and hope to get perfect behind a ball. then play a good safe that makes you a favorite anyway.
so many other ways to just lose a set without looking bad. but of course no pro ever hits a shot that goes wrong for them.

as i said. must have been something else happen during the set to include this shot.

and what do people expect when you have tournaments that pay less than the side bets in head to head match ups.
 
Gatz said:
I don't see how this is considered dumping lol. Have you never "OVER HIT" a ball before? I would of hit it the same way he did, I'm not rollin that shit in. Especially on a fast table. He just missed his tip position by a mm. He was just trying to go from one rail to another.

Maybe he was nervous, he was down on TV table in score. Everyone gets nervous. Maybe he lost some concentration down on shot, maybe he was going to change his mind on the shot but shot it anyway and so he over hit it? So stupid lol
Click to expand...
It is debatable, but considering where the 8, 9, and 10 were located, there was absolutely no reason to even bring the CB back past the side pockets. Just cinch the 8 ball and leave the CB anywhere in the vicinity of the middle of the table is all he needed to do.

However in his defense, he did play as good as safety as he could and forced Ronnie to come up with a great shot. Based on that, as others have said, there must’ve been a few other suspicious shots for them to have justified this decision.
 
Last edited:
ChrisinNC said:
It is debatable, but considering where the 8, 9, and 10 were located, there was absolutely no reason to even bring the CB back past the side pockets. Just cinch the 8 ball and leave the CB anywhere in the vicinity of the middle of the table is all he needed to do.
Click to expand...
Uh, I don't know about that. You use the word "CINCH". Maybe, his way of "CINCHING" the ball is going with stun bottoms with a little lefts going from one rail to the other. Every player has a stroke, stroke speed they like the most that they're most comfortable with.

There was two possible things he was trying here. A: Was trying to hold it and lost the speed B: was trying to go from one rail to the other and just put to much draw on it.

Both ways he was trying is definitely the way I would of tried under certain circumstances. I'm way more comfortable playing with bottoms and spin as opposed to top spin. Especially under the gun/pressure or being uncomfortable with a shot.

Shoot that shot out of 100 times he's making that shot more with the way he played it than with tops and "CINCHING" it.
 
ChrisinNC said:
For a player of his level, that’s a pretty obvious dump. All he had to do was bring the CB back near the middle of the table, but there was absolutely no reason to come back anywhere near the 9-ball or the corner pocket. It reminds me of the shot that resulted in Stephen Lee’s multi year snooker ban - not that obvious to many of us.
Click to expand...
You have NO idea what you're talking about.

I thought enough of us called BS that they overturned the ban like the next day or soon after
 
I’d have to see the whole match to have any idea….and then I’m not so sure even then that a decision could be made.
 
sos911 said:
i dont see it either
Click to expand...

Apparently nobody saw anything either. No peer support - he kicks everybody's ass; couldn't be that well liked.
Bigger picture, a large part of the action there is blood sport. The only logic I see is shielding him (or themselves) from the wrath.

He does play like a pool factory so I can see he simply isn't allowed incompetence - and that bad roll could easily be perceived that way and weren't they both banned for doing business?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top