OKay - This referee thing has gone too far!

[rackmsuckr]

I'm really torn where the "***Official*** unwritten code of ethics of all billiard and pool players" ends and where the official rules of the league/tournament begin.

On one hand, I play in leagues because the rules are the rules, everyone knows them, and follows them.

But on the other hand, people talk about the IPT ref who used his own judgment about a rolling cue ball being picked up right before a dead stop, to NOT call a foul.

How about the ref who DID call foul on Allison Fisher for positioning the cue ball prior to breaking? We all know that this is a wishy washy mamby pambly rule, and nobody anywhere ever would call a foul as per the "Unwritten rules".

But my point is this; we give a ref too much power when the are playing judge, jury and prosecutor by allowing them when to apply the rules, and when not to.

IMO, if you MUST, playing the strict text of the rules is the best way to avoid conflict. That's why they are there.

The strict text of the rule was to call the first occurrence a warning, with subsequent infractions being loss of game. My husband got cheated out of a game, which was a 2 game swing.

And Tommy Joe, as far as the rules being blatantly manipulated, the all ball foul can be just as manipulated. Someone can say an opponent's hair, shirt, etc. touched a ball and then what? If there was no ref, does it go to the shooter or can anyone manufacture that foul at any time? What about when they actually MOVE a ball and the ref is standing right there, as was the case when I played Sigel? Seems to me, whichever way the rules are written, they are left open to a LOT of interpretation.

 

[Snorks]

My opinion:

1. You got robbed in the sense that the player should of had the integrity to give you BIH, and the Tournament Director obviously made the wrong call..

2. Once the TD made the wrong call, you had to live by his ruling and obviously this is hard to do. This happened at a critical point in a year end here... the referee made the wrong call... everyone knew it was the wrong call, but it was his call to make. I think if you had of been able to get past the TD's call, you probably would of still beat him. Be the bigger person, accept the TD ruling (even though it's wrong), and continue.

Take it up with the owner next time you see him and have the TD there also. Hopefully this never happens again. Oh ya, and for that player, make an ass of him next time by being as loud as you can and saying something like:
"I would never ruin my reputation by blatently cheating in a pool game. You obviously don't care about your reputation, and will cheat just to win. That really shows everyone your true character now doesn't it..."

 

[Andrew Manning]

I haven't seen a good pool game in person in years but watch them when they show up on tv. First time I saw a ref wearing those white surgical type gloves I said to myself, "What's up with the gloves, what is this, a professional boxing match or what?" Now I know why the refs wear those stupid looking gloves - in case the players get violent and a boxing match breaks out.

Tommy Joe

They're not surgical gloves, they're cloth gloves, used to clean chalk off balls during the rack. You'll sometimes see a player call a ref over to clean a ball because there's a chunk of chalk on the ball near the contact point, which is something that can dramatically screw up a shot. They wear gloves so they don't need to carry a rag or towel.

-Andrew

 

[vagabond]

I haven't seen a good pool game in person in years but watch them when they show up on tv. First time I saw a ref wearing those white surgical type gloves I said to myself, "What's up with the gloves, what is this, a professional boxing match or what?" Now I know why the refs wear those stupid looking gloves - in case the players get violent and a boxing match breaks out.

Tommy Joe

Hi,
I am very strict with laws.I obey the laws whether they were right or wrong .I strongly believe that there should NOT be any room for wiggling.Once we allow that wiggling it becomes a slippery slope.
I pick the cue ball only when it comes to a dead stop even if it is one foot away from the pocket.

 

[ScottW]

It sucks that there are people out there who will cheat whenever given the opportunity.

 

[Schmohawk]

They're not surgical gloves, they're cloth gloves, used to clean chalk off balls during the rack. You'll sometimes see a player call a ref over to clean a ball because there's a chunk of chalk on the ball near the contact point, which is something that can dramatically screw up a shot. They wear gloves so they don't need to carry a rag or towel.

-Andrew

The WPBA ref just smudges the spots off with his fingers.

 

[vagabond]

Seems to me, whichever way the rules are written, they are left open to a LOT of interpretation.

In the past I mentioned that in my opinion that the framers of rules ( With the exception of the Billiards digest contributor from Bay area,CA) in pool appear to be:
A) lacking knowledge of rules for making the rules ( falls under Administrative Law)
B) Lacking basic skills in English language
C) Lacking awareness of variables that will be prsented in a situation
D) Lacking common sense

 

[vagabond]

Someone can say an opponent's hair, shirt, etc. touched a ball and then what?

Bullies do that all the time

 

[Cuebacca]

Hi,
I am very strict with laws.I obey the laws whether they were right or wrong .I strongly believe that there should NOT be any room for wiggling.Once we allow that wiggling it becomes a slippery slope.
I pick the cue ball only when it comes to a dead stop even if it is one foot away from the pocket.

