Why do we use the term "technically" when talking about rules in pool when there is no gray area in other sports? Either the rule was broken or it wasn't. I can't think of another scenario in sports where the ref steps in to prevent a competitor from breaking a rule which would incur a penalty.
Mosconi Cup: Did the Referee make and error ?
- Thread starter stephen_joyce
- Start date
Why do we use the term "technically" when talking about rules in pool when there is no gray area in other sports? Either the rule was broken or it wasn't. I can't think of another scenario in sports where the ref steps in to prevent a competitor from breaking a rule which would incur a penalty.
Here is the shot in question...
http://youtu.be/81n****VItw?t=32m26s
IMO, there is no excuse for the referee to do something so unprofessional.
EDIT: Lol, the link has asterisks because the code has the f-word in it. Just capitalize the F, C, K and make the u lower-case.
http://youtu.be/81n****VItw?t=32m26s
IMO, there is no excuse for the referee to do something so unprofessional.
EDIT: Lol, the link has asterisks because the code has the f-word in it. Just capitalize the F, C, K and make the u lower-case.
Last edited:
'Marvel' & 'mjantti'...... Yes, it was so long ago (2003) since I seen that match that I forgot what the whole situation was about.... Thanks for clearing that up.
Still getting back to this situation, the referee (Nigel Rees) should of not picked up the cue and a foul should of been called when the cue ball hit the cue. I do believe that the same referee (N. Rees) was the one who called the foul on Morris. He & Michaela Tabb were refereeing that tournament back in 2003.
Still getting back to this situation, the referee (Nigel Rees) should of not picked up the cue and a foul should of been called when the cue ball hit the cue. I do believe that the same referee (N. Rees) was the one who called the foul on Morris. He & Michaela Tabb were refereeing that tournament back in 2003.
There are certain fouls that should never be called, and this is one of them. Another "foul" you often see is a player touching the cue ball before it stops rolling after making the nine ball, and it happens even in the World 9-ball Championships. I've never seen it called.
The are times when basic sportsmanship must supercede the letter of the law.
The are times when basic sportsmanship must supercede the letter of the law.
If there is no neutral referee and the players are in charge of calling fouls on themselves, then I would agree with you.
But if a neutral referee is present (as in the case here), then the referee should do the job he/she is paid to do, which is to strictly call the match based on the rules. For a neutral referee, there should be no such thing as gray area.
I saw that Nikos, upon potting the winning 9, also laid his cue on the table. He was instantly rushed by his team members and almost didn't have time to pick his cue up.
The cue ball was also still in motion.
The cue ball was also still in motion.
In any rule book I've ever read the cue ball is always live until it comes to a stop after the last ball is potted. I suppose that in a b lack and white world this is a foul, but as The Mosconi Cup is more of an exhibition that an actual match I believe the referee made the correct no-call. If it would have meant something on some level then maybe you push the rule, but gee wiz, this ought to be kept friendly. That being said though, I wish they would establish some sort of unwritten rule that you acknowledge your opponent before celebrating with your team mates. To me that's just rude.
Old Nine Baller
Banned
Do you really need to ask if this is wrong? Niels is an imbecile and the ref is a bigger imbecile. He's got no business touching a player's cue.
ONB
I want to see it called just for the drama and look of disbelief that will ensue
I bet it would break him from the habit
If the ref left the cue on the table such that the CB hit the cue (which in this case would have definitely happened), would a no-call still be correct? If you still think so, then exactly how fast would the CB have to travel upon hitting the cue for a no-call not be correct?
Well stated, but the problem is that the needed level of specificity might be hard to get at when rewriting the rules.
For example, if a player that has just made the nine picks up a cue ball when it still has enough speed to possibly scratch into a pocket, a foul is surely in order .... but how much further a rolling cue ball might travel is a matter of opinion and a possible area of dispute in an un-refereed match. To avoid a grey area, the rule needs to be what it is today.
... but my feeling remains that occasional, discretionary, bending of the rule in the name of good sportsmanship is in the best interests of the game.
There should be no bending of the rules....... Rules are set there for a reason..... No matter what some people think about the Mosconi Cup..... it is a serious tournament with high pressure levels. All rules should be followed. That cue would of hit that cue stick if not for that referee...... a foul would of been the correct call.
Yes, 14.1 man, that would also be a nice change in straight pool. The were about five instances of a "serious foul" in this year's 14.1 event at Steinway Billiards, and that's based on what I saw first hand. Not one of them was enforced. Serious fouls normally carry a sixteen point penalty and a re-rack with the infracting player to break.
In my opinion, the game that seems to enforce "letter of the law" with greatest consistency is one pocket.
I think bob meant ignorant, not stupid. I can't tell what you mean to say.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are ignorant of the rules, which is stupid, since they are readily available.