It's what they do.
Hunter v Frost, your stance?
- Thread starter u12armresl
- Start date
It's what they do.
You and your little band of merry men.....guess reading English as a first language is just too tough a task.
Oh no, not another Hunter laptop...
Cool
Get that money
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
I'd call it on him even if his shirt didn't touch
absolute value of the situation to me: foul made. foul called. all okay with the call on my end. doesn't matter if it is the Queen of whereever, bubba down the street or my friend/enemy/me shooting or watching. a foul is a foul. call all fouls or cheapen the game/lessen the authority of the rules.
I too just rolled thru some of SF's and EF's FB posts and i saw nada about changes or ref removal. Nobody needs to get fired, they just need a ref at every table or at least one per pair of tables so a ref is always right there to call. This ref crap needs fixing as does putting a shot clock on every match.
Never
Because in something it's the gamblers like Scott who understands what it's about.
He'd already stopped him.
Call the ref and let the man shoot.
Look harder my son
Or look at my screenshot
Show me the evidence/proof Scott fouled. Scott tucked in his shirt and said "he didn't think it touched". Depending on the view angle Hunter had, maybe the shirt looked like it touched the ball but didn't. No Ref=No call.
KillerWhalePool
Member
Just out of genuine curiosity, do you think that’s because you feel like you would lose some integrity by following the rules in that particular instance? If it’s a foul, and I know it’s a foul in that particular game I’m playing, I call it. That’s how the game’s played. Rules are rules for a reason, to ensure fairness to all involved. I’m sure you’re not in that match to give away money, prestige, or a title for nothing. I wouldn’t.
There's absolutely no proof
I've read it enough to see that what Scott is providing is an opinion. There is no statement of fact about changes being made or refs being removed. Hopefully MR HAS done something to stop this in the future but just based on that screenshot there is no concrete evidence of it being done. I've even msg'd EF and MR direct and so far just crickets which is sop for them.
What you're describing is okay for a cue ball fouls only match. But when the match is all ball fouls, where touching an object ball with the sleeve of your shirt, for example, is a foul, then a referee must preside over the match from start to finish. Just ask Mike Sigel, Nick Varner, Ray Martin and any of the other great 14.1 players who play all ball foul matches. There has to be a referee presiding over the entire match, because he often has to get down on his knees in front or behind or alongside a player while he's shooting to see if his clothing touches a ball or not.
In an all ball fouls match, the referee is moving all around the table all of the time to check for clothing fouls. There is no other way to do it. It's ridiculous to even imagine an opponent sitting in a chair trying to determine if a touch foul has occurred. It's unheard of and unfair to both players. Each shot has to be closely monitored --- not every so often. Every shot.
Last edited:
We have a trusted forum member who played in the Open, and was present at this match, and saw the foul with their own two eyes. He has mentioned that multiple times.
What more do you want?
Still need a ref if all-ball fouls are the rule. Gonna ask sweaters in the seats, "Hey dude, did you see if that shirt touched the ball?" The entire episode is so chickenshit bush-league its a joke.