The Scott Frost/Hunter Lombardo issue was certainly bizarre. At first glance, Hunter seems like a piece of crap. However, I started thinking about it more and I'm not so sure anymore. Did the shirt touch? Who knows. But let's put ourselves in Hunter's shoes for a second and give him the benefit of the doubt that he did indeed see Scott's shirt touching the 6 ball.
From Hunter's perspective:
There is a lot on the line. This is the US Open. You've paid a big entry fee. You have major travel expenses. You're in contention for a Mosconi Cup spot. You've already lost one match and it's hill-hill. Stakes are high! So this is no casual match up where you're going to ignore a stupid rule and let the foul slide. All ball fouls apply and you expect everyone to follow the rules or face the consequences.
Scott is running out and you're staying quiet and respectful. Then Scott starts to lean over the 6 ball. You may consider calling a ref but it's not a close hit or anything so it would probably look like a shark move. You're sort of unsure if you should call a ref or not but then Scott stands back up and tucks in his shirt. With the shirt tucked in, you no longer anticipate an issue and also out of consideration for Scott, you sit still and just watch.
Then the shirt clearly touches. For the sake of this post, let's say it's more than just a quick touch, let's say it hangs there for a few seconds draped over the 6 ball. What do you do? You don't want to sound like a nit but the rules are pretty clear and there is a lot on the line.
Hunter didn't jump up to the table and shout "foul". He didn't even stand up or say "foul" at all. He simply said "You're touching the six". Notice that he didn't say "you touched the six", which would have been past tense. He used present tense, as if it's still currently happening as he speaks. This leads me to believe that it was longer than simple touch and go but rather a prolonged shirt touch (not that that matters anyways).
So now the ref comes over and Hunter is not argumentative or standing up trying to take a foul. He simply said what he saw and let the ref deal with it. What else can he do without being ostracized?
If Hunter truly saw the foul then I feel sorry for him. If he lied then I hope he burns in hell.
If this happened to me in a local gambling or tournament match I wouldn't call a foul. But I also don't play pool for a living or rely on good results to feed my family. So the situation is not the same at all. It's also worth noting that Hunter has a great reputation and has been known to call similar fouls on himself in the past.
The ruling from the ref is a different story all together. Typically the player at the table would have the final word regarding a foul or not. However, in this case Scott wasn't in a position to know whether or not his shirt touched. It's kind of a weird situation but I guess the ref made the only call that made sense. The rule is definitely open for abuse in the future.
It sucks to lose or win that way. I'm sure both players feel bad about it. But does Hunter really deserve all the hate? Not sure...