| Author |
Hendry 147 |
|
MachineGun
Home away from home
Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Posts: 518
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 13:53
But Selby should've had ball in hand, so Dott should've been warned or docked a frame?
Supposing I was playing Dott. Now Dott is far far better than me at long pots so I wouldn't want to play from where Dott pushed the white to. So I put Dott back in, now he'd have a much better chance of potting a long red and clearing up. If I had ball in hand, I could pot a shorter red.
That's basically Dott winning the frame because he moved balls with his hands.
You could do the same thing if the black was going in, just put your hand in the way but nudge it along the cushion so it doesn't go on the spot making it more difficult for your opponent to make a clearance.
|
|
wattsa
Quite a regular
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 67
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 14:05
Selby should not have got ball in hand, as the white did not leave the table, however I agree that Dott should have got a warning.
I saw Ronnie do the same thing a few months agao and was not warned, but it made no difference to the frame as his opponent conceded due to snookers being required.
As for your scenario with the black, you would have to be quick to pot the black and get your hand in the way, and why bother potting it, if you just want to push it safe.
|
|
PC
Official Pro9 Tipster!
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 780
From: Leeds
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 14:18
On 2009-04-30 13:53 , MachineGun Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! But Selby should've had ball in hand, so Dott should've been warned or docked a frame?
Supposing I was playing Dott. Now Dott is far far better than me at long pots so I wouldn't want to play from where Dott pushed the white to. So I put Dott back in, now he'd have a much better chance of potting a long red and clearing up. If I had ball in hand, I could pot a shorter red.
That's basically Dott winning the frame because he moved balls with his hands.
You could do the same thing if the black was going in, just put your hand in the way but nudge it along the cushion so it doesn't go on the spot making it more difficult for your opponent to make a clearance. I hear what you are saying but i think particularly in the black circumstance this would result in the referee exercising his powers to award to frame away. ----------------- 
|
|
MachineGun
Home away from home
Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Posts: 518
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 15:07
Wattsa, the white was definitely leaving the table (via the pocket) and Dott put his hand in the way to stop it.
For the example, suppose you've got a 60 point lead with reds in open and your opponent needs blacks with reds to win. Your shot is tricky so you would play safe. You might completely hash it up, leave an easy red and the black is hit towards a pocket you're standing by.
If the black goes in, then putting it on it's spot means you're oppenent could easily pot the red, get on the black and clear up and win.
Pushing the black safe with your hand is exactly what Dott did with the white and is cheating (although Dott wasn't doing it to cheat).
I would've warned Dott and allowed Selby ball in hand.
|
|
PC
Official Pro9 Tipster!
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 780
From: Leeds
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 15:10
On 2009-04-30 15:07 , MachineGun Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! Wattsa, the white was definitely leaving the table (via the pocket) and Dott put his hand in the way to stop it.
For the example, suppose you've got a 60 point lead with reds in open and your opponent needs blacks with reds to win. Your shot is tricky so you would play safe. You might completely hash it up, leave an easy red and the black is hit towards a pocket you're standing by.
If the black goes in, then putting it on it's spot means you're oppenent could easily pot the red, get on the black and clear up and win.
Pushing the black safe with your hand is exactly what Dott did with the white and is cheating (although Dott wasn't doing it to cheat).
I would've warned Dott and allowed Selby ball in hand. I agree with warning Dott but the rules dont allow for a referee to say have ball in hand. The ball never left the table and so the rules have to be stuck to play from there or opponent play again. -----------------
|
|
wattsa
Quite a regular
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 67
|
Posted: 2009-04-30 16:53
On 2009-04-30 15:07 , MachineGun Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! Wattsa, the white was definitely leaving the table (via the pocket) and Dott put his hand in the way to stop it.
For the example, suppose you've got a 60 point lead with reds in open and your opponent needs blacks with reds to win. Your shot is tricky so you would play safe. You might completely hash it up, leave an easy red and the black is hit towards a pocket you're standing by.
If the black goes in, then putting it on it's spot means you're oppenent could easily pot the red, get on the black and clear up and win.
Pushing the black safe with your hand is exactly what Dott did with the white and is cheating (although Dott wasn't doing it to cheat).
I would've warned Dott and allowed Selby ball in hand. This is where you are misunderstanding the referees own rules. He cannot make a judgement call, he can only base his ruling on Fact. Either the white went in the pocket or it didnt. In this case it didn't so the foul (touching the white) was committed with the white still on the table and therefore the white cannot be placed back in the D. However now you have explained your scenario with the black in more detail, I (if refereeing) would have to warn that player or award loss of frame. [ This message was edited by: wattsa on 2009-04-30 16:54 ]
|
|
MachineGun
Home away from home
Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Posts: 518
|
Posted: 2009-05-01 12:42
Ok, right. I just thought the ref had the power to allow ball in hand, but he obviously doesn't.
Didn't like the way he was laughing about it though when it had obviously rattled Selby!
Still, decent 147 though from Hendry!
|
|
MachineGun
Home away from home
Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Posts: 518
|
Posted: 2009-05-01 14:00
|
