Go to 4:04:19 it was close to a foul, the cb direction after contact told me good hit.
They should of called a ref.
Good Hit?
- Thread starter Island Drive
- Start date
Go to 4:04:19 it was close to a foul, the cb direction after contact told me good hit.
They should of called a ref.
you do know you can link right to the time start you want.
I did try it with the large arrow, but... was it good? I think so/frikin close.
JABSolstice
Well-known member
Looked good to me. Definitely close, though.
It looked like a foul on first glance, based on the angle the CB comes off the rail. But I screen recorded it and blew it up and slow motioned it. The 4b moves before the CB hits the rail IMO. I think the CB thins the 4b on the way in and then hit it again on the way out, causing the CB to react like that.
Stepping through the frames, there is one where the cue ball is about the same distance from the rail as the 4 ball. In that frame, it looks to me like the 4 has not moved. In the following frame, the 4 has moved, but I think the cue ball has already hit the cushion and is moving to the right.
On that kind of shot, it is always possible that the cue ball just barely brushed the ball going in and fair/foul shots will look the same.
I think it's not possible to call the shot from the video.
For what it’s worth, here is a video capture with me moving forward slowly through the frame. I think I see the OB move before the CB hits the rail.
Seems to me hitting the 5 first with that much left spin the CB would rebound more back toward the 8, not straight across as it does.
I'm thinking rail first.
pj <- waddaiknow
chgo
I'm thinking rail first.
pj <- waddaiknow
chgo
I think the thinness of the hit is what kills the rail exit. The Gideon vid looks good. I think the guy replied "Tie" or something. Left a dead out anyway. Wake me up if it causes an international incident...
looks like a bad hit to me
I think that the first frame in which the four has moved is after the cue ball has hit the rail.
Also Bob, never thought about this but.
But your explanation made me?
Ask this, on split hits with two balls it goes to the shooter.
Split hits on ball/cushion nose... are they to be treated the same, I would say yes with a ref, or hd video.
That could be. To my eyes the CB keeps going forward after hitting the OB. Without better video it is hard to tell if that’s actually the case, or perhaps if the CB has hit the rail then the OB and continued to compress into the cushion before releasing.
On hits, I was taught to listen and look. This scenario doesn't work for the listen part but the "look" part tells me the 4 ball moved way too fast and angled out too far from the rail to be a good hit.and, how could the opponent think to call for a referee anyway on a shot like this? Dr Dave has shown us over and over there is almost and impossibility for a split hit. So, the action of the ball has to be the decider and the cue ball too for me.
it's a tv table so he can maybe ask for ref to rewatch the shot
Sadly, the video seems inconclusive. Maybe the original video -- before YouTube massaged it -- has more frames and is clearer. Maybe the commercial cameras are 60 FPS?
About the massaging... If you step through the YouTube frames (with the ">" key when paused), you can see that some frames are doubled and other frames are skipped. You can see this in how far the cue ball advances (or doesn't) from one frame to the next from the tip-ball contact until the ball-ball contact. That distance travelled should be nearly the same from frame to frame. It isn't.
In addition to Bob’s point about whether the video would show it, I’m not sure the WNT allows the ref to check the video in this situation. When the area ref botched the call on a frozen ball hit by Pongers (incorrectly called a push), Marcel was called over. Based on what Dr Dave wrote later, it seems he could not review the footage and thus had to go with the area referee’s call.