Flakeandrun
Well-known member
agree 100%
Needs re-working and clarity
Chang - Foul or Not?
- Thread starter Cornerman
- Start date
Needs re-working and clarity
As it was explained to me forward stroke is when you move the cue forward using the tip and the tip hits the cueball in the area of the cueball where you could possible be hitting it under normal shooting circumstance. You don't have to be in a shooting stance as if you were shooting though.
This is to distinguish it from laying the cue on top of the cueball and moving it that way.
Yes, well said. As Bob Jewett noted, snooker expressly allows for a referee to make a judgement call in this situation.
PS Remember what happened to Jeremy Jones at the 2021 Mosconi Cup? He asked to have the cue ball cleaned and by the time the referee cleaned it, the shot clock had nearly expired. Many were up in arms over the shot clock foul that resulted, but on that occasion. the delay created by the cleaning of the cue ball was not deemed a good enough reason to make an exception, and this cost him the match when he was four balls from victory in his double hill match with Alcaide.
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
IMO, (and we all have one) some rules are super nitty, some are not.
In MR events, they make it clear to the players and the fans that ball cleaning, getting a mechanical bridge, getting a jump stick, etc, does not stop the clock. I think that's fair, not nitty. The players could call for the ball to be cleaned when they need 15 more seconds to decide the shot.
Helping the ref get the balls after the 9/10 is pocketed and having a foul called is the nittiest rule in existence. I don't think that's even a WPA rule, but I could be wrong on that. Half of me says players should just go to their chair and let the ref do it himself. The other half of me says that will slow down further this already slow poke game, and the fans will be the ones who suffer, not the ref.
That one is even nittier than the Pacquiao 10 ball event from 15 years ago that Efren won where obvious 10's had to be called.
Striking the CB with the front of the tip in a forward motion being a foul is absolutely not nitty IMO. The front of the tip is sacrilege! That's how you take a shot! I mean that is first grade stuff. The other stuff changes from event to event, and from year to year, and from promoter to promoter. This one has been around forever.
These are my opinions
In MR events, they make it clear to the players and the fans that ball cleaning, getting a mechanical bridge, getting a jump stick, etc, does not stop the clock. I think that's fair, not nitty. The players could call for the ball to be cleaned when they need 15 more seconds to decide the shot.
Helping the ref get the balls after the 9/10 is pocketed and having a foul called is the nittiest rule in existence. I don't think that's even a WPA rule, but I could be wrong on that. Half of me says players should just go to their chair and let the ref do it himself. The other half of me says that will slow down further this already slow poke game, and the fans will be the ones who suffer, not the ref.
That one is even nittier than the Pacquiao 10 ball event from 15 years ago that Efren won where obvious 10's had to be called.
Striking the CB with the front of the tip in a forward motion being a foul is absolutely not nitty IMO. The front of the tip is sacrilege! That's how you take a shot! I mean that is first grade stuff. The other stuff changes from event to event, and from year to year, and from promoter to promoter. This one has been around forever.
These are my opinions
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
Just think being stood up and playing the thing lightly one handed into position made it so obvious it wasn't a shot... They could make the ruling that the tip shouldn't touch the ball, or that the hand places the ball. It takes a second/one sentence to clean up such ambiguity.IMO, (and we all have one) some rules are super nitty, some are not.
In MR events, they make it clear to the players and the fans that ball cleaning, getting a mechanical bridge, getting a jump stick, etc, does not stop the clock. I think that's fair, not nitty. The players could call for the ball to be cleaned when they need 15 more seconds to decide the shot.
Helping the ref get the balls after the 9/10 is pocketed and having a foul called is the nittiest rule in existence. I don't think that's even a WPA rule, but I could be wrong on that. Half of me says players should just go to their chair and let the ref do it himself. The other half of me says that will slow down further this already slow poke game, and the fans will be the ones who suffer, not the ref.
That one is even nittier than the Pacquiao 10 ball event from 15 years ago that Efren won where obvious 10's had to be called.
Striking the CB with the front of the tip in a forward motion being a foul is absolutely not nitty IMO. The front of the tip is sacrilege! That's how you take a shot! I mean that is first grade stuff. The other stuff changes from event to event, and from year to year, and from promoter to promoter. This one has been around forever.
