Did Niels Feijen's Cue Contact the Cueball?

Tiddler

AzB Silver Haired Member
Silver Member
After sinking the final 9 ball of the Mosconi Cup Niels Feijen threw his cue onto the table and it seemed from watching that the cue ball ran into the cue before stopping. It's not readily apparent as the camera cuts away, but then from another angle it shows the cueball touching his cue. That's a ball in hand foul as far I'm concerned whether or not it was rolling too slow to scratch which is strictly a judgement call anyway. If this was covered in a previous thread I couldn't find it...
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
After sinking the final 9 ball of the Mosconi Cup Niels Feijen threw his cue onto the table and it seemed from watching that the cue ball ran into the cue before stopping. It's not readily apparent as the camera cuts away, but then from another angle it shows the cueball touching his cue. That's a ball in hand foul as far I'm concerned whether or not it was rolling too slow to scratch which is strictly a judgement call anyway. If this was covered in a previous thread I couldn't find it...

I'm generally a stickler for the rules, but if in fact the cue ball did barely hit the cue stick I think it's probably better to let it slide.

The story is told of an irascible and very competent snooker referee who was reffing the final frame of a match and the match was down to the final black. Any score or foul at this point ends the match. Player A makes a great shot to pot the black and as the cue ball is still rolling, the referee announces, "Frame and match ...," and the player grabs up the cue ball in triumph, only to have the referee continue "to player B." General consternation and outcry ensued, but the ruling stood.

It is a foul to touch a moving cue ball whether the game ball has been pocketed or not. Many players, even champions, haven't figured that one out. Fouling on a live cue ball in nine ball is the most common overlooked foul. Let the balls stop moving.

So the problem is should the official make a scene in a situation that is of no consequence except when strictly enforced? I think probably not. It would have been interesting if the American in that match had pointed out the foul and demanded another game but I don't think it would have been of much use in the end. It might have resulted in another match or two and would certainly have cemented opinions of the American players in some minds.
 

JoeyA

Efren's Mini-Tourn BACKER
Silver Member
I'm generally a stickler for the rules, but if in fact the cue ball did barely hit the cue stick I think it's probably better to let it slide.

The story is told of an irascible and very competent snooker referee who was reffing the final frame of a match and the match was down to the final black. Any score or foul at this point ends the match. Player A makes a great shot to pot the black and as the cue ball is still rolling, the referee announces, "Frame and match ...," and the player grabs up the cue ball in triumph, only to have the referee continue "to player B." General consternation and outcry ensued, but the ruling stood.

It is a foul to touch a moving cue ball whether the game ball has been pocketed or not. Many players, even champions, haven't figured that one out. Fouling on a live cue ball in nine ball is the most common overlooked foul. Let the balls stop moving.

So the problem is should the official make a scene in a situation that is of no consequence except when strictly enforced? I think probably not. It would have been interesting if the American in that match had pointed out the foul and demanded another game but I don't think it would have been of much use in the end. It might have resulted in another match or two and would certainly have cemented opinions of the American players in some minds.

Maybe it wouldn't have made any difference if the foul had been called but.........

If I were the losing player in this particular case, I would not have called a foul on Niels either.

Whether or not calling the foul would have changed the outcome of the match or not is not for ANY one person to say, even the referee, imo.

By your post, it almost makes me wonder about the right of an official's judgment to affect or not affect the outcome of a match. I thought they should always do the job they were commissioned to do.


JoeyA
 

Magog30

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Some of the players on the American team didn't show a huge amount of class but there isn't a player on that team that would stoop that low.( Anyone disagree?) They all knew there was no chance of a scratch. When you watch the players play in other tournaments, it is very common for them to start bringing balls up before the cue ball stops, and directing the cue ball up towards the head string with their cue before it stops, etc.

I think everyone, both teams and audience included were ready for the match to end!!
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Some of the players on the American team didn't show a huge amount of class but there isn't a player on that team that would stoop that low.( Anyone disagree?) They all knew there was no chance of a scratch. When you watch the players play in other tournaments, it is very common for them to start bringing balls up before the cue ball stops, and directing the cue ball up towards the head string with their cue before it stops, etc.

I think everyone, both teams and audience included were ready for the match to end!!

What should have been done, but almost always never is, is that it all should have been laid out at the players' meeting. A list of rules should have been given to the players and it should have been stressed that they would be strictly enforced.

Other than certain sportsmanship issues that may be unforseen (and even ones like cursing can be addressed ahead of time), rules should not be a subjective call, nor should they be enforced arbitrarily.

I've always felt that a competitive event is only as good as it's players' meeting.
 
Last edited:

Icon of Sin

I can't fold, I need gold. I re-up and reload...
Silver Member
Even if it was called, we (US) were not going to make a comeback there... It didnt really matter at that point. Best to put an end to the beating and let it go.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
What should have been done, but almost always never is, is that it all should have been laid out at the players' meeting. A list of rules should have been given to the players and it should have been stressed that they would be strictly enforced. ...
I believe the only rule that was not standard WPA was the break shot rule or rules. I think the players should only need a list of exceptions to the standard rules.
 

Tiddler

AzB Silver Haired Member
Silver Member
The person to call the foul should have been the referee paid to handle this very duty. The second person to call attention to the foul would be the American captain. The last persons to call attention to it would be the players in that match. I know it would have had little difference in the scheme of things, but you don't see referees changing rules in other sports because one side is crushing the other.
 

osama

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I would agree that this is a foul. American team getting crushed should have nothing to do with it.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I believe the only rule that was not standard WPA was the break shot rule or rules. I think the players should only need a list of exceptions to the standard rules.

