Go to 5:10 and check out the shot on the 4.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WhFKR8_EkCU&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WhFKR8_EkCU&feature=related
Foul or no foul?
- Thread starter Drew
- Start date
Best frame by frame I could pull on that poor of a quality looks like a pretty clean hit.
that's so close to a split hit it would be hard for the ref to call it bad... although after watching the video i would have to say that it was a foul. the 5 wouldn't have rolled that far on that thin of a cut if the cue hit it on the way back because the speed of the draw only drew the cue back a couple feet. i also don't think she could have drawn the cue straight back if it had hit the 5 on the way back...
tough call though.
tough call though.
branpureza said:
It is hopeless to try to determine if the shot is a foul or not from this camera angle.
The referee was standing in the best position to watch this shot. From that position, it is very easy to see the path of the cue ball and whether it is a good hit or not.
Mark Avlon said:
I agree. From this angle it's just about impossible to tell, even from the CB path we can't deduce much because the 5 was hit so thinly (whenever it was hit). I think if it had been a bad hit, then she wouldn't have pocketed the 4, and the ref would have seen it from his vantage point. So I'd say good hit.
-Andrew
I am going to disagree with everyone here and say it looks like a foul to me.
The 5-ball is moving away from the collision BEFORE the cueball drew back which leads me to believe the cueball hit it before striking the 4-ball. It's also thin enough and close enough that the carom off the 5-ball would not dramatically affect the direction of the cueball.
The only thing that concerns me is that Xiaoting Pan obviously did NOT think it was a foul. Nothing in her body language suggests she thought so even for a second. So, either it's good and I'm not seeing it right or it's bad and Xiaoting Pan does not understand what happened there.
The 5-ball is moving away from the collision BEFORE the cueball drew back which leads me to believe the cueball hit it before striking the 4-ball. It's also thin enough and close enough that the carom off the 5-ball would not dramatically affect the direction of the cueball.
The only thing that concerns me is that Xiaoting Pan obviously did NOT think it was a foul. Nothing in her body language suggests she thought so even for a second. So, either it's good and I'm not seeing it right or it's bad and Xiaoting Pan does not understand what happened there.
Andrew Manning said:
the hit was very thin... too thin i think to make the 5 move that far on the way back. to make the 5 move that far i feel that the cue had to hit it going in because it wouldn't have had enough force to move the 5 that much coming back.
the 5 ball moved just as far as the cue did when she pocketed the 4. how is that possible coming back when the cue ball barely touches the 5?
that being said... if i was the referee i probably wouldn't have make the call either. it's way too close and i probably couldn't process it fast enough anyway
It could have been a good hit, or it could have hit the 5 first. Or it could have even hit the 5 razor thin BOTH on the way in AND on the way out. With a YouTube quality video from that camera angle on something that close, all we can really say is "inconclusive". The benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter. 
Ok, the part I really don't like - she's playing shape for a 5-9 combination. I mean, she THOUGHT she could squeak in there. I think there's enough here to say she fouled.
Agree
I agree with Jude here. Foul. This is the same ref that was over Karen Corr and Jennifer Berretta in Florida where Karen jumped a ball, hit the top of the ball she was jumping.....moved it 2 inches and he saw nothing. He's blind! He needs to retire.
Ray
Jude Rosenstock said:
I agree with Jude here. Foul. This is the same ref that was over Karen Corr and Jennifer Berretta in Florida where Karen jumped a ball, hit the top of the ball she was jumping.....moved it 2 inches and he saw nothing. He's blind! He needs to retire.
Ray
You can't penalize the player for the incompetence of the referee. I agree with those who think the video is not good enough to make a call. I can't be sure, but it looks like the 5 was cut more than 90 degrees, which means the 4 was probably struck first and then the cue ball caromed into the 5. But as Cuebacca pointed out, on this particular shot there are three possibilities. I can't be sure which one happened.Bigtruck said:I agree with Jude here. Foul. This is the same ref that was over Karen Corr and Jennifer Berretta in Florida where Karen jumped a ball, hit the top of the ball she was jumping.....moved it 2 inches and he saw nothing. He's blind! He needs to retire.
Ray
yeah, cuebacca has the right of it.
I like jude's point about XTP's body language. A third option is that she has a good poker face and simply chooses not to acknowledge a fishy hit, and she used the few seconds of chalk pause to see if the ref was going to jump up. But not only did she make no indication about a foul...nobody else in the room seemed to either. So maybe in real life it was much more obviously a clean hit.
Or maybe everyone just feels it's too close to make a peep. But in that case, it's automatically for the shooter, so the ref can't be said to have done anything wrong.
In general people are too quick to say "based on the angle and speed of the questionable interfering ball, it HAS to (CAN'T) be a foul..." often a clean hit and a foul can both result in very similar reactions from the balls involved.
I like jude's point about XTP's body language. A third option is that she has a good poker face and simply chooses not to acknowledge a fishy hit, and she used the few seconds of chalk pause to see if the ref was going to jump up. But not only did she make no indication about a foul...nobody else in the room seemed to either. So maybe in real life it was much more obviously a clean hit.
Or maybe everyone just feels it's too close to make a peep. But in that case, it's automatically for the shooter, so the ref can't be said to have done anything wrong.
In general people are too quick to say "based on the angle and speed of the questionable interfering ball, it HAS to (CAN'T) be a foul..." often a clean hit and a foul can both result in very similar reactions from the balls involved.