These are my opinions
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
I think it's incredibly obvious he wasn't making a shot. The ambiguity in the wording of the law... or the sheer lack of definition is what makes it problematic. As mentioned, takes a sentence to clearly define. It should be clearly defined ASAP to ensure similar doesn't happen again. Really respect Chang's handling... taking time to clarify, and then accepting the referees interpretation of the action. As that is what it was, an interpretation... In the context of the match/sportsmanship, I feel Filler could have returned the BIH, but why the hell would he when there's big prize money on the line? I wouldn't. What the referee declares is gospel... in all sports. That is the point of the referee and in line with maintaining the integrity of the sport, the referee is lord.
It’s one of the dumbest fouls there are gives no advantages
Just like the double hit
Just like the double hit
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
Not sure what you mean? The way this foul played out really was dumb, he is obviously positioning the ball. Stood up and one handed.
Clarifying the rule needs to happen - place with hand only, or no touching with tip etc. easily done and not sure why there was ambiguity in the first place?
As for double hit/push shots... I hate push shots/double hits. Never has been acceptable to me (maybe coming from snooker background?), I have played phillipino, Chinese, Japanese and none of them allow for this either. Seems it's mostly Americans who allow for this. Curious as to why it's thought to be acceptable by some?
Good point - of course I knew that, just used the wrong words.
I do think either the rule needs to be more flexible or the players need to wise up. Because watching that happen in a final of a “world championship” was a tough look. Makes the sport look immature.
What don’t you understand, I think the moving of a cb with your tip is a stupid rule
As is the double hit foul
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
So you don't think people should move it with the tip and hand only? The wording didn't play out in my head. He could have used his tip but the forward motion made it illegal. You mean he shouldn't use the tip at all? Just hand?
Yeah, I agree, I think that would clear up some ambiguity. I think something needs to be clearer for sure.
As for double hits/push shots... ick... in all games push shots should be illegal. (except maybe Carom/billiards games, where extreme spin and manoeuvring sometimes causes the situation to arise more frequently - don't know the exact rulings for these games - Maybe it's acceptable there for good reason. Although, in English billiards, I have always played, and was taught, all push shots/double hits as being a foul)
In a big time tournament such as this, it is a foul all day long. They are playing for a significant amount of money. Then of course there is the notoriety of winning it along with sponsors. All of which needs to be considered.
If it had been let go the situation might have become far more controversial. The referee is highly experienced and made the right call instantly.
Foul for a lot of reasons!
If it had been let go the situation might have become far more controversial. The referee is highly experienced and made the right call instantly.
Foul for a lot of reasons!
Foul....
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
the fact there is so much conflicting opinion clearly demonstrates it needs to be improved in wording, and more concise... 4 pages of tit-for-tat
dquarasr
Registered
I agree with the call even if I wish it weren’t a foul because of the obvious non-intent to actually shoot and the high consequence of the foul.
But compare this to a touch of the CB while taking practice strokes down on the shot. It is usually quite clear that there is no intent to actually shoot yet (until the cue is brought forward with enough force to make the OB), but I don’t think anyone here would say that this is not a foul. It’s not a stretch to say that positioning the CB with a forward motion of the cue using the tip while upright is an extension of the idea that touching the CB during feather practice strokes is a foul.
But compare this to a touch of the CB while taking practice strokes down on the shot. It is usually quite clear that there is no intent to actually shoot yet (until the cue is brought forward with enough force to make the OB), but I don’t think anyone here would say that this is not a foul. It’s not a stretch to say that positioning the CB with a forward motion of the cue using the tip while upright is an extension of the idea that touching the CB during feather practice strokes is a foul.
With cue ball in hand, there are no specs for the precision a player might require in its placement. As far as I know, a player can fiddle with placement forever.
A cue ball as it sits on the table is quite different than ball in hand. The sitting cue ball can only be moved once.
On the other side of this, is it a foul if an accidental touch of a cue ball in play results in a legal hit?
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
*can of worms opens*
No, deal with the outcome, wasted opportunity? It's a legal hit?
My understanding, was that BIH can be moved with hand, in the air and placed, and physically manipulated into any position on the table. It was my understanding you could do this with the cue, but not the tip.
again, the sheer volume of tit-for-tat in this thread shows a drastic need to re-word, and revise what is actually the correct and appropriate action... it shouldn't be vague enough to fill 4 pages...