Videos - Miscellaneous

Scaramouche said:
...
Shots
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3uO7X7YDiSg
Click to expand...
About 7:15 into this video, O'Sullivan is clearing the colors and plays a precision stun/screw shot to get from pink to black which is on the side cushion. It appears that he shoots his shot on the black before the cueball stops rolling. If that's the case, should this shot be 7 away and respot both pink and black? If so, Pettman would have been trailing 45-53 with 13 on the table.
 
Bob Jewett said:
About 7:15 into this video, O'Sullivan is clearing the colors and plays a precision stun/screw shot to get from pink to black which is on the side cushion. It appears that he shoots his shot on the black before the cueball stops rolling. If that's the case, should this shot be 7 away and respot both pink and black? If so, Pettman would have been trailing 45-53 with 13 on the table.
Click to expand...

Looks like he hit the ball just as it became dead.

http://www.worldsnooker.com/about_the_rules.htm

Pettman could have questioned the failure of the referee to call a foul but did not.

Section 11

(c) If a foul is neither awarded by the referee, nor successfully claimed by the non-striker before the next stroke is made, it is condoned.
 
Scaramouche said:
Looks like he hit the ball just as it became dead.

http://www.worldsnooker.com/about_the_rules.htm

Pettman could have questioned the failure of the referee to call a foul but did not.

Section 11

(c) If a foul is neither awarded by the referee, nor successfully claimed by the non-striker before the next stroke is made, it is condoned.
Click to expand...
It sort of seemed to me that he did what you often see players do when the exact score seems unimportant which is to foul on black at the end. In this frame, the pink would have put RO'S up 68/45 and so the differential would have been greater than 7. If pink had actually been scored. A small catch-87 is that there was no next stroke after the one that caused black to enter a pocket.

But I looked for a while through the rules hoping to find something specific forbidding a next stroke while the current one is still in progress, but I didn't find anything. At pool, it is specifically forbidden to take a shot while any ball is still moving or spinning due to the previous shot. So, suppose someone smashes the reds potting a red and then addresses and pockets black while a lone wandering red is still moving down in baulk. Which rule covers this?
 
Bob Jewett said:
It sort of seemed to me that he did what you often see players do when the exact score seems unimportant which is to foul on black at the end. In this frame, the pink would have put RO'S up 68/45 and so the differential would have been greater than 7. If pink had actually been scored. A small catch-87 is that there was no next stroke after the one that caused black to enter a pocket.

But I looked for a while through the rules hoping to find something specific forbidding a next stroke while the current one is still in progress, but I didn't find anything. At pool, it is specifically forbidden to take a shot while any ball is still moving or spinning due to the previous shot. So, suppose someone smashes the reds potting a red and then addresses and pockets black while a lone wandering red is still moving down in baulk. Which rule covers this?
Click to expand...

SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS

6. Stroke
(c) A stroke is not completed until all balls have come to rest

SECTION 3. THE GAME

11 Fouls

(f) The next stroke is played from where the cue-ball comes to rest

12 Penalties

(i) striking when any ball is not at rest,
 
Scaramouche said:
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS

6. Stroke
...
Click to expand...
Right before my eyes. That will teach me to use more varied search terms if I'm not willing to read the whole thing (again).
 
Bob Jewett said:
About 7:15 into this video, O'Sullivan is clearing the colors and plays a precision stun/screw shot to get from pink to black which is on the side cushion. It appears that he shoots his shot on the black before the cueball stops rolling. If that's the case, should this shot be 7 away and respot both pink and black? If so, Pettman would have been trailing 45-53 with 13 on the table.
Click to expand...
No the foul was on the black not the pink, and therefore meaningless in respect of the result. The game ended with that foul (first score on the black) and technically Pettman should have been awarded the 7 points. Although the stroke is not complete until the balls come to rest you can hear the referee award '20' after the pink goes in, putting Ronnie 23 in front before the foul. Otherwise you make a valid point and yet again impress me with your all round knowledge.

Players quite ofter deliberately play a foul on the final black as a flourish eg potting both the black and the cue ball. I'm sure Ronnie was deliberately playing the moving ball simply to show off a bit - it's easier said than done. He clearly sets up to pot the black before the white arrives off the cushion.

Boro Nut
 
Last edited:
Boro Nut said:
No the foul was on the black not the pink, and therefore meaningless in respect of the result. ...
Click to expand...
But if we agree that white was still moving when struck for black, it seems to me that the stroke on pink was not yet complete. Presumably the balls speak for themselves on this even if the referee prematurely says "20."
 
Bob Jewett said:
But if we agree that white was still moving when struck for black, it seems to me that the stroke on pink was not yet complete. Presumably the balls speak for themselves on this even if the referee prematurely says "20."
Click to expand...
I think there is a clear distinction between which stroke Ronnie is fouling on. He has played his stroke on the pink. He is fouling on his stroke on the black by playing before the balls have come to rest. By definition this can only be on the subsequent stroke for the balls to be still in motion. It would be the same if a red ball had been potted and another red ball was still in motion somewhere when he potted the black. You wouldn't be happy to only receive four points for a foul on the red would you?

There is also the issue of the Ref, who is the sole arbiter, clearly awarding the six points (prematurely) for the pink. They can't be rescinded after the next stroke has been played, and it clearly had been. There was the famous incident with Alex Higgins needing a clearance to draw only to find the ref had mispoken the score early in the break (the TV audience spotted it straight away) and at the end found he was one point short and lost the frame. Although the countback proved Higgins correct the score stood. It is up to the player to pick up the mistake at the time it happens, otherwise it is condoned when the next stroke is played. There is no going back.

Boro Nut
 
Last edited:
Boro Nut said:
I think there is a clear distinction between which stroke Ronnie is fouling on. He has played his stroke on the pink. He is fouling on his stroke on the black by playing before the balls have come to rest. ...
Click to expand...
But in the definition of stroke quoted above, the stroke on the pink does not end until all balls come to rest. By that definition, his second tip-to-ball contact happened during the stroke on the pink.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top