Nice story from az front page
- Thread starter Joe T
- Start date
In view of other threads discussing the luck factor and Earl's infamous foul, I thought this quote was interesting:
"The finals table had been racking and breaking badly all day, and in the final, referee Chris Billings had a very tough job on his hands freezing the rack. To his great credit he gave it his full attention and dedication, but after taking a full FIVE MINUTES to rack the 18th game to the required standard, Gray broke and the 9-ball slid directly into the corner pocket, thus giving Gray a commanding 2 rack lead AND the break for what could be the final game.
It was at this point that the most magnanimous gesture I have ever seen in professional pool occurred.
In an outstanding gesture of sportsmanship, Gray offered a re-rack to Daryl Peach. Peach accepted immediately and after a brief consultation with the referee, the balls were racked again.
To be fair, this exact same situation occurred three times at this event to my knowledge, but I've never seen it happen in a final before when the money is so high and the ranking rewards so important."
"The finals table had been racking and breaking badly all day, and in the final, referee Chris Billings had a very tough job on his hands freezing the rack. To his great credit he gave it his full attention and dedication, but after taking a full FIVE MINUTES to rack the 18th game to the required standard, Gray broke and the 9-ball slid directly into the corner pocket, thus giving Gray a commanding 2 rack lead AND the break for what could be the final game.
It was at this point that the most magnanimous gesture I have ever seen in professional pool occurred.
In an outstanding gesture of sportsmanship, Gray offered a re-rack to Daryl Peach. Peach accepted immediately and after a brief consultation with the referee, the balls were racked again.
To be fair, this exact same situation occurred three times at this event to my knowledge, but I've never seen it happen in a final before when the money is so high and the ranking rewards so important."
There you go. Gray ended up losing the match, congrats! Now he's probably half drunk, thinking......would Peach have re-racked if he made the 9 on the break?? Well probably not, congrats though everyone thinks your a nice guy 
Purdman
Banned
Poolislife said:There you go. Gray ended up losing the match, congrats! Now he's probably half drunk, thinking......would Peach have re-racked if he made the 9 on the break?? Well probably not, congrats though everyone thinks your a nice guy
It is not about being a "nice guy", it's about honesty and integrity Poolislife. What don't you understand about that? Winning isn't everything.
One of the best outfielders for the Baltimore Orioles caught a fly ball and a kid in the stands asked him if he could have it. The player gave the kid a dirty look and turned around and threw the ball back to the second baseman. A guy in the stands stood up and yelled, "It's nice to be important but it is more important to be nice". That's how I feel about it.
Purdman
My Gosh Almighty
What a gesture, but in my opinion, not one to be made in a high dollar high profile event. Just as their are rules in tournaments not to concede
9 balls in games, this gesture takes it one step further and concessions a game, and as it turned out the whole matcfh.
I wonder how the outcome would be viewed if their were Vegas odds on the match. Gee, I hit a home run, but you threw it down the middle, can I do it over?
Was this Sportsmanship or throwing the match Peach's way? This type of behavior is NOT TOLERATED in other professional sports, so the question here is why did the referee allow it here? Is part of the rules, when you have an independent racker, and make the 9 on the break, that you get to do it over. What if he had not made anything, would he get to do it
over? I think not ...
This does not leave a warm and fuzzy feeling with me, its disturbing.
What a gesture, but in my opinion, not one to be made in a high dollar high profile event. Just as their are rules in tournaments not to concede
9 balls in games, this gesture takes it one step further and concessions a game, and as it turned out the whole matcfh.
I wonder how the outcome would be viewed if their were Vegas odds on the match. Gee, I hit a home run, but you threw it down the middle, can I do it over?
Was this Sportsmanship or throwing the match Peach's way? This type of behavior is NOT TOLERATED in other professional sports, so the question here is why did the referee allow it here? Is part of the rules, when you have an independent racker, and make the 9 on the break, that you get to do it over. What if he had not made anything, would he get to do it
over? I think not ...
This does not leave a warm and fuzzy feeling with me, its disturbing.
maybe some dumping involved????
Poolislife said:There you go. Gray ended up losing the match, congrats! Now he's probably half drunk, thinking......would Peach have re-racked if he made the 9 on the break?? Well probably not, congrats though everyone thinks your a nice guy
What is more important to you, being thought of as a good player or a good person? Most people would rather be thought of as a good person first, judging by your post I think I know what is more important to you
PIL, Snappy, and Kilo,
You are showing your boorish American attitudes. These guys are Brits and very much gentlemen. I can imagine the conversation went something like this:
Gray: "I say, old chap, it appears as though I've gone and potted the 9 on the break. What a foul stroke of luck. Let's rerack and start again, to be fair."
Peach: "Nay, nay, good sir, it is entirely within the rules that this is the way things should be."
