Mosconi Cup 2015, Boyes: 'Disappointed if we aren't partying on Wednesday!'

Cardigan Kid said:
And I'm going to take a minute to back up referee Ken Schumann.
Karl was not placing the ball at first.
Watching the replay, Karl takes the cue ball and holds it to the table then lifts it back up at which the referee called foul.
Karl makes a big scene insisting he was placing the ball, but he definitely measured it out at first and picked it back up.
Click to expand...

This post is freaking ridiculous. He had a very small space to place the cueball and had he touched either the 2 or 3 ball while placing the ball it would have been a foul against him. He is not going to simply walk right up and plunk the ball down into the gap, he is going to hover over it and see how easy it is going to fit and the best way to place it without fouling. That is normal, that is expected.

If you hate Karl fine, you hate Karl, but anyone who actually tries to argue he did anything wrong in this instance when he was attempting to place the cueball is being a biased fool.
 
Celtic said:
This post is freaking ridiculous. He had a very small space to place the cueball and had he touched either the 2 or 3 ball while placing the ball it would have been a foul against him. He is not going to simply walk right up and plunk the ball down into the gap, he is going to hover over it and see how easy it is going to fit and the best way to place it without fouling. That is normal, that is expected.

If you hate Karl fine, you hate Karl, but anyone who actually tries to argue he did anything wrong in this instance when he was attempting to place the cueball is being a biased fool.
Click to expand...

I'm still not 100% sure the way he struck that ball was clean though. I think it pushed through just enough before the spin took...only Dr. DAVE can solve that one
 
What would he have gained by measuring there? Don't like the kids attitude and demeanor but it looked to me like he was trying to place the ball.
 
pocket said:
What would he have gained by measuring there? Don't like the kids attitude and demeanor but it looked to me like he was trying to place the ball.
Click to expand...

To see if the draw would clear the three ball on it's way to the rail.
He put the cue ball down, and eyed it up, then picked it back up and the referee determined that was measuring.

Had he been placing it he would have just put the cue ball down and that's it, no call by the ref. But when he set it down and picked it back up, that's when the ref called it.
 
Colin Colenso said:
I'm not sure if it's defined in the rules, but to use the CB to measure where one is actually placing it ought not be a foul imho.

Karl could have been more sympathetic to Ken's plight I think. He made a mistake and humbly attempted to correct it and appease all the relevant parties. I guess pressure plays a role in how players react to some situations.

Colin
Click to expand...

Using anything as a measuring device is a foul in almost all rulesets.

Even laying your cue down on the table to measure a bank or kick or whatnot. If your hand comes off the cue, foul.
 
Celtic said:
This post is freaking ridiculous. He had a very small space to place the cueball and had he touched either the 2 or 3 ball while placing the ball it would have been a foul against him. He is not going to simply walk right up and plunk the ball down into the gap, he is going to hover over it and see how easy it is going to fit and the best way to place it without fouling. That is normal, that is expected.

If you hate Karl fine, you hate Karl, but anyone who actually tries to argue he did anything wrong in this instance when he was attempting to place the cueball is being a biased fool.
Click to expand...
You aren't accurately describing the situation.
When he placed it on the table then picked it back up, the foul was called.
If he was just placing it then why pick it back up?

That was what the referee obviously thought was measuring. But under the lights and cameras, pressure gets to everyone and the referee changed his call. I'm standing by his original assessment.

Also, for Karl to go about placing the ball when the referee was talking to the coaches and not looking was out of order. for sure he got a good look then.
 
mikeyfrost said:
Seriously the US population us much closer to 400 million than 40 million...after that you just lost me
Click to expand...

Rounded off figures....USA ..320 million.....Europe....740 million
The figures I'm arguing against....
...they are using the population of the actual countries the European players come from.
....about 200 million
So using their same method. the actual population of the STATES that the American
Players come from is
...about 40 million

They are cooking the books to make it look like USA has the advantage of a bigger base.
 
Cardigan Kid said:
Also, for Karl to go about placing the ball when the referee was talking to the coaches and not looking was out of order. for sure he got a good look then.
Click to expand...

This is silly. If the ref hadn't incorrectly called the foul in the first place (and then got himself in a flap having a conversation with the world and their mother) Boyes would have placed the ball and shot the shot by then anyway.
 
pt109 said:
Rounded off figures....USA ..320 million.....Europe....740 million
The figures I'm arguing against....
...they are using the population of the actual countries the European players come from.
....about 200 million
So using their same method. the actual population of the STATES that the American
Players come from is
...about 40 million

They are cooking the books to make it look like USA has the advantage of a bigger base.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I absolutely see the statistical "cooking of the books"
 
pt109 said:
Rounded off figures....USA ..320 million.....Europe....740 million
The figures I'm arguing against....
...they are using the population of the actual countries the European players come from.
....about 200 million
So using their same method. the actual population of the STATES that the American
Players come from is
...about 40 million

They are cooking the books to make it look like USA has the advantage of a bigger base.
Click to expand...

