Jayson Shaw victim or defeated foe

[bicki]

I have seen the situation and cannot remember Earl calling the 2. But that does not necessarily means he didn't. Earl had the 15 to the left side but bridging over the 5 mad that a super hard shot. then there was the 10 which was a thin cut to the lower right pocket. I am not sure about the 2 though. iirc he cud have kissed the 10 and billiard the 2 in. basically, 3 "reasonable" options to continue his inning. the 10 to the lower right was by far the best option. Almost anyone would have chosen this option... From that standpoint, there is no doubt at all for me that Earl had the intention to shoot the 10.

If Earl clearly called the 2 though it is a different matter. Especially, since that situation has already come up during the match. If you have noone credible confirming that Earl called the 2 and the replay does not prove it, you have to rule in favor of Earl. As hard it seems for Jason.

Putting this all aside, it was obvious Earl was going for the 10 after having weighed all 3 options. And he made it. period! Winning on a technicality reminds me of Boyes vs Daulton a year or two back...

I am truly sorry for Jason but he has had so many opportunities to put this match away before.


PS: Thanks Joe for showing the situation during my post. I thought the 11 was the 2. Seeing the 2 now, c'mon folks, this is the last ball on the table to be called! Literally!

 

[ctyhntr]

I think the score was 189-184 at the time. Jayson conceded after the ruling.

Who won the match and what was the score?

 

[DaveM]

Well they're both blue and start with a T.

 

[BeiberLvr]

I think the only way the ruling could have gone against Earl is if there was clear evidence that he did call the 2 ball.

Yes, that's what I said.

 

[BeiberLvr]

but if theres no evidence he called the 2 ball, did he in fact call it? don't know your point. If a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear, did it make a sound? lol. Also, I think there's plenty evidence given alot of ppl who watched the stream is on az right now saying he didnt call the 2. Additionally, John Leyman rewatched and could not hear or see earl calling the 2.

The only evidence we have that Earl called the 2 ball is hearsay (Shaw's word).

I agree with the decision that was made. My only point is that if it was clear that Earl called the 2, then his turn should be forfeited. Simple.

 

[PoolBum]

Yes, that's what I said.

No, that's not what you said.

You said, "The only reason the ruling was in Earl's favor is because there wasn't any evidence proving he called the 2 ball," which doesn't even entail that the only way the ruling could have gone against Earl is if there was clear evidence that he did call the 2 ball.

 

[BeiberLvr]

My question is, if he called the 2 ball where in the world would he be trying to make it, and how?

Here's my guess.

Earl may have just had a brainfart in his old age. If he did call the 2 ball, it was most likely a mistake. After all, both balls are blue, and he made a similar mis-call earlier in the match.

 

[ducatirider]

How about the fact that Earl was permitted to sit in the back of the room while Jayson was at the table??

 

[BeiberLvr]

No, that's not what you said.

You said, "The only reason the ruling was in Earl's favor is because there wasn't any evidence proving he called the 2 ball," which doesn't even entail that the only way the ruling could have gone against Earl is if there was clear evidence that he did call the 2 ball.

Shaw claims Earl called the 2.

Video replay (evidence) doesn't show Earl calling the 2. Ruling is made in favor of Earl.


IF... the video replay (evidence) did show Earl calling the 2, then it should be Jayson's shot.



Am I missing something here? What other ways could the ruling have gone against Earl?

 

[decent dennis]

Well they're both blue and start with a T.

And they both have three letters.:grin-square:

 

[Poolmanis]

This just show poor sportmanship from Shaw. IMO. Fortreit match after ruling!
If I was Shaw position I don´t even want win if you need to nitpick rules.
So many players do whatever they can for win.. so few gentlemans left on pool.

 

[PoolBum]

Am I missing something here? What other ways could the ruling have gone against Earl?

I was talking about what you actually said, not whether or not there were other ways the ruling could have gone against Earl. Maybe you thought you said the same thing that i did, but you didn't.

In any case, it looks like we can agree that the ruling had to come down to the audio evidence, and that without clear evidence that Earl called the 2 ball the ruling had to go in his favor.

 

[BeiberLvr]

This just show poor sportmanship from Shaw. IMO. Fortreit match after ruling!
If I was Shaw position I don´t even want win if you need to picknit rules.
So many players do whatever they can for win.. so few gentlemans left on pool.

Rules are meant to be black and white.

Where do you draw the line? And like I said in another thread, if you aren't going to bother following the rule, then why play call shot in the first place?

 

[decent dennis]

Well they're both blue and start with a T.

And they both have three letters.:grin-square:

 

[brooklynplayer]

How about the fact that Earl was permitted to sit in the back of the room while Jayson was at the table??

Yeah this was sort of wack.

This was sort of the only reason the "ref" even started racking the balls. Earl stopped coming to the table to rack the balls for Jayson.

The players were agreeing to either self rack or rack for each other at the beginning of each match during all the matches I watched on the TV table - or those convos I could hear at least.

There seemed to be some disagreement to this btw Earl and Jayson even on the very first rack. Earl racked for himself on the opening break but then jayson re-racked.

The call Leyman made, given all the messed up circumstances leading up to his involement was correct, but this whole mess arose from not having a ref racking and calling shots - as has been noted and should sort of be the norm in at least semi and final matches.

lol - "the pool world".

 

[PoolBum]

And they both have three letters.:grin-square:

And they both are one syllable and have two consonants and one vowel!

 

[PoolBum]

How about the fact that Earl was permitted to sit in the back of the room while Jayson was at the table??

Lol, sounds like a really professionally run World 14.1 Championship.

Was Earl allowed to go to the 7-11 while Jayson was at the table, and Jayson allowed to listen to his headphones while Earl was at the table too?

 

[justnum]

And they both are one syllable and have two consonants and one vowel!

and they are both even numbers

 

[sjm]

There was a ref, hell he had been racking for each opponent since Earl went and pouted in a corner and didn't come over to rack when Shaw cleared the table.

When this occurred apparently the Ref didn't want to or couldn't make an official call. They are not walking around the table calling shots as they have in the past. The TD was off preparing for the next match, in his own words.

I just got home form Steinway and it's my opinion that this is the only post in this thread that properly assigns the blame for what happened.

There WAS an attending ref, sitting about two feet from Jayson Shaw, and for him not to know what ball was called by Earl is an outrage.

After an unsuccessful attempt to verify what ball was called reviewing the audio, Head Referee and tournament director John Leyman, one of the best in the business, made the only call that he could make in the absence of any truly conclusive evidence that Earl called the wrong ball.

It needs to be noted that earlier in this same match, Earl called the wrong ball and though he pocketed the shot that he attempted, he lost the table when Jayson pointed it out. To me, that makes it far more likely that Earl called the wrong ball here, repeating the mistake, but, of course, it is inconclusive.

To believe that Earl made the right call here would require believing that Jayson Shaw imagined the call of the two, as did a couple of very trustworthy onlookers to whom I spoke. That's a little too unlikely a scenario for my taste, and I think it highly likely that the wrong ball was called by Earl.

Shaw a victim or a defeated foe? I say victim, but the perpetrator was the attending ref, who got caught napping and whose nap likely cost Jayson the match.

The match left such a bad taste in my mouth that I left rather than staying for Immonen vs Lo Li Wen, which will determine the other finalist.

 

[NastyNate13]

https://www.facebook.com/arturo.reyes.104855/videos/10154118342558401/

Facebook video of the last few minutes before and after the ruling.