thought son controversial spot in Trump match

[cuenut]

Late in Trump's match, he potted the pink and there were interfering balls for the referee to spot it. It was also a crucial point in the match and game. Although he ended up winning, what do you guys think of the spot off line instead of behind the entire cluster. I was shocked that Trump didn't demand to have him spot it appropriately. Even the commentators had issues with it. Is there a "close enough" clause in the rules of spotting the ball in this scenario?

 

[Scaramouche]

I watched that match, but I haven't gone back to view the video.

IIRC the ref's marker showed that the ball should spot.
It would have been unfair to Trump's opponent to not sport the ball.

John Virgo was the one jumping up and down about the spot not being in line.
Don't know what other commentators thought, or if there has been any subsequent discussion.

In the end, Trump won the match, so no harm done.

Now everyone can pile on me.

 

[Swighey]

Haven't seen it yet - which frame was it in? Unless the rules have recently changed and the commentators were not aware of it (quite possible if the rule change wasn't communicated publicly) then the pink and black should always be spotted "in-line". The fact that neither player questioned it suggests that there may have been a rule change - but at the same time I don't see any sense in a rule change.

How far "offline" was it spotted - maybe the players were so engulfed in the game that they didn't notice?

 

[Bob Jewett]

I doubt very much that the spotting rules have been changed. There is no reason to change them. They have been the same for a long time. There is nothing controversial about them. They are unambiguous.

 

[Swighey]

I doubt it too - so have no idea what was going on.

Interesting conversation with Steve Davis a few minutes ago where he said, on TV, that the bounces would be fairer if snooker cushions were cut more like "9 bal" (UK speak for "American" i.e WPA style) pool tables.He also didn't quite say it but he suggested strongly that he prefers that the modern game would be played on old style thicker cloths.

 

[Bob Jewett]

The situation in question appears to be: https://youtu.be/ENfWkW7fQgQ?t=2h55m23s

To me it looks like a nightmare for the ref. Maybe the ball fits.

On pool tables the task is made a little easier by having a line marked along the long string (centerline) for spotting a ball.

 

[acesinc1999]

...
To me it looks like a nightmare for the ref. Maybe the ball fits.
...

I think a salient fact not well understood by those not familiar with the mechanics of a full size snooker table, it is literally impossible to get your eyeballs directly overhead of the pink spot. It is not a bar box and, historically at least, the referee's have not taken to physically climbing up on top of the table for a better view. It looks easy to us to position the ball because we have a bird's-eye camera view mounted directly above the pink spot. The ref does not have this advantage. To understand this better, go precisely to 2:54:50 of the video and look at the position of the ref's head as he tries to position the pink ball with his outstretched arm and his gloved hand. (In my opinion, this is a type of situation that the ref should temporarily remove his glove, would make the task much easier...I know from experience.)

But my response to this "controversy" is that the ref is correct. The pink ball should be spotted in amongst the pack of reds, not above the pack toward the black spot (often mis-stated as "behind the pack"...wrong terminology). There is clearly plenty of room there for the pink to fit. Did he get it exactly right in line? Maybe, maybe not but it makes no difference to the shot choice...the red was pottable whether the pink was where it was at or whether it was shifted toward black and to the right a whisker half millimeter (0.020" in engineering terms) which may have put it more exactly on the centerline.

I am confused slightly by Scaramouche's post as his posts are of course always spot on and accurate:

I watched that match, but I haven't gone back to view the video.

IIRC the ref's marker showed that the ball should spot.
It would have been unfair to Trump's opponent to not spot the ball.
.......

Now everyone can pile on me.

Perhaps you had a different situation in mind than the referenced YouTube video Scaramouche? The pink clearly would not spot naturally, the ref did not even actually check it with a half-ball tool. Also, I don't know the meaning of the acronym "IIRC". The referee did clearly follow the Rules of Snooker exactly correctly the same as they have been for very long time. It is possible you may think he was off in his placement several thousandths of an inch, no argument from me on that, but that possible slight misplacement had no relevance at all to the shot, frame, or match.

EDIT: I Googled IIRC ("If I recall correctly")...yes, Scaramouch, it appears that you do need to review the video. :smile:

 

[Swighey]

Looks like the ref was correct and the ball did indeed spot, regardless of whether he spotted it in exactly the right place. It's the ref's judgement here and it would also be hard to argue here if he placed it "in-line" "behind" the pack.