Ohh okay I got you now. Very valid argument, we should be able to access a Canadian at least haha!
 
The problem as I see it is that the cue ball only had a small space to be placed into it in order to make the shot. I can't tell you what was going on in Karl's mind but simple logic tells you that he would have to "measure", whether with his eye/mind's estimation, the cue ball or some other method to see if the cue ball could fit in the tight spot and he also has to determine/measure if he can place the cue ball in that spot without touching the surrounding balls.

Ken Shuman felt that Karl was measuring and called a foul. The lifting the cue ball back up is most likely why Ken called the foul because it looked like Karl had decided it was too tight of a spot to place the cue ball.

Once Karl began his protest, he ultimately committed to placing the cue ball in the tight spot.

Ken did the right thing imo but my logic says that Karl was indeed measuring. If Karl decided to not place the cue ball in that spot, Karl's argument that he was trying to place the cue ball would have been a moot point.

Now the other unique question is, what would have happened if Karl had accidentally touched ONE of the impeding balls while he was placing or measuring with the cue ball?

JoeyA

Cardigan Kid said:
And I'm going to take a minute to back up referee Ken Schumann.
Karl was not placing the ball at first.
Watching the replay, Karl takes the cue ball and holds it to the table then lifts it back up at which the referee called foul.
Karl makes a big scene insisting he was placing the ball, but he definitely measured it out at first and picked it back up.
Click to expand...
 
Cardigan Kid said:
To see if the draw would clear the three ball on it's way to the rail.
He put the cue ball down, and eyed it up, then picked it back up and the referee determined that was measuring.

Had he been placing it he would have just put the cue ball down and that's it, no call by the ref. But when he set it down and picked it back up, that's when the ref called it.
Click to expand...

You must either see a different video than the rest of the world or simply being blind! The ref calls the foul and then Boyes picks up the cue ball! The cue ball never really goes off his hand. He is placing the ball, hears the ref calling the foul and pulling it back up!
You have been very specific in your (many) posts about being otherwise while it's not (with a video, at 10:45 on genipool14's video on his channel) You are either blind or very hateful!
 
I don't see what Boyes could be measuring there. You're not measuring if you're trying to see if you can put the cue ball down. You're measuring if you're trying to see if a ball passes a tight spot after being hit.

In that one match:

1. Ken called an illegal lag on Sky - Sky shot after Boyes' ball had hit the far rail. Fine, but then he said "let's just do it again." He should have stuck to his call. There are no take-backsies.
2. He made a dumb call on measuring.
3. He then told Boyes he had to pick the cue ball back up ad re-place it. Where does that rule come from?
4. He later took Boyes' jump cue back to his chair for him and unscrewed it. WTF? Ken is not Boyes' caddy. If Boyes uses house equipment like the bridge, sure, but you don't help a player with his own equipment.

Ken is an experienced ref, but that was a bad performance.
 
Mousa said:
You must either see a different video than the rest of the world or simply being blind! The ref calls the foul and then Boyes picks up the cue ball! The cue ball never really goes off his hand. He is placing the ball, hears the ref calling the foul and pulling it back up!
You have been very specific in your (many) posts about being otherwise while it's not (with a video, at 10:45 on genipool14's video on his channel) You are either blind or very hateful!
Click to expand...

If this is the case, I would love to see a video of this particular timeframe. How about a link. I would like to see it because I missed seeing the beginning of when Boyes was either measuring or placing the cueball.

JoeyA
 
BRussell said:
I don't see what Boyes could be measuring there. You're not measuring if you're trying to see if you can put the cue ball down. You're measuring if you're trying to see if a ball passes a tight spot after being hit.

In that one match:

1. Ken called an illegal lag on Sky - Sky shot after Boyes' ball had hit the far rail. Fine, but then he said "let's just do it again." He should have stuck to his call. There are no take-backsies.
2. He made a dumb call on measuring.
3. He then told Boyes he had to pick the cue ball back up ad re-place it. Where does that rule come from?
4. He later took Boyes' jump cue back to his chair for him and unscrewed it. WTF? Ken is not Boyes' caddy. If Boyes uses house equipment like the bridge, sure, but you don't help a player with his own equipment.

Ken is an experienced ref, but that was a bad performance.
Click to expand...

No matter how good or experienced you are you are gonna ba e moments I call brain farts.

.my boss has bee a plumber for 25 years and has ow wd his own comps g for 20 . He is good at it and other plumbers call him for advice when they encounter problems.

Yesterday he watched me cal a pipe and he then reached over to turn the valve on.

I yelled wtf? Are you doing ? Too late . . The popped off a d water was shooting everywhere before be could then back off.

I asked him wth was he thinking ? He said...i dunno.

Talk about a brain fart after always preaching to me to wait a half hour fot the glue to dry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top