Was the Ref right ??

[Londonlad147]

Just to add ,

The commentators are not agree with his decision , Neither do I .

The vast majority of commentators are very sadly lacking in their knowledge of the rules. Them disagreeing with a decision doesn't make them right. Or you.

[Ramon]

The vast majority of commentators are very sadly lacking in their knowledge of the rules. Them disagreeing with a decision doesn't make them right. Or you.

Thanks for rep .

The vast majority of commentators have played (or followed) this game for many years.
So, what you are saying here does'nt makes any sense to me, tbh.
But, I do agree that they are all human. So, in this case, a poor judgment is the way i would describe it. (assuming that you're right of cours).
Not to mention, we are not talking about only one of them , but several commentators disagreed with this decision.

[Ramon]

The referee is not supposed to agree to clean a ball on every request, only a 'reasonable request'. Whilst that is not defined in the rules, that is usually accepted to mean where position is absolutely crucial, or where placing a ball marker would be particularly difficult (eg sone or more other balls would have to be moved to easily lift the ball.

Really not sure what you mean about only when the referee is unable to re-spot the ball on its spot. Reds, for example don't have spots. If by 'its spot' you mean its original position then a ball can always be placed very closely on its original spot, even if it means moving other balls (which is why most refs will carry two or more markers). However, there is no guarantee that a ball, once replaced will be in EXACTLY the same position. Most of the time a millimetre isn't going to make any difference, but where the position is critical, then the referee is within his rights to refuse.

Agree with this part !!

btw, Yes i meant the original position .

e.g. the ball 5 mm off the cushion, than I can imagine the Ref is prevented to place the ball marker.
As far as I can see, that was not the case here.

[screw-back]

I think this was more of a case of Chamberlain being a d...head tbh

Chamberlain liked the limelight in making such decisions. Do you remember the time he fouled Selby for lifting the white after Dott had stopped it from entering the pocket when it was obvious that it was? Common sense is sadly lacking in the mans persona. Also remember the time in the Masters when he said he wouldn't invoke the third Foul and a Miss against Doherty? Chamberlain is a clown.

[Dave Walton]

I think this was more of a case of Chamberlain being a d...head tbh

Chamberlain liked the limelight in making such decisions. Do you remember the time he fouled Selby for lifting the white after Dott had stopped it from entering the pocket when it was obvious that it was? Common sense is sadly lacking in the mans persona. Also remember the time in the Masters when he said he wouldn't invoke the third Foul and a Miss against Doherty? Chamberlain is a clown.

Like it or not it was a foul and the ref had no other choice but to call a foul, Dott was unsporting by playing the next shot and not just touching the white.

[Dave Walton]

Ref is well within his rights, Selby has been pulled by refs many times for, this hoping to gain an unfair advantage.

[JimMalone]

The referee may accede to a 'reasonable' request to have a ball cleaned. However, when the position of the ball is absolutely crucial, as here, then it is perfectly reasonable for the referee to refuse, as Dean has said. Particularly when there's no obvious dirt on the ball.

To those saying 'it'll go exactly on it's spot', well, ball markers are not 100% accurate. They do a very good job, but there is margin for referee error: balls can and often do roll a little as you lift your finger and it is easy with some of the lighter markers to actually move the marker a fraction. The risk of the ball being a millimetre out here is not worth the advantage or disadvantage that Selby might have gained.

In summary, Chamberlain was 100% right to refuse the request.

Think I agree with this summary.

[screw-back]

Like it or not it was a foul and the ref had no other choice but to call a foul, Dott was unsporting by playing the next shot and not just touching the white.

Yes, he had the choice, all could have been avoided if Chamberlain had used common sense and just confirmed with Dott that it was going in, then picked the cue ball up and either put it where refs normally do, or hand it to Selby. People wouldn't still be talking about it now if he had. And, you mentioned the rules and that he had to call it, the Masters one wasn't in the rules and wasn't in his remit.

[DeanH]

Like it or not it was a foul and the ref had no other choice but to call a foul, Dott was unsporting by playing the next shot and not just touching the white.

Dott did not even have to do that (and give a foul and penalty point away) but he could have just said to Selby Play Again.
After every foul the non-offending player has two choices - 1) play themselves, or 2) ask the offender to play again

[Ramon]

Ref is well within his rights, Selby has been pulled by refs many times for, this hoping to gain an unfair advantage.

Good point !! It's possible .
But look at the position of the balls Dave !!

Can'nt see how in this case tbh .
it's true the ball may end up re-placed 2mm right ( next to it's original position* ) . this way selby gain some advantage . But the ball may end up replaced 2mm Left as well as right . Which in that case would be in his disadvantage . Selby knows that . Why would he take that risk ?
The reason why Selby asked to have the ball cleaned is bcuz he wanted play the shot with lots of side and in this case an clean contact is realy important .
A bad contact could end up in giving a free ball for a 2e time !!

[Londonlad147]

And, you mentioned the rules and that he had to call it, the Masters one wasn't in the rules and wasn't in his remit.

All events staged by official bodies WS, WPBSA, EASB, EBSA, IBSF etc are all played according to the official rules owned by WPBSA. Chamberlain was bound by the rules. The rules only allow referee discretion in situations which are not (adequately) covered in the rules: the Dott situation is unambiguously dealt with in the rules.

[Londonlad147]

it's true the ball may end up re-placed 2mm right ( next to it's original position* ) . this way selby gain some advantage . But the ball may end up replaced 2mm Left as well as right . Which in that case would be in his disadvantage . Selby knows that . Why would he take that risk ?

The referee also knows the risk of not putting the ball back exactly in the right place. It would be totally unfair to give the player an advantage or disadvantage through his actions. Safest to decline the request.

[jonny66]

All events staged by official bodies WS, WPBSA, EASB, EBSA, IBSF etc are all played according to the official rules owned by WPBSA. Chamberlain was bound by the rules. The rules only allow referee discretion in situations which are not (adequately) covered in the rules: the Dott situation is unambiguously dealt with in the rules.

Could he have said that the ball had to be played from where it was though?

[Ramon]

The referee also knows the risk of not putting the ball back exactly in the right place. It would be totally unfair to give the player an advantage or disadvantage through his actions. Safest to decline the request.

this's a good point , indeed .

[Cue crafty]

this's a good point , indeed .

I told you this was a great thread Mate!