Hunter v Frost, your stance?

Sounds like a No Foul should have been the ruling according to this somewhat experienced gentleman. 🙂
As someone that witnessed said foul occur. I agree that the BIH should not have been given to Hunter.

The grounds to which it was, are valid based on the current WPA rule set. Fortunately MR is already moving away from that organization so I can see an improvement in the future.
 
I ref'd and acted as a TD for over 40 years and not once did I rely on any "trusted witnesses." My attitude was simply that spectators should not be involved in the match in any way, shape of form, period! And I adhered to that philosophy for the entire time I acted in my capacity as a referee or TD. I learned there are other ways to find out the truth about what happened on the table by talking to each player individually. I won't get into all that now, but let's just say there is a long learning process involved in being a good ref. I would guess that there aren't more than five excellent pool refs on the planet right now, and there never has been many more than that at any one time. And I've seen several piss poor ones who have made very bad decisions since I quit working these tournaments. Matchroom had some great referees in Nigel Rees and Michaela Tabb. Why they got rid of them I'm not sure.

As far as this current issue is concerned, it is actually easier to ref with "all ball fouls" than with "cue ball fouls" only. Ideally you would have a referee at every table or at least one for every two tables. It should be the responsibility of the opponent to call over the ref in any situation where it looks like there could be a potential foul or bad hit. All you have to do is tell the player at the table to hold up until a ref can be called to watch the shot. If you fail to do that, then you've forfeited your right to complain afterwards.
This is a good summary, but I'm gonna say it straight up. Pool has been in the doldrums for a good long time, and if Matchroom were to decide to allow the spectators to take a small part in this way, I support them. What has been done in the past, clearly has not worked. Continuing to do things as they have always been done, if it was not working, is the definitionnof insanity. As I said before in other posts, if they made that the rule, then this will induce the active player to "protect" themselves in a situation where they will be leaning over a ball by calling the ref themselves.

Now, I know that the first kneejerk reaction would be to say that this is "unworkable", and allows "moves" by the players, calling imaginary fouls if they thought the crowd would support them. And to that I say.. With the first breath of fresh air for pool in a VERY long time, is someone really going to risk getting banned from all Matchroom events? I doubt it. If they are willing to try, I say fine, let em. They will eventually get caught and banned, and good riddance.

And if the Mosconi Cup is any indication, Matchroom knows something about spectator/viewer engagement.

Now.. I don't really SEE Matchroom as backing that particular rule change/clarification.... But I don't think it would be the worst idea to test out. And I think as a general rule, the players would very quickly adjust to the rule, and would be a HELL of a lot more careful when leaning over balls. American players are simply too used to CB fouls only. They are not "professional" rules, and they are simply a stopgap to address some American players tendendcy to try to get away with a foul if nobody can "prove" it. For my part, I play in the German league system, and have played at levels from Kreisliga to Oberliga, and this sort of nonsense is just never an issue. If your opponent calls a foul that you did not see/feel, then it was a foul, you trust that, and there are no arguments. Nobody has ever "pulled a move" in the 7 years I have played here. Arguing about fouls seems to me to be "mostly" an American thing, these days. As in, an American is much more likely to be other either side of a foul argument. Yeah, I said it, and I believe it.

Still love yah, Jay...
 
Don't doubt you one bit but it doesn't matter. Without a ref AT THE TABLE you can NOT play fouls on all balls.
....and the call goes to the shooter.

Don't know who or where people learned to play this game. Maybe they don't even play other than clipboard, ball count league pool. But calls going to the shooter solves many more conflicts that it creates....and those it creates are solved by calling an impartial party or ref to make the call.
 
This is a good summary, but I'm gonna say it straight up. Pool has been in the doldrums for a good long time, and if Matchroom were to decide to allow the spectators to take a small part in this way, I support them. What has been done in the past, clearly has not worked. Continuing to do things as they have always been done, if it was not working, is the definitionnof insanity. As I said before in other posts, if they made that the rule, then this will induce the active player to "protect" themselves in a situation where they will be leaning over a ball by calling the ref themselves.