Me too. When I win a game, I don't see any reason to pick up the cue ball before it stops. It doesn't really save any time anyway. If my opponent starts racking, that shows they are satisfied and I'll pick up the cue ball at that time.

Does it really matter if there is no way it will scratch? What is the difference between that and this... Before I take a shot, I reach for the chalk, my shirt clearly brushes the cue ball but the cue ball does not move. Thats a foul, period. But it had absolutely no effect on the outcome of game. Why should I be called a foul for it? Well, because you aren't allowed to touch the cue ball, until the money ball drops and the cue ball stops.

That said, I personally have never called anyone on it, but I don't see a problem with it being called. Eventually it will become accepted and people will stop doing it. I just don't want to be the one to have to "make an example out of someone". I'm glad Vagabond, that you have the courage to stand up and do the right thing, even though many people probably don't see it that way.

 

[Cuebacca]

It contrast to my opinion in my previous post, I feel that what happened to you, Scott, is total BS. The tournament director, in my opinion, should have at least asked the guy, "well, did YOU see a ball hit a rail after contact?". If the guy said "well, no, I didn't see a ball hit a rail", then that's a foul whether a ref was watching or not.

If he said, "yes, I did hit a rail after contact", then that's a little tougher. Then its his word against yours (and unfortunately, he's a liar). If it can be proven that he was lying, he should be tossed for unsportsmanlike conduct. I guess somehow in his mind, he's not lying, he's trying to exploit the rules to his advantage. Either way, he's being unsportsman-like. If he's not willing to lie about it, then I guess technically he's not lying, but he's still being dishonest or else completely dense to the point of being a moron. In pool, there is no such a thing as the 5th amendment (if there is a ref watching, then that is a debate for another thread).

What he might not understand is that the rule, "arguments go to the shooter" does not mean that the shooter keeps shooting until the ref sees a foul. It means that when the two players honestly disagree on what they saw happen, and the ref didn't see it, then it goes to the shooter. Big difference!!

What I'd be tempted to do, Scott, is next time you play him, call a ref for EVERY single shot he takes. Even when he breaks, call a ref, "I'd like to have this hit watched, because there is a chance that you won't hit the one, and you have proven that you won't even obvious fouls on yourself." What else can you do to protect yourself? Its totally rediculous.

 

[gromulan]

classiest thing i ever saw

I have said many times that pool has this happen too much because the standard for refereeing shots is incorrect. The general rule is that if no referee is present, then a disputed call goes to the shooter. In fact it should be the exact opposite, any disputed call should be a foul!!

Then, if you were shooting any shot where there was even a remote chance there could be a foul, you would make darn sure there was a referee aroudn to watch it.

The ideal situation would be that referees watched every shot as in snooker and billiards, but that will never happen in pool.


The greatest thing I ever saw was in a golf tournament a few years ago where Davis Love III was competing. He needed to win a tournament with only 5 weeks to go before the Masters in order to secure an invitation. If he didn't, he wouldn't get in.

So he was playing in a tournament, and leading it, when he inadvertedly moved his golf ball during address while he was in the rough. He was the only person in the world who knew that it happened and he immediately declared a penalty on himself, which cost him two strokes, and he ended up losing the tournament.

Later he was interviewed and they asked him about it and he said (paraphrased), "I knew what was going to happen when I called the penalty, but I knew that if I won the tournament I would get into the Masters. But if that happened, and then I ended up winning the Masters, I would always have it on my concience that I won the Masters by cheating, and I just wouldn't have been able to live with that." If ever you wonder what it means to have class, just remember that quote.

Love won the next tournament he played in (after flushing a 2 iron second shot on a par 5 about 225 yards to six feet and making eagle on the 17th hole) and got in the Masters, but he didn't win it.

 

[sniper]

why this refusal to follow the law. It does n`t matter whether the cue is going towards the pocket or not.I go by the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.One time I was playing a money game with one of those past US Open 9 ball champions.He picked the cue ball before it came to a stop.I put the score in my favor and I told him that I didn`t give a dam for his status in pool hirarchy and he broke the law and I am taking the game.He knew not to mess with me because I will be waiting for him in the Parking lot.

That was a pretty classy move on your part.


Scott, it's unfortunate what some players will do just to try and get ahead in a measly $20 tournament. If the tournament is that poorly run I would just tell the room owner about the issues and hopefully he/she will take care of it. If not I'm sure it isn't the only good tournament around your parts.

 

[Snapshot9]

Tournament

That was a pretty classy move on your part.


Scott, it's unfortunate what some players will do just to try and get ahead in a measly $20 tournament. If the tournament is that poorly run I would just tell the room owner about the issues and hopefully he/she will take care of it. If not I'm sure it isn't the only good tournament around your parts.

