tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post6098383805368178451..comments2024-02-03T12:04:16.336+00:00Comments on SNOOKER SCENE BLOG: OH WHAT A NIGHTDave Hhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08037719321756898982noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-68944746428385773122009-12-14T08:06:39.433+00:002009-12-14T08:06:39.433+00:00@Betty:
"Hogwash the name of the rule "...@Betty:<br /><br />"Hogwash the name of the rule "Play Again" can only be invoked after a foul and a miss."<br /><br />I do believe that ANY player is allowed to put his opponent back in play AFTER he/she has made a foul, ANY foul that is!<br /><br />@Hogwash:<br />Perhaps all snookerplayers should then be thinking about choosing another career as well. If they'd be spot on perfect then granted, you are correct but I don't think we've ever seen a best-of 19 match end in 10-9 with 147s all around.<br /><br />Yes, sport is about the players, agreed on that BUT like players, refs are only human and therefore will make the odd mistake. These things happen.<br /><br />@All:<br />Regardless of whether Jan's call was right or wrong, the fact that he "changed his mind" shows to me that at least he dares to.<br /><br />Just my 2 cents' though,<br />Cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-67988602663901188912009-12-13T23:33:39.066+00:002009-12-13T23:33:39.066+00:00Cant believe ronnie didnt take the blue in the las...Cant believe ronnie didnt take the blue in the last frame.<br /><br />You wouldn't expect him to miss the pink but I thought the blue was the easier pot, any one else agreee ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-81882772524563132072009-12-13T20:19:45.175+00:002009-12-13T20:19:45.175+00:00Dave the info you got from the ref wasn't Virg...Dave the info you got from the ref wasn't Virgo by any chance was it... ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-34762435302141825932009-12-13T19:22:32.515+00:002009-12-13T19:22:32.515+00:00i agree 100% on your last comment Dave.
Jan is th...i agree 100% on your last comment Dave.<br /><br />Jan is the best there is.<br /><br />There isnt much between him, Michaela and AC/EW but hed be my vote as the best.<br /><br />i didnt hear any mention of him being allowed to move the cueball, which he did. the interview with SD must have been cut short, or they missed that part out so it went under the carpet.<br /><br />if anything, its taught us that no matter what rules are in place they can be bent whether it be by accident or design and now hopefully they will rectify one of a few loopholes that id bet exist.<br /><br />ta for the reply daveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-41587654110156887762009-12-13T19:11:33.271+00:002009-12-13T19:11:33.271+00:00Jan is probably the best referee on the circuit so...Jan is probably the best referee on the circuit so I'm happy to go with his rulingDave Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08037719321756898982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-40802467165731294592009-12-13T19:01:23.901+00:002009-12-13T19:01:23.901+00:00what ref told you the wrong info then Dave (wrong ...what ref told you the wrong info then Dave (wrong info according to Jans definition today)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-61895975203797002932009-12-13T17:12:29.522+00:002009-12-13T17:12:29.522+00:00A PENALTY should have beeb called,
the player is s...A PENALTY should have beeb called,<br />the player is still on the orginal<br />shotsequense.<br /><br />The situation is used as a "trickquestio" in exams for class<br />2 referees.kimballnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-18562075273953421782009-12-13T16:37:48.337+00:002009-12-13T16:37:48.337+00:00Theo, if you are indeed a ref then I am very worri...Theo, if you are indeed a ref then I am very worried.<br /><br />From the definitions:<br /><br />11. Ball On<br />Any ball which may be lawfully struck by the first impact of the cue-ball, or any ball which may not be so struck but which may be potted, is said to be on.<br /><br />The colours are not ball on, after a red is potted. A colour must be nominated for it to be "ball on". If you nominate the brown you cannot legally strike any other colour, therefore after nomination only the brown is ball on. None of the colours prior to nomination are "ball on" because they cannot be legally struck by first impact with the cue ball until they are nominated.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-9645671298840035372009-12-13T16:30:32.489+00:002009-12-13T16:30:32.489+00:00Hogwash the name of the rule "Play Again"...Hogwash the name of the rule "Play Again" can only be invoked after a foul and a miss.