Now, I know that the first kneejerk reaction would be to say that this is "unworkable", and allows "moves" by the players, calling imaginary fouls if they thought the crowd would support them. And to that I say.. With the first breath of fresh air for pool in a VERY long time, is someone really going to risk getting banned from all Matchroom events? I doubt it. If they are willing to try, I say fine, let em. They will eventually get caught and banned, and good riddance.

And if the Mosconi Cup is any indication, Matchroom knows something about spectator/viewer engagement.

Now.. I don't really SEE Matchroom as backing that particular rule change/clarification.... But I don't think it would be the worst idea to test out. And I think as a general rule, the players would very quickly adjust to the rule, and would be a HELL of a lot more careful when leaning over balls. American players are simply too used to CB fouls only. They are not "professional" rules, and they are simply a stopgap to address some American players tendendcy to try to get away with a foul if nobody can "prove" it. For my part, I play in the German league system, and have played at levels from Kreisliga to Oberliga, and this sort of nonsense is just never an issue. If your opponent calls a foul that you did not see/feel, then it was a foul, you trust that, and there are no arguments. Nobody has ever "pulled a move" in the 7 years I have played here. Arguing about fouls seems to me to be "mostly" an American thing, these days. As in, an American is much more likely to be other either side of a foul argument. Yeah, I said it, and I believe it.

Still love yah, Jay...
So you know better than Mr. Helfert now?
Smh
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a No Foul should have been the ruling according to this somewhat experienced gentleman. 🙂
Funny thing if you watch the video all Hunter calmy said was " you are on the 6 ball". To me it's him saying you need to get off that ball before you shoot....

Then the ref came over and just butchered everything.
 
... Matchroom had some great referees in Nigel Rees and Michaela Tabb. Why they got rid of them I'm not sure....
Those two were ROCKSTARS. Knew how to control players and the crowd. Current crop couldn't make those two coffee. For all the things that MR does right. This is one topic that drives me nuts.

They seem to:
  • JL almost never is standing in the correct spot
  • They don't understand the physics of how balls react in close quarters or rail first
  • Some plane can't consistently rack a set of balls (even with template)
 
As far as this current issue is concerned, it is actually easier to ref with "all ball fouls" than with "cue ball fouls" only.
Agreed. And that is why it's played that way (actually "all ball fouls" is a misnomer because it's just the rules as they are) pretty much everywhere. Mistakes do happen, on the part of the referee or a mistaken player, but they happen rarely. Players "looking for fouls" and calling everything they can is even rarer and they either run away and try to scam others beyond the world of pool (and spend their whole life being overjoyed whenever they make a few bucks), or they come to their senses and become part of the pool community. It's the best way, the easiest way and the way that encourages players to fall into line in terms of playing by the rules. "Cue ball fouls only" is a courtesy where you might let something go in a bar against a player new to the game, or in a practice session where you want your partner to play the next shot because it will spark a learning conversation between the two of you. I can't take anyone seriously who claims to be a "pool player" who advocates for "cue ball fouls only".
 
Last edited:
Arguing about fouls seems to me to be "mostly" an American thing, these days. As in, an American is much more likely to be other either side of a foul argument. Yeah, I said it, and I believe it.
I don't think it's an "American" thing perse (the major team sports in the USA tend to have rules that are much stricter, more technical and less open to interpretation than those that are more popular elsewhere). I think it's a product of league pool in the USA where many leagues have a nonsensical "cue ball fouls only" rule that somebody one day thought was a good idea and some other people agreed. Pretty much anywhere else, anyone who plays in any kind of league or tournament will play "proper rules" rather than Wednesday night at the Corner Bar's rules made up by some bloke who talks a lot.
 
....and the call goes to the shooter.

Don't know who or where people learned to play this game. Maybe they don't even play other than clipboard, ball count league pool. But calls going to the shooter solves many more conflicts that it creates....and those it creates are solved by calling an impartial party or ref to make the call.
As has been stated multiple times, in all those countries whose players are dominating Americans in pool right now? They grew up playing all ball fouls from the time they entered youth competition, all the way up through the highest levels of their national leagues. In fact, my German club members are literally in our club Whatsapp clowning on folks like yourself who are arguing in Scott's favor. We have about 10 players in my club alone that would drill the vast majority of American pool players, full stop. We are amateurish in pool as compared to nearly every country currently successfully competing on the national scene, minus maybe Phillipines. (I don't know if all ball fouls is the rule or exception there...)
 