This was the best tournament around at the time, and it is not a problem with the room or the owner. The owner is a very good and classy player himself, but he left after the calcutta, and the tournament director (and employee) is a young guy that's played 2-3 years, a 5, and not that knowledgable about the rules. He is a nice guy, about 300 lbs, and a teddy bear personality. The problem ONLY exists because of this one player and who was my opponent, and with whom we kind of have an adversarial relationship. You would have to experience this player for yourself to really know what I meant. He is a very good player, and not a bad guy when you are just bullshitting, plays enhanced a lot, but takes great delight in punctuating his better shots and wins .... a lot. I used to beat him pretty regular, but he plays better now (he is about 36), and it is a toss up anytime we are matched up on the table.

 

[rackmsuckr]

I have said many times that pool has this happen too much because the standard for refereeing shots is incorrect. The general rule is that if no referee is present, then a disputed call goes to the shooter. In fact it should be the exact opposite, any disputed call should be a foul!!

Then, if you were shooting any shot where there was even a remote chance there could be a foul, you would make darn sure there was a referee aroudn to watch it.

The ideal situation would be that referees watched every shot as in snooker and billiards, but that will never happen in pool.
QUOTE]

Yes, that would be the ideal situation, but refs aren't paid all that much, especially for a $20 tournament, and people should have the integrity to call fouls on themselves anyway.

If all disputed calls were automatically a foul, that would give even more license for dishonest people to manipulate the system, calling fouls on every shot..or at least waiting until the ref had their back turned!

 

[Bob Jewett]

... If all disputed calls were automatically a foul, that would give even more license for dishonest people to manipulate the system, calling fouls on every shot..or at least waiting until the ref had their back turned!

While that might happen once or twice, pretty soon people would know what kind of player the foul caller was, and he wouldn't be in any more tournaments.

Or at least I hope that's what the TD would do.

A main point here is that it is the shooter who is in the best position to know when a shot is likely to be questionable, and it should be up to him to stop and call someone over to watch. The opponent sometimes doesn't know when the shot will be close, and if he calls someone over on every potential problem shot, the shooter will think it's to distract him. I've seen plenty of shooters who shoot fast so there will be no time to call someone over.

 

[JoeyA]

I had a situation in a tournament last Friday night that I am not happy with at all, and will be voicing my complaint to the room owner.

I was playing in a $20 entry 9 ball tournament, short race to 5, no handicaps, with a calcutta with 16 players. I won my first 2 matches and was playing in the quarterfinals on the winners side to see who would be playing in the semi's on the winners side.

Here was the situation. I was playing another player that is very good, a lefty, that shoots about Luc Salvas's speed, both in Tempo and skill level.
This player is very gregarious type personality, and gets extremely loud sometimes. He is also a very good winner, and voices his enthusiasm for such, and a very poor loser, especially to anyone that he himself does not recognize as being clearly better than him. He sometimes gets to going too fast, and will make a mistake or two that will cost him against a real good player, but often gets away with it with lessor players.

I was leading in the match, 4-2, and he approached the table to shoot the 4 with no pocket to go to. The 5 was right beside the 4 to the left a little, so he elected to shoot the 4 into the 9, not to make the 9 really, but to hide the 4 behind the 5. He intended to roll up behind the 5 with the cue ball hooking me on the 4. Well, there didn't look to be any problem playing the shot, but he shot too easy and neither the 4 nor the 9 ball hit a rail, so I called a foul on him. The resulting layout left me with an almost straight in 4-9 combination in the corner, the 9 only being about
5-6" from the corner pocket. He immediately got loud and started rushing around, like he always does when he is getting beat, and claimed I could not call a foul because a referee had not watched the shot, and went up to the tournament director to ask him. Now, on my side, the guy that bought me in the calcutta was watching me play and said there was no rail, and another spectator I know (and he knows) said there was no rail hit. The tournament director said it was no foul because a referee didn't watch the shot.

This is absolutely INSANE because many shots are shot where there is no real danger of a foul, but players make mistakes,and a foul occurs and one player gets ball in hand as a result. I lodged an official protest to the tournament director, more or less told him what I thought of his ridiculous ruling, and told him I would be talking to the room owner (who is much much more experienced with Pool than the tournament director). My opponent carried and carried on loudly protesting it was not a foul because no referee was there, so I said the hell with it, and went ahead and shot. Well, it turned out, he won that game, and 2 more to win the match from me, but only after 'cheating' me out of my ball in hand on the obvious foul he comitted. I refused to let the issue die, and told him I would replay the end of the match over from 3-3 or a race to 2.