<br /><br />14. Foul and a Miss<br />(a) After a foul and a miss has been called, the next player may request the offender to play again from the position left or, at his discretion, from the original position, in which latter case the ball on shall be the same as it was prior to the last stroke made<br /><br />11. Fouls<br />If a foul is committed, the referee shall immediately state FOUL.<br />(h) The player who committed the foul<br />(ii) has to play the next stroke if requested by the next player.<br /><br />As you can see, putting your opponent back in after a foul is quite distinct from asking them to "Play Again".<br /><br />The criteria for "Playing Again" are quite clear, so I don't see there is confusuon over this.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-50614936566504664872009-12-13T16:22:46.029+00:002009-12-13T16:22:46.029+00:00To Theo: I'm sure Mr. Verhaas is a very nice g...To Theo: I'm sure Mr. Verhaas is a very nice guy. He was just not up to the job last night. Maybe he should do something he is better at - keep a few sheep perhaps. I do respect referees - in all sports - but sports are not about them and your comment shows you think that they are. Ask the Irish.Hogwashnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-82477999718385206922009-12-13T16:14:28.587+00:002009-12-13T16:14:28.587+00:00@ Betty Logan 1:46 PM
Well, this is a completely ...@ Betty Logan 1:46 PM<br /><br />Well, this is a completely different situation. In the example as you descibed it, the first player MISSED A POT, which automatically ends his turn (or break). If his opponent puts him back in after the foul, his next shot surely is a red. Can't be any doubt about that.<br /><br />But that all has very less in common with yesterday's situation, where Ronnie got snookered after potting a red, and thus still BREING ON A BREAK. That's why he had to continue with a colour and not a red, as Dave has pointed out.Erichttp://snooker.blog.nl/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-68632506710844978402009-12-13T16:13:49.066+00:002009-12-13T16:13:49.066+00:00If Ronnie was put back in hes on a red Jan said it...If Ronnie was put back in hes on a red Jan said it at the interval.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-22640750509704496492009-12-13T16:09:13.046+00:002009-12-13T16:09:13.046+00:00Jan Verhaas has just confirmed that if Higgins had...Jan Verhaas has just confirmed that if Higgins had put Ronnie back it would have been to play the red.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-68912505408423383802009-12-13T15:50:31.278+00:002009-12-13T15:50:31.278+00:00One of the refs told me, although everyone seemed ...One of the refs told me, although everyone seemed confused one way or another and apparently still areDave Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08037719321756898982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-41596408733445970552009-12-13T15:31:50.198+00:002009-12-13T15:31:50.198+00:00I can't see why there is this huge discussion,...I can't see why there is this huge discussion, well bit of a fight regarding some comments.<br /><br />To Hogwash. Your comment shows that you have absolutely no respect of a referee's job. As I'm a ref by myself i find that sad. Jan Verhaas is definately the very much best referee in the world. And also a very nice guy. <br />The whole situation last night was a bit weird. Ok Jan coudl have handled this better. That was a mistake. But how many unforced errors have you counted from Ronnie and John? <br />I think that was the first mistake from Jan for ages and i cant remember any situation worth to talk about.<br />To be honest, i laughed when i read "Jan Verhaas ... should not be allowed refereeing at any event of such importance." Please show some respect.<br /><br />To Dave. Who have you talked about the rule that you say Ronnie would have still be on a colour? This would be right if it was a full face situation, so that the opponent can win the frame after the third foul. But this wasn't the case. I do can see the intention of your point and i agree that this version is woth to think about for a rule change in the future. But it's not eligible at the moment i think.<br />I might be wrong, so i would be very pleased if you can explain this a bit more detailed. I know you are very busy. But maybe you find a few minutes.<br /><br />To Betty. You think you found a point in the rules that is not clear and now you want to make a fool of everyone. But you are wrong. Please check Section 2 Definitions. Ball On and Nominated Ball. No matter if in a break or in last night's situation. All 6 colours were ON. Now check the definition of Miss: "A miss is when the cue-ball fails to first contact a ball on and the referee considers that the striker has not made a good enough attempt to hit a ball on." <br />So it has no effect on the miss rule which colour you nominate.<br /><br />Let me know if that is still not clear. I might get my dictionary out to maybe find clearer words.