YOU MAKE THE CALL – Are These Pro Shots Fouls or Not?

[Shuddy]

Filler shot. Filler broke. Illegal break. Cue ball stopped next to the 2. Shaw thinned the 2 into the 6 and sent the cue ball 2 rails up table. Not a foul Tabb was completely out of position to call the hit. Filler didn't think it was a foul and he was right.

They have banned Orcollo from coming to America. They should ban these English referees.

She’s one of the most experienced refs on the circuit, and to be fair, Filler is a lunatic. You can see her scrambling to get into position. One of the benefits of organization and money being applied to a sport is technology. Snooker now defers to the marker (ref responsible for scoring) for any iffy calls and foul misses. They use video playback for close calls and do overlays when replacing balls for foul miss calls. Hopefully pool benefits in a similar way as Matchroom pushes 9 ball hard.

 

[dr_dave]

Filler shot. Filler broke. Illegal break. Cue ball stopped next to the 2. Shaw thinned the 2 into the 6 and sent the cue ball 2 rails up table. Not a foul Tabb was completely out of position to call the hit. Filler didn't think it was a foul and he was right.

Filler was right, but I don't blame the ref (although, the call should have been reversed after the "second opinion" video review). Filler shot quickly, not giving Tabb any time to think and get the best view (although, she could have asked him to wait). Tabb is generally one of the best refs out there.

 

[easy-e]

Can you update this thread when Danny threatens to box you for lying about his shot?

 

[dr_dave]

Can you update this thread when Danny threatens to box you for lying about his shot?

Sure thing.

 

[stumpie71]

Dave, I watched your recreatios, all of them the 9 ball contacted the 6. The Filler shot the 6 ball is not moved by the 9 but a solid hit from the cb.

So working the tangents backwards from the 6 ball then a 2 ball strike first doesn't add up. Also at 6:50:xxx on the video you can see the cb path would be on the tangent from the 2 ball original position. At this point on the video the 6 hasn't moved while both the 2 and 9 have moved.
A thin cut on the 9 first recreates this with the solid by hit on the 6 by the cb and the cb following the path of the 2.

In summary, when you hit the 9 first the 2,6,9 had similar movements and the cb wasn't very close. With the 2 ball hit first the movements were similar but the cb wasn't close. All had the 9 striking the 6 ball before contact with the cb. Recreate the shot with the 9 not striking the 6 which is how the Filler shot went.

 

[dr_dave]

Dave, I watched your recreatios, all of them the 9 ball contacted the 6. The Filler shot the 6 ball is not moved by the 9 but a solid hit from the cb.

That's because I didn't have the 6 in the exact right spot (with the exact right gap size) relative to the 2 and 9. Have you ever tried to spot balls on a table based on what you see from one video view. It is tough (without fancy software). I tried my best, but I obviously wasn't perfect.

So working the tangents backwards from the 6 ball then a 2 ball strike first doesn't add up.

You don't need to work backwards to understand the good hit. Work forward off the tangent line of the 2 and the tangent line of the 9 (or vice versa, as I did in my re-creations). The 6 is really immaterial. Also look at the speed and direction of the 9 ball. That motion is not likely with a 9-first hit. Regardless, the tangent-line analysis and discussion during my analysis and re-creations is solid, and the correct call is clear, IMO.

 

[stumpie71]

Yes Dave I have a do try to spot balls based off video, and did so with this shot as well. Was able to recreate the shot almost exactly as the video, however my cloth is old and slower and my rails aren't as hot as the ones on the tv table. So the I miss the 6/9 contact, the 9 just passes above the 2 coming off the short rail with the 2 making contact with the 6 and (2 ball) going into or hanging up in the corner pocket. I removed the other balls from the table since no contact was made with them.

The only time I can get all 4 balls to follow the shot is with a thin hit (.18-.20" ) on the 9 first.

IMO the shot is a foul.

 

[dr_dave]

Yes Dave I have a do try to spot balls based off video, and did so with this shot as well. Was able to recreate the shot almost exactly as the video, however my cloth is old and slower and my rails aren't as hot as the ones on the tv table. So the I miss the 6/9 contact, the 9 just passes above the 2 coming off the short rail with the 2 making contact with the 6 and (2 ball) going into or hanging up in the corner pocket. I removed the other balls from the table since no contact was made with them.

The only time I can get all 4 balls to follow the shot is with a thin hit (.18-.20" ) on the 9 first.

IMO the shot is a foul.

So you don't agree with my tangent-line analysis, even based on how well my shot re-creations backed up the analysis? If you don't know what I mean, watch the Filler-shot section of my video again.

What clear evidence do you think there is for a foul in the original video?

 

[alstl]

Filler was right, but I don't blame the ref (although, the call should have been reversed after the "second opinion" video review). Filler shot quickly, not giving Tabb any time to think and get the best view (although, she could have asked him to wait). Tabb is generally one of the best refs out there.

Here's why I said what I did about English referees. In snooker they shadow the player around the table for a valid reason. They spot balls back up so they need to be near the table. Their method is poor for 9 ball and 10 ball. No need to shadow the players around the table. Sit in a chair or stand still away from the table until you have to look at a hit. Then walk up to the table where the object balls are - hands behind your back - stand motionless and watch the hit. She was 20 feet away from that hit and called it wrong. If you watch the match she squeezed in up against him in front and the wall in back. That's ridiculous.



