Close. It was in Ho Chi Minh City (before it was renamed) with louvered walls for ventilation. It was good practice for sticky conditions. I don't recall that any of the balls moved but they sure got damp.
My favorite referee moment
- Thread starter easy-e
- Start date
Close. It was in Ho Chi Minh City (before it was renamed) with louvered walls for ventilation. It was good practice for sticky conditions. I don't recall that any of the balls moved but they sure got damp.
I would need more information. In a spot like that I like to question both players separately as to what happened, what balls moved and where they were prior to moving. Only then could I make an informed decision. If there remained any ambiguity, I would not call a foul since I didn't witness the shot. This is one reason why "fouls on all balls" is preferable to "cue ball fouls only." In this case it would clearly be a foul. We are slowly moving in that direction. At least for all major tournaments in the USA. It has long been the rule for most International events.
Last edited:
Hu, this is one option I NEVER liked to avail myself of, for the exact reasons you mention. It's hard to get an unbiased opinion. I have asked for help when a player forgot to mark the score, which has happened quite often.
An interesting referee moment happened to Allen Hopkins in a match that I heard about. A well-known ref, since deceased, told Allen that since he had already placed the cue ball and gotten down to shoot a ball-in-hand shot that Allen could not replace the cue ball -- he had to play it from the original placement.
A TD in a weekly nine ball tournament said that if your opponent was on two fouls and you shot a ball in (to play a better safe on a later ball), your opponent was off his fouls. That same TD seemed to keep forgetting to pay 3rd and 4th place if they didn't ask to be paid.
A TD in a weekly nine ball tournament said that if your opponent was on two fouls and you shot a ball in (to play a better safe on a later ball), your opponent was off his fouls. That same TD seemed to keep forgetting to pay 3rd and 4th place if they didn't ask to be paid.
I witnessed a player with BIH in a major tournament place the cue ball on the table and it touched another ball (it moved slightly). Both players saw it and when the ref was called over he said it was not a foul, that the player could continue to place the cue ball where he wanted. I had to gasp and keep my mouth shut.
I ref'ed a match when in placing the cue ball (with BIH) on the edge of the pocket to shoot the next shot, it dropped in the pocket. I called a foul, over the objections of the offending player. I think I made the right call, but others have told me I didn't. IMO if that's not a foul, then it should be!
There are only a handful of really good pool referees imo.
If a player with BIH places the CB on the playing surface and it then falls into a pocket (your case, I think), I would not call a foul. It's not a scratch, because no "shot" was taken. I'd view it as a "Balls Settling" situation (WPA rules), whereby it is just restored to the edge of the pocket. And the player could even pick it up at that point and place it somewhere else, as he still has BIH.
If a player with BIH drops the CB directly into a pocket or onto the playing surface or onto a rail and it then rolls into a pocket without hitting anything else (apparently not what you are describing), I would not call a foul. There is no penalty for dropping the CB anywhere providing it doesn't hit another ball. The player can pick it up and still has BIH.
Actually I watched him set the cue ball on the table in a precarious position, take his hand off the ball, take another look, then touch it ever so slightly again and cause it to fall into the pocket. In my judgement he had caused the cue ball to be fouled and it was not a case of "settling." That was the first time I had ever seen anything like that and it's entirely possible I made the wrong call. I'm not sure how that's covered in the "rule" book. If it's not specifically covered then it becomes a judgement call. To me it's not that much different than placing the cue ball and touching another ball. You must use care when placing the cue ball on the table and putting it into play imo.
Last edited:
Worse, is when you ask a ref to watch the hit. The hit is obviously bad to the entire audience, yet the ref says it was good.
Thanks for that bit of history. I was at the event but wasn't watching that match. Only heard Lisciotti's account of it. Guess the rule book doesn't have much on how to deal with hurricanes!
The rule book defines a list of fouls. That is not a foul, unless you get very, very creative in the unsportsmanlike conduct section.
The player gained no advantage by the cue ball falling into the pocket and it probably was not his intent. The table could be blamed -- perhaps the slate had been beveled by the pocket.
I remember it well. I was watching it ringside. Melling's reaction was priceless.
Td
I called the tournament director over to watch a very close hit. I was pretty sure the call wouldn't go my way before I shot. I was playing the tournament director at the time!
Hu
I called the tournament director over to watch a very close hit. I was pretty sure the call wouldn't go my way before I shot. I was playing the tournament director at the time!
Hu
Yes- I thought that's was what this was going to be. I was there for the bad behavior and the flowers. I never heard Earl apologize for anything before or since so i think he was given an offer he couldnt refuse by MR-Apologize publicly or pack your bags.This is speculation by me but based on pretty good knowledge of both entities.
Last edited:
I'm a complete banger compared to Melling but I'm a bit surprised he went forward 2 rails given the position of the 5 instead of just drawing back to the long rail.
Maybe with essentially BIH he was able to get the right angle. If the cue ball was a little farther up table he might have been behind the 5.
Maybe with essentially BIH he was able to get the right angle. If the cue ball was a little farther up table he might have been behind the 5.
That all makes sense, and definitely on the all ball fouls. I cant count the number of times I have seen players of all skill levels move a ball and instinctively grab it and put it back. I am 100% in favor of the ABF movement.
Heres another one that sparked my memory. Years ago a good friend of mine was playing Nick Varner in a one pocket tournament and nick had a piggy bank of pennies on the rail. He shoots a shot where again the cueball has to really travel and he inadvertently knocked a penny on to the table which the cueball ended up hitting. I cant remember how they reconciled that one but I do remember both saying that no one knew what to do.
Pretty clearly a foreign object foul. It's a good reason not to leave chalk on the rail where you might knock it off where a ball can hit it.
I agree with Bob here. I've seen chalk knocked onto the table more than once and contact an object ball or the cue ball. Either way it's a foul. I don't how many times I watched a player go to the table with a piece of chalk sitting precariously on the cushion and he totally ignores it. Usually nothing happens, but the fact that they would leave it dangling there is a big mistake in my book.
We had a small local tournament, the final match, it was arbitrated by referee with national license.
Final was a race to 7, alternate break, 8 ball. One of the player got first on the hill, having a 6-2 score. We were something like 10 players on the rail watching and sweating with losing player (our friend). Our losing player start to make a comeback, 6-3, 6-4, 6-5. After each winning game he came to us and give fives to everyone, and we were cheering him. He made it 6-6, break in the last rack and win the match. We were all very happy, and enjoy the moment, when referee suddenly announce that score is 6-6, and the players have to play their last rack.
We try to argue that is not true, the player that was first on the hill, suddenly said that he doesn't know what the score is, and he will do what referee says.
Finally the referee watched the video, and after 30 minutes declare that our friend is the winner.
The reality was referee wasn't care much about the match and didn't pay attention to the score, he's main duty was to rack the balls.
Final was a race to 7, alternate break, 8 ball. One of the player got first on the hill, having a 6-2 score. We were something like 10 players on the rail watching and sweating with losing player (our friend). Our losing player start to make a comeback, 6-3, 6-4, 6-5. After each winning game he came to us and give fives to everyone, and we were cheering him. He made it 6-6, break in the last rack and win the match. We were all very happy, and enjoy the moment, when referee suddenly announce that score is 6-6, and the players have to play their last rack.
We try to argue that is not true, the player that was first on the hill, suddenly said that he doesn't know what the score is, and he will do what referee says.
Finally the referee watched the video, and after 30 minutes declare that our friend is the winner.
The reality was referee wasn't care much about the match and didn't pay attention to the score, he's main duty was to rack the balls.