<br /><br /><br /><br />Wow this became a quite long comment LOLTheonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-66142164386066272822009-12-13T14:44:18.117+00:002009-12-13T14:44:18.117+00:00The name of the rule is "Play Again" - s...The name of the rule is "Play Again" - section 3/13. Does this mean anything to you? He is still on the same shot and plays it again. The balls are not repositioned since there was no "miss" call but he has to play it again nonetheless.Hogwashnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-26076088551058652492009-12-13T14:12:39.743+00:002009-12-13T14:12:39.743+00:00Ronnie's problem is that he gives Higgins too ...Ronnie's problem is that he gives Higgins too much respect, he should have attacked him from the off.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-41982312190933777262009-12-13T13:46:08.705+00:002009-12-13T13:46:08.705+00:00So tell me this Dave. Say a player pots a red and...So tell me this Dave. Say a player pots a red and takes on a colour but fouls and leaves himself snookered on the reds but leaves the colour he attempted over the pocket, his opponent can either attempt a red or take on a free ball. If there is no value in playing the free ball then he can put his opponent back in, who is then back on a colour instead of a red and can go on and pot the colour that finsihed over the pocket? No I don't think so.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-76413986137912958772009-12-13T13:34:21.551+00:002009-12-13T13:34:21.551+00:00He's on the same shot as he was originally on,...He's on the same shot as he was originally on, regardless of whether a miss is calledDave Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08037719321756898982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-32035303158363547082009-12-13T13:31:02.306+00:002009-12-13T13:31:02.306+00:00Dave, why would Ronnie have to go for a colour if ...Dave, why would Ronnie have to go for a colour if John had put him back in after the "no miss" foul? That doesn't make sense! After a "no miss" foul it's complete new turn regardless of who plays it. I think you've got that wrong.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-91896557328475859212009-12-13T13:23:49.824+00:002009-12-13T13:23:49.824+00:00betty, i have explained the miss rule on here and ...betty, i have explained the miss rule on here and so has someone else. i wont spoon feed you more, sorrry, as i suspect youre on the wind up (as nobody is that silly to not have understood what i and others typed and still make posts like you do)<br /><br />Dave, do you think Jan did a booboo?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-56672523882822802912009-12-13T13:20:37.723+00:002009-12-13T13:20:37.723+00:00My reading of the 'incident'as we are now ...My reading of the 'incident'as we are now duty bound to call it: the referee was right, it wasn't a miss, but if John had put Ronnie back in he would still have had to go for a colour, not a red<br /><br />This rather makes a mockery of any claims he had cheatedDave Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08037719321756898982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-83197970122574486862009-12-13T13:14:02.614+00:002009-12-13T13:14:02.614+00:00Well was Verhaas right or wrong? Surely some of th...Well was Verhaas right or wrong? Surely some of the Snooker 'experts' on here know the rules and can give a definitive answer.<br /><br />John Virgo was determined to 'blame the ref' and he repeated his opinion several times. This is without having the rule book checked!stuartfanninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09965910795523103318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-10403289873953517732009-12-13T13:10:25.703+00:002009-12-13T13:10:25.703+00:00I didn't say he was unlucky to be snookered, s...I didn't say he was unlucky to be snookered, so you're the one who brought it up. And I will ask you again: show me in the rules where it says the miss rule also applies to colour nomination. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong section, or at the wrong rules but as far as I can tell the miss rule only applies to the "ball on" and nothing else. If you can't quote me the appropriate section then we will just assume you've lost the argument and I've won it to spare Dave Hendon's blog from your further witterings.Betty Logannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29605452.post-3272761767578838972009-12-13T13:06:41.641+00:002009-12-13T13:06:41.641+00:00Kimball said it all: the rules are quite clear. 7 ...Kimball said it all: the rules are quite clear. 7 points penalty for touching the black and as a GENERAL RULE FOR ANY FAUL (section 3/11/i and ii) Mr. Higgins should have decided whether or not he wanted to come to the table. Jan Verhaas has made a HUGE mistake and should not be allowed refereeing at any event of such importance.Hogwashnoreply@blogger.com