Boyes pulling a very questionable move on Daulton

It may be a shitty move to call a foul on someone for stopping a barely moving cue ball in the middle of the table but I think every person here knows that you can not legally do that. Interfering with moving balls on the table is something that should never be done, especially in games of importance. I am surprised by how many times you see this on interweb tournaments. It makes the player who does this very vulnerable, why even take that unnecessary risk?
 
It may be a shitty move to call a foul on someone for stopping a barely moving cue ball in the middle of the table but I think every person here knows that you can not legally do that. Interfering with moving balls on the table is something that should never be done, especially in games of importance. I am surprised by how many times you see this on interweb tournaments. It makes the player who does this very vulnerable, why even take that unnecessary risk?

I highlighted the only part of your post that is relevant. The other portion nobody is disagreeing with so it's a moot point.
 
That is different because Mike should have got up to rack the balls. I like Mike but I think he was just frustrated there.

It was rack your own, Karls excuse was rules are rules, It was a move IMO when he did it to Daulton. Now when Mike tried to call it on him he didn't seem to care what the rules were.
 
It was rack your own, Karls excuse was rules are rules, It was a move IMO when he did it to Daulton. Now when Mike tried to call it on him he didn't seem to care what the rules were.

Nevermind, someone corrected me. If it was rack your own than you are correct and it should have been a foul.

Yes I think both were moves but rules are rules, you always run into that guy looking for even the slightest advantage. Would I call the foul in league or a small tournament not a chance. I would like to say I also wouldn't in a huge tournament like the US Open but I've never been in that situation.

I am kind of confused on why their match was rack your own because I got hooked on watching a few other matches and in the finals Darren and Hohmann racked for each other.
 
Last edited:
Then they were not paying attention. It was rack your own the whole match! Either way, I respectfully disagree. It's the same thing. Karl only wants to follow the rules when it benefits Karl.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
 
Nevermind, someone corrected me. If it was rack your own than you are correct and it should have been a foul.

Yes I think both were moves but rules are rules, you always run into that guy looking for even the slightest advantage. Would I call the foul in league or a small tournament not a chance. I would like to say I also wouldn't in a huge tournament like the US Open but I've never been in that situation.

All good. It irritates me when a player acts like they did nothing wrong but acts like another player is crazy when being called out for breaking the "rules"
 
I'm watching a lot of 90's accu-stat matches. After pocketing the 9, the players routinely scooped the CB up-table before it came to a complete halt.

They also seem to frequently push out without declaring "push". The other player might walk up, look the shot over, and go sit down. All without saying a word or even looking at the player that pushed.

They were acting like pros. None of this "ooh! Ooh! You didn't mark the 8 ball pocket!" style BS.
 
Here we go again with a player putting his cue on the table before whitey stops and the opponent calling a foul.
For f**cks sake, wait for the damn rock to stop!:banghead:
And don't call a ticky-tacky foul when you know it ain't gonna scratch.. get on with it.
 
it is a tournament and all rules apply and if you break one you get penalized. just like touching the sand or something in a sand trap in golf. it costs you even if it didnt affect your score or shot.
 
it is a tournament and all rules apply and if you break one you get penalized. just like touching the sand or something in a sand trap in golf. it costs you even if it didnt affect your score or shot.

I was the only referee at the US Open during the Karl Boyes-Shannon Daulton match. Because eight other matches were being played at the same time, it was impossible for me to be present at every table and witness every shot.

After Boyes called the foul on Daulton, play was halted and I was called over to the table and asked to make a decision based on the rules. After I saw the video tape replay, it was clear to me and everyone else that Shannon's cue touched whitey before whitey came to a full stop.

Would I have called that a foul if I had been present when it occured? No. I probably would have given Shannon a warning to let whitey fully stop, but Boyes insisted that the rules be followed to the letter. I had no choice but to follow the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law.

I agree with John Barton, a referee should be present at every table all the time to eliminate these needless squabbles. But, the cost of hiring trained and experienced referees for the US Open is not in the budget. It's 12 hours a day for a week, on your feet for very little money. If anyone has a suggestion on how to improve this situation, I'd be happy to sit down and listen.
 
I was the only referee at the US Open during the Karl Boyes-Shannon Daulton match. Because eight other matches were being played at the same time, it was impossible for me to be present at every table and witness every shot.

After Boyes called the foul on Daulton, play was halted and I was called over to the table and asked to make a decision based on the rules. After I saw the video tape replay, it was clear to me and everyone else that Shannon's cue touched whitey before whitey came to a full stop.

Would I have called that a foul if I had been present when it occured? No. I probably would have given Shannon a warning to let whitey fully stop, but Boyes insisted that the rules be followed to the letter. I had no choice but to follow the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law.

I agree with John Barton, a referee should be present at every table all the time to eliminate these needless squabbles. But, the cost of hiring trained and experienced referees for the US Open is not in the budget. It's 12 hours a day for a week, on your feet for very little money. If anyone has a suggestion on how to improve this situation, I'd be happy to sit down and listen.

I don't know you, but I want to thank you for what you do. Your jobs are some of the most thankless on the planet and the only time we hear about a ref is if someone is *****ing about them. Thank you.
 
I was the only referee at the US Open during the Karl Boyes-Shannon Daulton match. Because eight other matches were being played at the same time, it was impossible for me to be present at every table and witness every shot.

After Boyes called the foul on Daulton, play was halted and I was called over to the table and asked to make a decision based on the rules. After I saw the video tape replay, it was clear to me and everyone else that Shannon's cue touched whitey before whitey came to a full stop.

Would I have called that a foul if I had been present when it occured? No. I probably would have given Shannon a warning to let whitey fully stop, but Boyes insisted that the rules be followed to the letter. I had no choice but to follow the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law.

I agree with John Barton, a referee should be present at every table all the time to eliminate these needless squabbles. But, the cost of hiring trained and experienced referees for the US Open is not in the budget. It's 12 hours a day for a week, on your feet for very little money. If anyone has a suggestion on how to improve this situation, I'd be happy to sit down and listen.
You did your job as expected. It's not your fault Karl is a nit! lol

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top