Gray: "Ah, but I must insist. I would never feel right if I should win this match on such a play. I refuse to win a game in such manner. Pray, let us rerack and start the game again."
Peach: "You, sir, are indeed a fine fellow. In the interest of protecting your honor, I will concede the issue and we shall recommence posthaste."
During last year's World snooker championsips, one of the players accidentally brushed one of the balls with his sleeve. It didn't move, but he immediately called a foul on himself and turned the table over to his opponent. I think we all could use a little more honor and integrity, especially on the pool table. Unfortunately, American society seems to be headed in the opposite direction. I'm with Purdman...
You are showing your boorish American attitudes. These guys are Brits and very much gentlemen. I can imagine the conversation went something like this:
Gray: "I say, old chap, it appears as though I've gone and potted the 9 on the break. What a foul stroke of luck. Let's rerack and start again, to be fair."
Peach: "Nay, nay, good sir, it is entirely within the rules that this is the way things should be."
Gray: "Ah, but I must insist. I would never feel right if I should win this match on such a play. I refuse to win a game in such manner. Pray, let us rerack and start the game again."
Peach: "You, sir, are indeed a fine fellow. In the interest of protecting your honor, I will concede the issue and we shall recommence posthaste."
During last year's World snooker championsips, one of the players accidentally brushed one of the balls with his sleeve. It didn't move, but he immediately called a foul on himself and turned the table over to his opponent. I think we all could use a little more honor and integrity, especially on the pool table. Unfortunately, American society seems to be headed in the opposite direction. I'm with Purdman...
Your comments
were superfulous to the situation. I am a good player because I am
a good person. What others fail to realize, is that Gray decided it
was an unfair break, and he influenced the match for a rebreak, therefore
giving Peach an actual unfair advantage for victory. HE IS NOT THE ONE
TO DO THAT, THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE OFFICIALS FOR SPORTS.
So what if the table was breaking hard? The independent racker took
5 minutes, but got them racked, and I am sure they were racked right, so
what could possibly justify REBREAKING.
It is like when you are breaking, and you accidently touch the cueball
with your tip on warmup strokes, some guys will say go ahead and do it
again (good sports), but the rules say over the line and it is your
opponents option, THAT'S THE RULES, so when your opponent takes
the cueball and breaks, you can not cry that that was unfair.
Rules are rules, and I expect professional events to adhere to them, not
make exceptions to them. How do you know there weren't several high dollar side bets on the match? If I was Peach, I would feel that the victory was a little hollow.
How is this any different than a player calling a foul on himself when he
didn't actually foul, and giving ball in hand to his opponent. That's why officials are there. Extreme example, I know, but appropriate for my
argument.
sniper said:What is more important to you, being thought of as a good player or a good person? Most people would rather be thought of as a good person first, judging by your post I think I know what is more important to you
were superfulous to the situation. I am a good player because I am
a good person. What others fail to realize, is that Gray decided it
was an unfair break, and he influenced the match for a rebreak, therefore
giving Peach an actual unfair advantage for victory. HE IS NOT THE ONE
TO DO THAT, THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE OFFICIALS FOR SPORTS.
So what if the table was breaking hard? The independent racker took
5 minutes, but got them racked, and I am sure they were racked right, so
what could possibly justify REBREAKING.
It is like when you are breaking, and you accidently touch the cueball
with your tip on warmup strokes, some guys will say go ahead and do it
again (good sports), but the rules say over the line and it is your
opponents option, THAT'S THE RULES, so when your opponent takes
the cueball and breaks, you can not cry that that was unfair.
Rules are rules, and I expect professional events to adhere to them, not
make exceptions to them. How do you know there weren't several high dollar side bets on the match? If I was Peach, I would feel that the victory was a little hollow.
How is this any different than a player calling a foul on himself when he
didn't actually foul, and giving ball in hand to his opponent. That's why officials are there. Extreme example, I know, but appropriate for my
argument.
A well written and entertaining article from Big Dave !!
I just don't understand. Would Gray have been dishonest if he didn't ask for a rerack?Purdman said:
I totally agree with Snapshot on this one. I wouldn't call it "disturbing", but more "WTF?"
Gray made the 9 ball on a clean rack. Why should he not accept the rack won? How is this any different than breaking the balls, and having a nice 1-9 combination show up right there on a silver platter? Would he be commended by his "sportsmanship" with this scenario? What if he asked for a rerack just because he had an open shot on the 1 ball? Where does it stop?
I'm not going to doubt that Gray asked for a rerack because he thought it was the most "sportsmanlike" thing to do. Maybe making the 9 ball on the break is looked down upon in England as being a very cheap win.
