Players Championship 2019

[fkhan]

Excellent century from Selby, the last two reds were too good.

[Hey]

Sweet double by Higgins...

[fkhan]

Great win for Higgins.

[Steve748]

I think it is Ronnie's way of protesting that there is no consistency between the referees on how they administer the foul and a miss rule. In the match with Barry he made an excellent attempt at hitting the black considering the cue ball travelled around 9' and it missed by a fraction of an inch. To call a miss after that attempt was imo petty and there was no advantage gained by it not touching the black. Because Barry exorcised his right to have it played again Ronnie felt he wasn't going to help the referee out, putting the ball back because he disagreed with the call and imo rightly so.
I think the rule needs looking at as there seems to be no credit for a difficult shot missed by say a sixteenth of an inch, it missed, foul and a miss.

[fkhan]

What a run Lisowski has had so far. Kyren and now 1 away from beating Judd.

[screw-back]

I think it is Ronnie's way of protesting that there is no consistency between the referees on how they administer the foul and a miss rule. In the match with Barry he made an excellent attempt at hitting the black considering the cue ball travelled around 9' and it missed by a fraction of an inch. To call a miss after that attempt was imo petty and there was no advantage gained by it not touching the black. Because Barry exorcised his right to have it played again Ronnie felt he wasn't going to help the referee out, putting the ball back because he disagreed with the call and imo rightly so.
I think the rule needs looking at as there seems to be no credit for a difficult shot missed by say a sixteenth of an inch, it missed, foul and a miss.

That was a Foul and a Miss all day long. He hit it the second time with a slight adjustment didn't he? The rule doesn't need to change and as for people mentioning that he didn't gain an advantage, the word 'advantage' was in the first write of the Foul and a Miss rule in 1991 but it was removed the same year.

[TornadoTim]

"to the best of the players ability" is the rule and even O'sullivan, Davis and Hendry would struggle 6 feet to a cushion and another 6 feet to object ball to hit accuracy of half a balls width. Plus you can see when they try doubles, they miss half the time as each cushion has subtle diffs. So reality is when i snooker my opponent needing 4 snookers, i can just let him miss 10 times! as if the ref will call miss no matter how many cushions he comes off and unless he hits the ball, will be called miss- which seems to be the unwritten standard. Now counter to that argument, a player could keep purposely miss a lot out to one side and gradually safely bring it in till it just hits without doing lot damage. I think thats whats the refs are trying to protect against- Thats fine BUT NO player off 2 cushions can get a ball better than 1 balls width from half the table length so a "reasonable" attempt that got less than 1 balls width , i would call fair as no way the player could plan to miss by that amount. I have seem refs do that as they thought the shot was difficult to judge and it missed a good balls width out and passed the ball so DIDNT call a miss.
This is tricky but remember its that "players ability" so a 150th ranked player trying to get out of a Davis snooker must be given more latitude unless he is a genius at steering the ball but cant breakbuild a damm??- The ref has to know this already to apply rule fairly.
Once again, the rule is tricky as as it stands, unless you hit the ball , 99% you will be called a miss and the player behind could pick up 40 point on fours then clear up when you hit and leave him on. Just a bit too unfair to the player who was so far ahead from his skill. Snookers should be like bunkers in golf- A penalty or 2 but no more except on POT bunkers which can take 10 hit to get out of-
RULE change in Golf Jan 2019- You are now allowed to drop OUT OF the bunker behind with 2 stroke penalty- So that takes away impossible escape for small stroke loss. Perhaps they need to go over the miss rule so a player isnt left there for 10 stokes missing the ball by i cm over 16 feet!!! Anyway just MO.

[fkhan]

What a victory for Judd, brilliant.

[DeanH]

Players Championship 2019

Lisowski 5-2 ahead you lose 6-5
hope he is now mature enough to move on from this.
well done trump by staying in there for the win.

[Mark187187]

"to the best of the players ability" is the rule and even O'sullivan, Davis and Hendry would struggle 6 feet to a cushion and another 6 feet to object ball to hit accuracy of half a balls width. Plus you can see when they try doubles, they miss half the time as each cushion has subtle diffs. So reality is when i snooker my opponent needing 4 snookers, i can just let him miss 10 times! as if the ref will call miss no matter how many cushions he comes off and unless he hits the ball, will be called miss- which seems to be the unwritten standard.

