I'm so glad to see that referees in pool are starting to use ball makers. I can't understand why they didn't do this years ago like the snooker referees. I found the 'open hand' technique somewhat laughable, not to mention inaccurate, as one hand is always out of action! Anyway, great step forward in our game. PLEASE may it continue.
The same thing 'sort of' applies to "fouls on all balls" as well. How often the re-placement of a ball(s) (if disturbed) leads to it being slightly 'off' from where it was originally. Bringing in the rule of 'foul on ALL balls' (not just cue ball) would remedy this, and would mean that anything, not just a cue or a hand, that came into contact with any ball would then result in a foul. Ok, it would put a bit more pressure on league and club players, but surely this would only raise standards and get rid of an otherwise 'casual' attitude towards this 'cue ball only' attitude? Also one could argue that it might cause the occasional argument (in the absence of a referee), but conversely, it might (hopefully) engender and promote a more sporting attitude (such as we see in SNOOKER) amongst players admitting when they have fouled, which would be better for the karma of the game all round. I didn't find the implementing of the rule any serious disadvantage in a recent tournament, (probably because I was 'raised' on playing snooker) and it actually promoted a greater care in the execution of one's shots. This has to be good for the game, right? Opinions please?
The same thing 'sort of' applies to "fouls on all balls" as well. How often the re-placement of a ball(s) (if disturbed) leads to it being slightly 'off' from where it was originally. Bringing in the rule of 'foul on ALL balls' (not just cue ball) would remedy this, and would mean that anything, not just a cue or a hand, that came into contact with any ball would then result in a foul. Ok, it would put a bit more pressure on league and club players, but surely this would only raise standards and get rid of an otherwise 'casual' attitude towards this 'cue ball only' attitude? Also one could argue that it might cause the occasional argument (in the absence of a referee), but conversely, it might (hopefully) engender and promote a more sporting attitude (such as we see in SNOOKER) amongst players admitting when they have fouled, which would be better for the karma of the game all round. I didn't find the implementing of the rule any serious disadvantage in a recent tournament, (probably because I was 'raised' on playing snooker) and it actually promoted a greater care in the execution of one's shots. This has to be good for the game, right? Opinions please?