True, but unfortunately, I think that because the rules have not been properly followed nor enforced for so long, I think it becomes necessary to reacquaint the players with them.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The person to call the foul should have been the referee paid to handle this very duty. The second person to call attention to the foul would be the American captain. The last persons to call attention to it would be the players in that match. I know it would have had little difference in the scheme of things, but you don't see referees changing rules in other sports because one side is crushing the other.
The rules do not permit the team captain to say anything about the officiating unless there was a special rule for this event.
 
The story is told of an irascible and very competent snooker referee who was reffing the final frame of a match and the match was down to the final black. Any score or foul at this point ends the match. Player A makes a great shot to pot the black and as the cue ball is still rolling, the referee announces, "Frame and match ...," and the player grabs up the cue ball in triumph, only to have the referee continue "to player B." General consternation and outcry ensued, but the ruling stood.

Lol. Who was the ref and who was playing?

I noticed this foul at the time, and I must say, if the ref had called foul I would have agreed with them. The game is still live until all balls have stopped rolling. I've noticed pros stop CBs with their hands after sinking the 9 and think that's wrong too. I know it makes no substantive difference but it feels wrong to me.
 

PETROBOY

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The ref should have called this but it wouldn't have changed the outcome. I hope t hat the ref didn't notice and that's why it wasn't called and not that they chose not to call it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Lol. Who was the ref and who was playing?

I noticed this foul at the time, and I must say, if the ref had called foul I would have agreed with them. The game is still live until all balls have stopped rolling. I've noticed pros stop CBs with their hands after sinking the 9 and think that's wrong too. I know it makes no substantive difference but it feels wrong to me.
I'd have to re-read my snooker books to find out who the ref in the story was.

I agree that the players should observe the rules. As Fran pointed out, a major problem is that the rules -- until about 2003 -- changed frequently and it's hard to expect the players to keep up. But there have been no changes in the last five years (since the last major revision) and it has always been a foul to touch a ball intentionally while a shot is in progress. In the US, there is the problem that promoters often just make up rules and expect the players to follow them.

I suppose it would have been a good learning experience for some of the players and the audience if the foul had been called. Maybe pros should be tested on rules knowledge -- don't they do that in golf?
 

Okie

Seeker
Silver Member
I'd have to re-read my snooker books to find out who the ref in the story was.

I agree that the players should observe the rules. As Fran pointed out, a major problem is that the rules -- until about 2003 -- changed frequently and it's hard to expect the players to keep up. But there have been no changes in the last five years (since the last major revision) and it has always been a foul to touch a ball intentionally while a shot is in progress. In the US, there is the problem that promoters often just make up rules and expect the players to follow them.

I suppose it would have been a good learning experience for some of the players and the audience if the foul had been called. Maybe pros should be tested on rules knowledge -- don't they do that in golf?

As a class A PGA professional I did take tests which involved rules. But just like pool there many rules which go unenforced until the camera catches it and then it is almost always enforced. Ex: Stadler using a towel to "build a stance" many years ago.

I am of the opinion that if a rule is on the books it should be enforced. If it is unenforceable or unimportant then it should be removed. But if a rule is on the books and a player or ref enforce it then they should be allowed to do so without ridicule from all the cool kids who think it is "nitty" to enforce such a rule at such a time.

Good topic!!

Ken
 

sonny_burnett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
As a class A PGA professional I did take tests which involved rules. But just like pool there many rules which go unenforced until the camera catches it and then it is almost always enforced. Ex: Stadler using a towel to "build a stance" many years ago.

I am of the opinion that if a rule is on the books it should be enforced. If it is unenforceable or unimportant then it should be removed. But if a rule is on the books and a player or ref enforce it then they should be allowed to do so without ridicule from all the cool kids who think it is "nitty" to enforce such a rule at such a time.

Good topic!!

Ken

Ken, what did you score on the class A test? That thing is a bear!

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 

poolguy4u

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If a foul would of been called, it would of been the most embarrassing thing about the whole event.

Even if a foul was called and the nine ball spotted and cueball was in hand I would think the incoming player might of missed it on purpose to show what class was left.:thumbup:



Being from the old school I would of never wanted to stoop that low to win a simple game of pool.
 

JoeyA

Efren's Mini-Tourn BACKER
Silver Member
As a class A PGA professional I did take tests which involved rules. But just like pool there many rules which go unenforced until the camera catches it and then it is almost always enforced. Ex: Stadler using a towel to "build a stance" many years ago.

I am of the opinion that if a rule is on the books it should be enforced. If it is unenforceable or unimportant then it should be removed. But if a rule is on the books and a player or ref enforce it then they should be allowed to do so without ridicule from all the cool kids who think it is "nitty" to enforce such a rule at such a time.

Good topic!!

Ken

I agree that whoever is allowed to enforce the rules, when they see an infraction it should be called regardless of whether it might or might not have had an effect on the overall outcome of the game or match.

Rules should be used all of the time, not just when someone deems it appropriate to the situation at hand.

Two thumbs-up on the "nitty" sentence.

JoeyA
 
Last edited:

alstl

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
After sinking the final 9 ball of the Mosconi Cup Niels Feijen threw his cue onto the table and it seemed from watching that the cue ball ran into the cue before stopping. It's not readily apparent as the camera cuts away, but then from another angle it shows the cueball touching his cue. That's a ball in hand foul as far I'm concerned whether or not it was rolling too slow to scratch which is strictly a judgement call anyway. If this was covered in a previous thread I couldn't find it...

It's Earl's fault.
 
Top