Unusual circumstances that could catch out players and referees

[Shockerz]

I saw Mark Selby in a video the other day watch his opponents ball going toward the green pocket.

Just before it dropped to go in off, his opponent blocked the pocket pushing the white toward the 'D' with the referee calling 'Foul 4.'

Mark went to move the ball across the 'D' and the referee again called 'Foul 4' to his surprise.

As the cue ball hadn't actually gone into the pocket, the first foul had been called for touching the white. The second foul had also been called for 'Touching the red' as the cue ball should only be placed back in the D if the ball has left the baize and actually gone into the pocket.

When explained, it makes sense but, when a player stops the ball and throws it back to you, I wonder how many of us have picked it up and placed it back in the 'D?'

Have you experienced any other rules that may catch us out?

[DeanH]

Unusual circumstances that could catch out players and referees

this was Greame Dott and Jan ver Hass ref and was discussed at the time because the cue ball had not left the playing surface so not a ball in hand situation.
The second foul was for picking up the cue ball as it was not a ball in hand after stopping the cue ball going into the pocket (not red).

The only other situation that caused controversy, that comes to mind, was Selby and Williams with the fast paced shot to the red and pink and no one could tell which ball was hit first

[Shockerz]

this was Greame Dott and Jan ver Hass ref and was discussed at the time because the cue ball had not left the playing surface so not a ball in hand situation.
The second foul was for picking up the cue ball as it was not a ball in hand after stopping the cue ball going into the pocket (not red).

The only other situation that caused controversy, that comes to mind, was Selby and Williams with the fast paced shot to the red and pink and no one could tell which ball was hit first

You would have to call it a simultaneous hit which is a foul?

[DeanH]

this was Greame Dott and Jan ver Hass ref and was discussed at the time because the cue ball had not left the playing surface so not a ball in hand situation.
The second foul was for picking up the cue ball as it was not a ball in hand after stopping the cue ball going into the pocket (not red).

The only other situation that caused controversy, that comes to mind, was Selby and Williams with the fast paced shot to the red and pink and no one could tell which ball was hit first

You would have to call it a simultaneous hit which is a foul?

Exactly
But no one could tell if it was simultaneous or not

[Dave Walton]

this was Greame Dott and Jan var Hass ref and was discussed at the time because the cue ball had not left the playing surface so not a ball in hand situation.

The only other situation that caused controversy, that comes to mind, was Selby and Williams with the fast paced shot to the red and pink and no one could tell which ball was hit first

Don't think it was Jan reffing that match but I remember thinking it was poor of Dott to take advantage of the situation.

[DeanH]

Unusual circumstances that could catch out players and referees

you are right, Eirian Williams

[Odrl]

you are right, Eirian Williams

Alan Chamberlain, surely? :wink:

[DeanH]

you are right, Eirian Williams

Alan Chamberlain, surely? :wink:

Holy moly how bad am I! How quickly does old age moments set in?

[Londonlad147]

Definitely Chamberlain... I remember the smirk on his face as he called the second foul!

[sharkster63]

I think that because Dott gained advantage by doing this and also that selby did not see that the white did not go into the pocket because view was obscured that a unsportsman like fall should be called on Dott and lose the frame, this would stop anyone doing this in the future....

[magicman]

Dott should've just potted the white into the corner pocket and the scores and game could've continued as it was meant to be.

In the Selby/William's match, the ref had the benefit of a slo-mo reply which showed Selby had just contacted the red before the pink. I'm unsure whether this facility is always available at every venue though.

The miss rule has caught me out a few times. Once by losing a frame after 3 misses, thin edge x2, miscueing 3rd attempt, and once by returning the white to baulk after my opponents 4th or 5th miss, only to realise the ref hasn't called a miss this time!

[Londonlad147]

Dott should've just potted the white into the corner pocket and the scores and game could've continued as it was meant to be.

In the Selby/William's match, the ref had the benefit of a slo-mo reply which showed Selby had just contacted the red before the pink. I'm unsure whether this facility is always available at every venue though.

The miss rule has caught me out a few times. Once by losing a frame after 3 misses, thin edge x2, miscueing 3rd attempt, and once by returning the white to baulk after my opponents 4th or 5th miss, only to realise the ref hasn't called a miss this time!

I think in the red/pink scenario the video evidence was inconclusive, but benefit of doubt given to striker as I recall.

You can only lose a frame for three misses if central full ball contact was available (ie you could hit it centre ball). If central full ball contact is available, once the first F&M has been called, a second F&M can be called regardless of score, and the frame lost after a third miss. A miscue only counts as a miss if you've actually struck the cue ball. Otherwise s3.11(i) MIGHT apply.

[Bigmeek]

If someone pots the last red followed by the yellow and the ref then forgets to re-spot the yellow. Striker then pots green and maybe even brown and blue before its noticed that yellow was not re-spotted. Rule is (in this scenario) brown, green and yelow are re-spotted and striker has to pot them again!

[tomwalker147]

"Unusual circumstances that could catch out players and referees" - me playing well

[Shockerz]

If someone pots the last red followed by the yellow and the ref then forgets to re-spot the yellow. Striker then pots green and maybe even brown and blue before its noticed that yellow was not re-spotted. Rule is (in this scenario) brown, green and yelow are re-spotted and striker has to pot them again!

Interesting one.

What if the ref replaces the blue and carries on for a few shots and then notices, does it stay there or moved to it's correct spot?