6 feet to and off a cushion I would expect myself to hit the OB a high percentage of the time unless the table was absolutely terrible, then it might take 2 or 3 goes. I'm definitely not a 'genius'. In fact I'm pretty terrible.

For doubles, snooker players just don't practice them. I saw a video of Alex Pagulayan practicing doubles on a snooker table and getting about 9 out of every 10, including into the corners. That's simply because he's had 25-30 years playing pool, including 'banks' tournaments. He doesn't care that some cushions are different, he just adapts to that. It's not like the players don't have long enough in a match to get used to a table- and it's not like millimetre prescision is usually needed. Snooker players don't have that level of proficiency, so it's no surprise that they miss a few doubles and escapes. Rather than moaning, get practicing- the rules are the same for everyone, so get an advantage. I've seen ROS escape from alot tougher snookers than the one in question.

And.... if you need 4 snookers, the ref won't call a miss in your favour 10 times. He won't even call it once.

[screw-back]

"to the best of the players ability" is the rule and even O'sullivan, Davis and Hendry would struggle 6 feet to a cushion and another 6 feet to object ball to hit accuracy of half a balls width. Plus you can see when they try doubles, they miss half the time as each cushion has subtle diffs. So reality is when i snooker my opponent needing 4 snookers, i can just let him miss 10 times! as if the ref will call miss no matter how many cushions he comes off and unless he hits the ball, will be called miss- which seems to be the unwritten standard. Now counter to that argument, a player could keep purposely miss a lot out to one side and gradually safely bring it in till it just hits without doing lot damage. I think thats whats the refs are trying to protect against- Thats fine BUT NO player off 2 cushions can get a ball better than 1 balls width from half the table length so a "reasonable" attempt that got less than 1 balls width , i would call fair as no way the player could plan to miss by that amount. I have seem refs do that as they thought the shot was difficult to judge and it missed a good balls width out and passed the ball so DIDNT call a miss.
This is tricky but remember its that "players ability" so a 150th ranked player trying to get out of a Davis snooker must be given more latitude unless he is a genius at steering the ball but cant breakbuild a damm??- The ref has to know this already to apply rule fairly.
Once again, the rule is tricky as as it stands, unless you hit the ball , 99% you will be called a miss and the player behind could pick up 40 point on fours then clear up when you hit and leave him on. Just a bit too unfair to the player who was so far ahead from his skill. Snookers should be like bunkers in golf- A penalty or 2 but no more except on POT bunkers which can take 10 hit to get out of-
RULE change in Golf Jan 2019- You are now allowed to drop OUT OF the bunker behind with 2 stroke penalty- So that takes away impossible escape for small stroke loss. Perhaps they need to go over the miss rule so a player isnt left there for 10 stokes missing the ball by i cm over 16 feet!!! Anyway just MO.

Best of his ability - was that first attempt the best of O'Sullivans ability? No, of course it wasn't so F & M all day. You also say "So reality is when i snooker my opponent needing 4 snookers, i can just let him miss 10 times!" Brush up on your rules knowledge, if snookers are required, the ref couldn't call a miss anyway, unless of course it was classed as deliberate.

Giving a player of a lesser ability more latitude in the same match is also nonsense. That wouldn't be a level playing field then would it!

[Billy]

Neil on Mark playing one handed shots: "Still not sure why he does that."

Gill: "Do any other players do that?"

Neil: "No. Not those that have two arms available to them."

Best snooker line of the season. I guffawed for a good 30 seconds... and that was before Gill and Neil started corpsing

[DeanH]

MSI and the studio team 'corpse it' - great to see

did not catch what started it, Stephen Hendry handles it better - ever the pro

it was the discussion about Mark Williams one-handed shots he does, it went down hill from there

[Hey]

Everyone needs a trademark whether its ambidexterity, naughty snooker, one hand or massaging the baize...

[anish147]

Neil on Mark playing one handed shots: "Still not sure why he does that."

Gill: "Do any other players do that?"

Neil: "No. Not those that have two arms available to them."

Best snooker line of the season. I guffawed for a good 30 seconds... and that was before Gill and Neil started corpsing

Awesome. I missed the comment and couldn't work out why Neil was in hysterics, lol