|
Division 1 (Week 10)
|
| berty |
Posted on 30-01-2008 18:47
|
Home From Home
Posts: 367
Joined: 03.10.07
|
Thats fair enough Danny and I can see where you are coming from but in this particular instance I will never agree. Remember it was us that supposidly suffered!!! so this is not born out of sour grapes. The sad fact is that numbers are dwindling and whilst you will have a smaller number or better world rules teams I feel that in some cases common sense must prevail to avoid Tuesday nights becoming bitter affairs. Anyway I have no leg to stand on as it is written clearly in the rules and was never questioning that but it seems a bit of common sense and gentelmanly conduct wouldn't go a miss from time to time in situations such as this. Why else would he ask for the white under the current rules unless he was fould snookered? fand there was no free ball to take after he picked it up as the black was over the bag!!
anyway you are right and I am wrong however I shall take the Morale highground |
| |
|
|
| Truey |
Posted on 30-01-2008 19:12
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 168
Joined: 08.10.07
|
What a load of bollox - If someone had called a foul for not calling the correct snooker then they are a total MUG, ffs i know rules are rules but it is beyond a joke..
in a game a few seasons back in DIV1 against 1 of the top sides (After a new set of rules had come in) 1 of our team set-up the balls with the wrong colours & instead of saying prior to the break - they are set-up wrong called a foul - obviously we took this on the chin
Er no we didn't had a bit of a row - Ended up re-racking them correctly & the game continued
That to me is a form of cheating & is not right - Why not just let someone know (Especially if it is obvious & a clear mistake) try helping people out rather than truying to mug people off with a superior knowledge of rules -
Anyway on a lighter note
We beat the rack-pac 5-2 from 2 Zip down (they only had 5)
It seems more & more teams are struggling for players, so lets get the rules changed to help teams out & get a longer match format
HOW LONG LEFT ? |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 30-01-2008 19:25
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Random question, as everyone is posting on here.. whats the max number of players allowed to be signed up to a team? |
| |
|
|
| berty |
Posted on 30-01-2008 19:35
|
Home From Home
Posts: 367
Joined: 03.10.07
|
12 |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 30-01-2008 19:54
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
bugger. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 20:08
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Truey wrote:
What a load of bollox - If someone had called a foul for not calling the correct snooker then they are a total MUG, ffs i know rules are rules but it is beyond a joke..
in a game a few seasons back in DIV1 against 1 of the top sides (After a new set of rules had come in) 1 of our team set-up the balls with the wrong colours & instead of saying prior to the break - they are set-up wrong called a foul - obviously we took this on the chin
Er no we didn't had a bit of a row - Ended up re-racking them correctly & the game continued
That to me is a form of cheating & is not right - Why not just let someone know (Especially if it is obvious & a clear mistake) try helping people out rather than truying to mug people off with a superior knowledge of rules -
Anyway on a lighter note
We beat the rack-pac 5-2 from 2 Zip down (they only had 5)
It seems more & more teams are struggling for players, so lets get the rules changed to help teams out & get a longer match format
I agree . . Common sense should always prevail in these situations but it doesn't deter from the fact that it is a foul and should a referee or player call it then they are well within their rights to uphold the rules . .
The same thing extends to the total snooker rule . . There have been situations where it's obvious that a player is in a total snooker but if they don't call it and then don't hit a cushion then it's still a foul . . I bet that wouldn't be treated in the same manner as above . . The rules are there so that there isn't a 'grey area' by where something is or isn't 'obvious' . .
I have seen numerous situations where the same thing has happened . . There was a situation in a frame Cliff was involved in where the exact same situation occured when we had just started playing Interleague . . Cliff was in a foul snooker situation and the conversation went something like this . .
Referee - "Foul . . Two Visits"
Cliff - "Total Snooker"
Referee - "Yes"
Cliff - "Can I have the white"
Referee - "No"
Cliff - "But I'm in a total snooker"
Referee - "Yes"
Cliff - "So I can pick the white up"
Referee - "No"
This continued for about 10 minutes until the referee pretty much told Cliff that he had to ask for a foul snooker . . Cliff then cleared up . .
The fact of the matter is that the referee didn't have to advise him and could have done him over with the rules but common sense prevailed . .
It would seem that common sense prevailed last night and as no foul was called there is no harm done . . If anything there is a lesson to be learned by the whole experience . .
Just out of curiosity, who was reffing for The Prop during this frame? |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 20:15
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Truey wrote:
That to me is a form of cheating & is not right - Why not just let someone know (Especially if it is obvious & a clear mistake) try helping people out rather than truying to mug people off with a superior knowledge of rules -
Interesting point . . You're playing in the KO Cup 1st Round . . It's 3-3 and you're reffing frame seven . . Player A from Random Div 5 Team A is on a tricky black so decides to roll up behind it and snooker but doesn't hit a cushion in the process . .
. . Do you call the foul? Your superior knowledge of the rules tells you that he has just played a foul shot but Player A wasn't aware of this even after playing the rules for two years . . After all, you'll be helping him out rather than mugging him off with your superior knowledge . .
Scenario A - You don't call the foul, Player A ends up winning, you go out of the cup 4-3 and your team-mates pat you on the back knowing you did the right thing in the spirit of the game . .
Scenario B - You call the foul because it's just that, a foul. You win the game as a result (as you were entitled to) and you win the frame and match.
I think we all know what one will happen . . It's a crude way of explaining it but it is exactly the same principle . .
Scenario C - You decide to pick Scenario A and Alex stabs you in the eye with a rusty fork. |
| |
|
|
| Fat-Dart |
Posted on 30-01-2008 20:49
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1308
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Golden wrote:
Do any of you out there not bother taking two shots when the cue ball goes in?