But how can Peach accept the rerack request? To me, that's actually unsportsmanlike. IMO, we shouldn't be focusing on Gray's sportsmanship for asking for a rerack, but Peach's unsportmanship for accepting the rerack.
Maybe I'm not understanding this situation completely. Let me know if I'm missing something.
Last edited:
jsp said:
Gray is a world class snooker player, not really a 9-ball player. So I figure he thought this was a cheap win, not really knowing that it is something 9-ball players hope for and always take with glee.
So I tend to agree that Daryl shouldn't have accepted the re-rack, unless there was clearly something wrong with the rack.
sniper said:What is more important to you, being thought of as a good player or a good person? Most people would rather be thought of as a good person first, judging by your post I think I know what is more important to you
Well to be honest, yeah I'd rather have a pocket full of cash than to have some shmo think I was a good person because I GAVE a game away. Whats next....."ohh I think that table rolled a bit and hooked you, here you go you can move that ball and take a clear shot?" or "ohh damn, I missed that shot and hooked you, thats not fair, lets start this game over!"
LOL
I'm certain that this situation has cropped up many, many times in local tournaments.
There is a (long) thread discussing this situation as well as many opinions on the 'clean 9-ball' on http://www.pro9.co.uk/html/viewtopic.php?forum=1&topic=204&start=0
Have a read through the comments. It would be interesting to hear everyone else's view on this.
BS
There is a (long) thread discussing this situation as well as many opinions on the 'clean 9-ball' on http://www.pro9.co.uk/html/viewtopic.php?forum=1&topic=204&start=0
Have a read through the comments. It would be interesting to hear everyone else's view on this.
BS
There are at least some good points raised in this thread, I agree that Daryl prob shouldn't have accepted the rerack but I wasn't there so its hard to comment on what was said. However from reading other reports it seems that players in other matches had done the same, some even agreeing that 9's off the break wouldn't count because the tables where so bad and hard to rack.
I'm no racking expert but I always thought that if the 9 ball goes into the pocket WITHOUT being kicked then the balls where not racked correctly? If this was the case then I cancertainly understand where Mark is coming from,and why he offered the rerack.
PS
Not really the point I know but why the 9 ball isn't spotted after the break if it made like 8 ball has always been beyond me - anyone?
I'm no racking expert but I always thought that if the 9 ball goes into the pocket WITHOUT being kicked then the balls where not racked correctly? If this was the case then I cancertainly understand where Mark is coming from,and why he offered the rerack.
PS
Not really the point I know but why the 9 ball isn't spotted after the break if it made like 8 ball has always been beyond me - anyone?
As mentioned in the article, since the tables were so bad, it took the referee a full five minutes to rack the balls. It sounds like the players' had a "gentleman's agreement" that making the 9 on the break wouldn't count. Consequently, offering a rerack was consistent with the gentleman's agreement and probably shouldn't the big deal that we're making it out to be.TheOne said:
I remember in the early days when I used to play snooker, I was taught to do whatever I could to make sure my opponent could play his best game without any disturbance from me. I was taught that these behavor was to ensure the player with the better skill would win. A victory, in this sense, would be truly fair and meaningful.
I am always under the impression that in the true sense of playing a gentlemen's game, the pride of having acted as a gentleman, is sometimes more important than the victory itself.
It is about the integrity and honesty of a player, and such calibers are not judged and measured solely by who has won the game.
I think it is because of the conscience of wanting to play his best game in order to achieve a fair and well deserved victory that Gary decided to rerack.
I do not believe he would blame himself for that decision after he has lost, as his decision was not motivated by trying to win the match; it was motivated by "may the player with the best skill win."
I am not sure why his opponent would accept the gesture, but I also do not see how he could have refused to, if Gary really insisted.
I can understand how anyone who have bet on the match would feel about the rerack, it would give me a heart attack if I was betting on Gary.
At the same time, I cannot help but admire his character of putting his conscience before the win. It takes a lot of character and self respect to do what he did.
Just my opinion.
Richard
I am always under the impression that in the true sense of playing a gentlemen's game, the pride of having acted as a gentleman, is sometimes more important than the victory itself.
It is about the integrity and honesty of a player, and such calibers are not judged and measured solely by who has won the game.
I think it is because of the conscience of wanting to play his best game in order to achieve a fair and well deserved victory that Gary decided to rerack.
I do not believe he would blame himself for that decision after he has lost, as his decision was not motivated by trying to win the match; it was motivated by "may the player with the best skill win."
I am not sure why his opponent would accept the gesture, but I also do not see how he could have refused to, if Gary really insisted.
I can understand how anyone who have bet on the match would feel about the rerack, it would give me a heart attack if I was betting on Gary.
At the same time, I cannot help but admire his character of putting his conscience before the win. It takes a lot of character and self respect to do what he did.
Just my opinion.
Richard
Last edited: