Having had time to think about what I'll call the "Extension Debacle at the Open," these are my thoughts.
John Leyman as head referee, by all things that are right when it comes to tournament rules, should have the last say. As such, right or wrong, his call as a referee should be the the final say in most circumstances. I remember a referee making a bad call on Keith against Shannon Daulton at the 2005 SBE Pro/Am tournament. Everybody in the audience knew it was a bad call, and the referee was not experienced as John Leyman is. He was just a hired hand by SBE to fill in, and I believe he just guessed. Keith lost the match, and we had to suck it up. The referee makes the final call, like or not, even when it's a bad one.
Now comes the other side, something very worthy of mention. People with a hearing impairment do have difficulty elongating words, and they distort sounds when speaking. They also have problems with articulation. Sometimes, especially if there is noise in the room, they cannot hear their own voice when they speak. I am not saying this is what happened with Shane, but it is food for thought. With a hearing impairment comes speech difficulties. I'm sure Shane will make an effort to speak louder in the future to ensure whoever and wherever the referee is situated that the referee will hear him loud and clear. One thing for sure, Shane Van Boening is not a cheat and would not move forward with an extension if he did not believe he called one.
Though this holds no weight in a competition, railbirds on-site in the audience, one of whom is from Maryland, heard and saw Shane say "extension." Whereas the referee was situated approximately 15 feet behind Shane's back.
When the dust settled, on live TV no less, I applaud Matchroom's quick action. I think allowing Shane to continue shooting was the right decision by Matchroom. Yes, it was an affront to the head referee, John Leyman, but in this circumstance, considering that there may have been a modicum of doubt whether Shane said it or not, sometimes there are extenuating circumstances. I believe 100 percent that Shane said "extension," believes he said "extension, but because of the noise in the room and his hearing impairment, the referee did not hear the word spoken. Both of them are right and both of them are wrong, and when this happens, just like in a court of law, Matchroom being the supreme authority definitely made the right call in my opinion.
As an aside, maybe I've been watching snooker too long, but I really liked the snooker referees at the Matchroom competitions. When John Lehman called out "Let's break" at the beginning of each session, it was pretty odd. If he had done more Buffer-esque witn an emphasis on the "break" word like "breaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaak," it might have been more pleasing. But each time he did it, it was like fingernails on a chalkboard to my ears.
I think Emily Frazer made the right call in letting Shane shoot after viewing the tapes, speaking to the referee, and then pulling both players off camera to talk to them. It was live TV, and she had to react with some quick thinking to put out the fire. Good for her!