I'd take two VISITS actually.
(and before you say it, yes, 'two visits' and 'two shots' very often amount to the same thing when I'm playing.. :lol |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 21:09
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I've seen you play Mark and I reckon you'd need at least eight 'visits'  |
| |
|
|
| RasFas |
Posted on 30-01-2008 21:15
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 05.10.07
|
The rules are not there to catch people out or punish ignorance. They're there to clarify situations for the benefit of everyone.
Nowhere in the rules does it say it's a foul if you don't say 'foul snooker'. It's a foul if you pick up the white ball and it's a foul if you hit or pot your opponent's ball without nominating it. As far as I can see if you ask the ref to pick up the white and you're entitled to it he should give it to you.
The rules say you may ask the ref for a ruling. It doesn't say he should be an arse about how you ask him. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 21:17
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
The only time a ref would be an arse about it is if they were trying to help the player otherwise they could easily just say no, let the player pick it up and then call a foul . . |
| |
|
|
| RasFas |
Posted on 30-01-2008 21:38
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Section E Para d:
If a player wishes to play from Baulk after a "Foul Snooker", "Foul Jaw Snooker", or "Time Foul" the player must verbally advise the referee of this choice and the referee will then recover the Cue Ball and hand it to the player or place it on top of, and in the centre of, the cushion at the Baulk end of the table for the player to retrieve by hand.
If he says 'no' he's an arse...  |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 22:55
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
The important part there is "the player must verbally advise the referee of this choice and the referee will then recover the Cue Ball" . .
In the incident in question, the player didn't correctly advise the referee and therefore the referee is under no obligation to recover the cue ball . . This happened in the incident with Cliff . . He didn't correctly advise the referee and therefore shouldn't have been handed anything other than a rulebook  |
| |
|
|
| Coneycueist |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:12
|
Home From Home
Posts: 262
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Golden: I accept your points although all of your examples relate to incidents that have already occured. Obviously if somebody has rolled into a ball or gone in off you are not going to be able put the balls back.
The point I would make is that if somebody is clearly going to make a mistake through lack of knowledge of the rules then the refs (or in an ideal world the player should be able to warn them.
Scenario: A team is short of players so calls upon a 9ball player in their local club to play rather than throw the game. He can hold a cue but has only had a brief tutorial of rules. You are playing him Golden and you go in-off. He picks up the white and puts it in the middle of the table (not behind baulk). He clearly does not know this rule. Do you let him play the shot and call two or tell him to put the ball in the correct place?
The Coney: The Home of Bread and Butter pool since 1999 |
| |
|
|
| Shaggy |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:17
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 888
Joined: 02.10.07
|
I wouldnt want to call a foul, but I would expect the person to at least explain why they were taking that action. 'Foul Snooker', 'Freeball', 'I cant hit both sides after the foul and want to pick the white up', are all good enough for me.
Total Snooker isnt sufficient as that has other meanings, ie you dont have to be totally snookered to be 'foul snookered' etc.
I would never call it against a new or lower division team, but I would at the end of the game make sure they new what they had done could have easeily been called elsewhere, and what the procedure they should take. However, its fair to say that if a person has been called once he will never do it again. Knowledge = Power Grrrr.
House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:19
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
You have all made this so complicated when it is clearly so simple, as i will explain.
If you are playing the Eden, its a foul
All other scenario's, its not a foul as gentlemenly conduct should prevail.
PS :- My expected response........"This is a 1st division thread, what are you doing on it" hee heee heee heeeeee
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:25
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Coneycueist wrote:
Scenario: A team is short of players so calls upon a 9ball player in their local club to play rather than throw the game. He can hold a cue but has only had a brief tutorial of rules. You are playing him Golden and you go in-off. He picks up the white and puts it in the middle of the table (not behind baulk). He clearly does not know this rule. Do you let him play the shot and call two or tell him to put the ball in the correct place?
Of course I let him play the shot . . I'd probably laugh after he does it and then clear up . .
I'm not in the habit of making allowances . . For fear of sounding arrogant, I've gone out of my way to learn the rules and spent years practising to give myself an edge. . Not to then give allowances for someone or some team who haven't . .
Not only that but it wouldn't be down to me to call the foul . .
This happened in the Croydon A v Croydon B Interleague match back in 2006 . . Mick Saunders did just that . . He had roll-ins and put the ball down the wrong end of the table . . We all knew Mick and have done for some time but the bottom line is that it's a foul . . |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:26
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Shaggy wrote
However, its fair to say that if a person has been called once he will never do it again. Knowledge = Power Grrrr.
You say that, but doesn't this thread mention Paul Adams twice in this exact situation.
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:28
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
It wasn't exactly the same situation but the exact same principle . .
Gary was reffing at the time and called the foul against him . . It was obvious what ball he was going for but the rules state that he has to specifically point the ball out . . He didn't do that and therefore it was a foul . . |
| |
|
|
| Coneycueist |
Posted on 30-01-2008 23:30
|
Home From Home
Posts: 262
Joined: 05.10.07
|
If teams like the Coney are going to survive they will have to recruit new players next year. In all probability these players will not know the rules. If opponents are comitted to ensuring the league prospers long term I believe there will have to be some flexiility in terms of allowing certain errors/ learnings with the rules. If I was playing in the Croydon League for the first time and anything happened to me along the lines detailed in Truey or The_Shark's posts it would be my first and last time, that's for sure.
The Coney: The Home of Bread and Butter pool since 1999 |
| |
|