We went back and forth, then he said we would just play the match over, which I thought he meant the complete match over, but when he jumped up 2-0, he said he won (he got breaks in first 2 games with combos).
Anyway, I gave in since I said to replay from 3-3, but he knew he fouled in the original match, but still took the win.

I was on my way to a rematch with him for the winner of the loser's bracket, but derailed myself on the match before when I let down on 2 shots that swung the match away from me, so I ended up taking 4th, and the other guy took 2nd (where I probably would have been).

The tournament had several strong players in it (they all turned out for the first no handicap tournament in a long time). Jr. Brown showed up to play after being absent from the Pool scene here for a long time, and won the tournament, shooting pretty good, BTW.

My point is this: Players claiming no foul after obviously committing a foul just because no referee watched the shot is BULLSHIT. Before refs, the opponent called all fouls, and if contended was debated and resolved between the players. To me, this type of player undermines the whole purpose of rules of the game to begin with, and yes, he only cares about winning - nothing else. I don't mind losing a good match, but I do not want to be cheated out of it. I know about 'pushing' the rules sometimes, but this was a downright blatant usurping of the rules, IMO.

I once had a similar problem with a professional pool player where the cue ball nor any object ball had not hit a rail. I called a foul and he bellowed that he had hit a rail arguing rather viciously but I would not be deterred. After physical threats were made by the player and arguing reached a crescendo, the tournament director made her way over to the table we were playing at where she inquired to me as to what the problem was. I loudly and firmly said "So and so" made a shot, the cue ball nor any object ball on the table hit a rail, he owes a ball AND HE'S GOING TO PAY A BALL. AFter quizzing the audience she could not get one person to side with the pro (others said he did not hit a rail) and she talked with the pro and then I went on to finish giving him the spanking he deserved.
JoeyA

 

[gromulan]

While that might happen once or twice, pretty soon people would know what kind of player the foul caller was, and he wouldn't be in any more tournaments.

Or at least I hope that's what the TD would do.

A main point here is that it is the shooter who is in the best position to know when a shot is likely to be questionable, and it should be up to him to stop and call someone over to watch. The opponent sometimes doesn't know when the shot will be close, and if he calls someone over on every potential problem shot, the shooter will think it's to distract him. I've seen plenty of shooters who shoot fast so there will be no time to call someone over.

Exactly right. I think that a change in the disputed call rule would do a lot for unrefereed matches.

There's a similar situation in pool where if a referee cannot tell if a foul was committed, the call goes to the shooter. This should also be reversed, as in snooker, where any time a referee can't tell if a close hit was a foul or not, it's a foul! Then if you're shooting a shot that could be close, you better make sure you hit it in such a way so as there's no doubt.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... as in snooker, where any time a referee can't tell if a close hit was a foul or not, it's a foul! Then if you're shooting a shot that could be close, you better make sure you hit it in such a way so as there's no doubt.

How about the following. Set up the shot by putting the cue ball on the spot. Freeze the eight ball and the nine ball to the cue ball so each is in a staight line to a near corner pocket. The 8-cue-9 should form a right angle.

Move the cue ball straight up the table and shoot it back to the spot. With luck both balls will go into the corner pockets. You may have to compensate a little for throw by putting the balls a little "wider". Can you tell which object ball was struck first?

This is a really neat shot. Try it.

In the current pool rules, such shots are not fouls. I assume it would be a foul in snooker.

But there is a shot at snooker in which the player gets the benefit of the doubt. When the cue ball is very nearly touching a ball, the player is permitted to play a fine hit even though the cue tip may still be on the cue ball when the cue ball strikes the object ball.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... he bellowed that he had hit a rail arguing rather viciously but I would not be deterred. After physical threats were made by the player and arguing reached a crescendo, the tournament director made her way over to the table ...

I hope she referred to BCA/WPA Rule 1.18.1:

Rule 1.18.1 Earnest Discussions
When an earnest discussion breaks out in an unrefereed match, the ruling will go against the player who can be heard more clearly from the other side of the room.​

 

[gromulan]

How about the following. Set up the shot by putting the cue ball on the spot. Freeze the eight ball and the nine ball to the cue ball so each is in a staight line to a near corner pocket. The 8-cue-9 should form a right angle.

Move the cue ball straight up the table and shoot it back to the spot. With luck both balls will go into the corner pockets. You may have to compensate a little for throw by putting the balls a little "wider". Can you tell which object ball was struck first?

This is a really neat shot. Try it.

In the current pool rules, such shots are not fouls. I assume it would be a foul in snooker.

If the referee couldn't tell which ball was hit first, it would be a foul. That beinig said, I've never seen one actually make a mistake on that, and I've dealt with some pretty lousy referees

However, I do like the fact that, in snooker, the onus is on the player to sort of 'prove' that he should stay at the table, not on the referee to prove that he doesn't.