Their method of refereeing doesn't work in American pool. It isn't snooker.

 

[The_JV]

Here's why I said what I did about English referees. In snooker they shadow the player around the table for a valid reason. They spot balls back up so they need to be near the table. Their method is poor for 9 ball and 10 ball. No need to shadow the players around the table. Sit in a chair or stand still away from the table until you have to look at a hit. Then walk up to the table where the object balls are - hands behind your back - stand motionless and watch the hit. She was 20 feet away from that hit and called it wrong. If you watch the match she squeezed in up against him in front and the wall in back. That's ridiculous.

Their method of refereeing doesn't work in American pool. It isn't snooker.

Interesting take, but I don't see why the singular difference of not needing to replace balls on spots alters pool so differently from snooker. A ref's location/position needs to be as dynamic as the player's. How else are they to determine the legal play..? The only way parking a ref in a corner works is if players fully adopt the honour system. Which simply won't happen in 'american pool'

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Their method of refereeing doesn't work in American pool. ...

I disagree, especially because they are playing all ball fouls.

 

[alstl]

Interesting take, but I don't see why the singular difference of not needing to replace balls on spots alters pool so differently from snooker. A ref's location/position needs to be as dynamic as the player's. How else are they to determine the legal play..? The only way parking a ref in a corner works is if players fully adopt the honour system. Which simply won't happen in 'american pool'

You think standing 20 feet away from the shot is the correct way to judge a hit?

She has one job and she got it wrong. That is what the FBI would call a clue.

 

[The_JV]

You think standing 20 feet away from the shot is the correct way to judge a hit?

You need to sort out which side the argument you're on. Are you saying that refs should or shouldn't shadow players...? In one breath you say they shouldn't because it isn't like snooker. In another you're complaining that they're not close enough. Which is it....?

In this specific situation with Filler and Tabb. I agree that Tabb could have been in a much better spot to make the call. I also know she does not hesitate to put the brakes on players if she feels the need. ...so I think it far more likely that misinterpreted the situation and Filler's intent than did a haphazard job of positioning herself.

 

[dr_dave]

In this specific situation with Filler and Tabb. I agree that Tabb could have been in a much better spot to make the call. I also know she does not hesitate to put the brakes on players if she feels the need. ...so I think it far more likely that misinterpreted the situation and Filler's intent than did a haphazard job of positioning herself.

If you look at how Tabb reacted to the shot, it is obvious she didn't expect Filler to hit it so quickly. I bet if she thought he might try to shoot that fast, she might have asked him to give her time to study the shot first so she would know what to look for and where to stand.

 

[alstl]

In this specific situation with Filler and Tabb. I agree that Tabb could have been in a much better spot to make the call. I also know she does not hesitate to put the brakes on players if she feels the need. ...so I think it far more likely that misinterpreted the situation and Filler's intent than did a haphazard job of positioning herself.

I'm surprised this is so difficult. She should stand in one spot until needed to call a hit. Then do what American referees do. Walk up to the table. Hands behind the back. Stand motionless and watch the hit.

Very simple concept. Watch it for yourself. 48:30

You can see her shirt move when she squeezes in behind Filler. She is up against his butt while his is trying to play pool. Then standing 20 feet away she calls it wrong. It's interesting people think that's how pool should be played. Maybe I'm just not handsome enough because people don't walk up behind me and rub up against me when I'm in a pool hall. Must not happen to Filler much either because he was shaking his head at the stupidity.

Different strokes for different folks.

 

[The_JV]

I'm surprised this is so difficult.

Normally it wouldn't be, but when the back and forth is akin to playing tennis with a bag of cats, it's hard to judge the angle someone is coming from....lol

An isolated incident doesn't equate to firm ground to anchor one's stance. Just my opinion....

 

[CroweCues]

For the SVB shot, if the CB and OB were frozen would that change things at all?

yes.

 

[jay helfert]

I missed #5. Just too close to call via video. On #3 Michaela was way out of position to make that call. Much better to be at the other end of the table and see the cue ball coming toward you. A lot of refs don't get that concept. They are hung up on not being in the players line of sight. I will stand pretty much where I need to be to see the shot correctly and just stand still. That never bothers a good player.

 

[jay helfert]

Yes. Totally. But they were not. If they were, he probably wouldn't have elevated like he did.

I probably should have mentioned in the video that the balls were not frozen.

You are allowed to hit into a frozen CB, and it results in a clean hit per the info and demos here:

frozen CB resource page​

Never liked that rule Dave, where you can shoot directly through a frozen ball. We never played that way back in my day. You had to either shoot at an angle, so the cue ball did not follow directly behind the object ball, or elevate and draw the cue ball back after contact. Shot correctly this way the cue ball would roll forward slightly and then reverse path backwards.

 

[The_JV]

Never liked that rule Dave, where you can shoot directly through a frozen ball. We never played that way back in my day. You had to either shoot at an angle, so the cue ball did not follow directly behind the object ball, or elevate and draw the cue ball back after contact. Shot correctly this way the cue ball would roll forward slightly and then reverse path backwards.

Personally I always thought the snooker approach made the most sense. On frozen ball you must shoot away. This removes any and all grey interpretation of what's legal or not, (jacking up or angled away to some degree, playing in Texas rather than NewYork). If the frozen ball represents a legal OB then in terms of pool, only a rail need be contacted after shooting away.

Too simple I suppose