What happened to honor in this world we live?

Is a win a win regardless of the circumstances?

The pro pool community should be held to high standards. Next event is hunter welcome? How is Frost and the pool community going to treat him? How should they treat him?

If history is our guide with these situations!

Earl calling the wrong ball against Jayson Shaw!

Thorpe clearly fouling on his jump shot against biado!

No consequences then no change in pocket billiards!

Kd



Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 
9asGh5b.png
 
I think pool in general has excellent refs. Scott is right, every single sport they get it wrong a lot, when super slow motion is involved after the fact. When the ref is there live, he/she has to make an instant call.

I really see this as a non-factor in the growth of our game. I think we've been a bit too hard on some of these refs.

IMO:)
 
Yes you can. Most people do.
That doesn't make it right. You need to take the players out of the refereeing business and put them where they belong --- in the playing arena, AS PLAYERS. They haven't practiced this hard for years to get where they are to police their opponent for clothing fouls. That is not their job. If the tournament organizer can't find a referee to preside over every match, then play cue ball fouls only and be fair towards the players and stop lowering the bar on them, forcing them to be referees from the chair. They deserve better.

As former president of the WPBA and former touring pro, and someone who has refereed many professional matches, I know what I'm saying here is right. I've lived it on both sides --- on the playing end and on the administrative end.
 
Last edited:
As has been stated multiple times, in all those countries whose players are dominating Americans in pool right now? They grew up playing all ball fouls from the time they entered youth competition, all the way up through the highest levels of their national leagues. In fact, my German club members are literally in our club Whatsapp clowning on folks like yourself who are arguing in Scott's favor. We have about 10 players in my club alone that would drill the vast majority of American pool players, full stop. We are amateurish in pool as compared to nearly every country currently successfully competing on the national scene, minus maybe Phillipines. (I don't know if all ball fouls is the rule or exception there...)
So?
Great job with the delusional chess clock posts.
Keep riding shorty.
 
That doesn't make it right. You need to take the players out of the refereeing business and put them where they belong --- in the playing arena, AS PLAYERS. They haven't practiced this hard for years to get where they are to police their opponent for clothing fouls. That is not their job. If the tournament organizer can't find a referee to preside over every match, then play cue ball fouls only and be fair towards the players and stop lowering the bar on them, forcing them to be referees from the chair. They deserve better.

As former president of the WPBA and former touring pro, and someone who has refereed many professional matches, I know what I'm saying here is right. I've lived it on both sides --- on the playing end and on the administrative end.
Couldn't be more correct than this.
 
I don't think it's an "American" thing perse (the major team sports in the USA tend to have rules that are much stricter, more technical and less open to interpretation than those that are more popular elsewhere). I think it's a product of league pool in the USA where many leagues have a nonsensical "cue ball fouls only" rule that somebody one day thought was a good idea and some other people agreed. Pretty much anywhere else, anyone who plays in any kind of league or tournament will play "proper rules" rather than Wednesday night at the Corner Bar's rules made up by some bloke who talks a lot.
This is exactly why you guys have a reputation for beating your players into submission. We actually face problems and pose viable solutions. You would rather force all ball fouls on your players without presiding referees and put them in a state of constantly having to decide whether or not to call over an official --- unlike us who actually respect our players and want them to play the game rather than worry about whether or not their opponent's sleeve might be touching the ball. THAT IS NOT A PLAYER'S JOB.


I suggest that you start respecting your players rather than forcing them to do both theirs and someone else's job.
 
Granted in less formal play but I have refused to referee from the chair for decades. Insist on me being the referee as the opponent and I will position myself wherever a professional referee would be. Ridiculous to expect me to be referee and stay where I can't see a shot. These rules are in conflict with each other.

If my opponent tries to referee from the chair they will find the percentage of shots they can't see soar too. Pool is a gentleman's, and gentle ladies game. I have demonstrated this to those that had learned there was an advantage being a heel playing gentle people for decades. They get so involved playing referee that they can't play pool.

Unless there is an official referee calling your own fouls backed up by your opponent when the shooter can't see is the only practical way to play.

Hu
 
Back
Top