Post a reply

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

Blavdes wrote:rofl rofl rofl rofl this Harold match what a farce.


INDEED.

Harold should have never been declared a foul by Marcel Eckart when he came off 2 cushions to hit a red.

The rule CLEARLY states a ball must hit a cushion, doesnt have to be a red, so the ref got it ALL WRONG THERE. <doh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Lucky

That should be replayed...the ref made it up as he went on. Pisser

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

But then when it was touching ball on the black Harold too shouldnt have hit it.

But in the end I think it was a fair decision to give Cope the win because harold DID pot the blue AFTER the time was finished.

But the ref there <doh> rofl <doh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Lucky

buck me.....Robbie Williams has gone down bank since Take That.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

Blavdes wrote:^ If that's true then Harold should be within his rights to want a re-match.


Yeah agree, although as I said in the end Cope deserved the win because Harold potted the blue after the time was over.

But who knows what would have happened if that ref hadnt declared a foulf on Harold <doh>

The REF rofl

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby PLtheRef

Andre147 PGC wrote:But then when it was touching ball on the black Harold too shouldnt have hit it.

But in the end I think it was a fair decision to give Cope the win because harold DID pot the blue AFTER the time was finished.

But the ref there <doh> rofl <doh>


Did Harold play the shot after the time had elapsed

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

PLtheRef wrote:
Andre147 PGC wrote:But then when it was touching ball on the black Harold too shouldnt have hit it.

But in the end I think it was a fair decision to give Cope the win because harold DID pot the blue AFTER the time was finished.

But the ref there <doh> rofl <doh>


Did Harold play the shot after the time had elapsed


He did yes, thats why Cope won.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby kolompar

Lucky wrote:That should be replayed...the ref made it up as he went on. Pisser

I thought the same, totally ruined a good match
terrible referee, they should get rid of him
remember when he refused to clean the white for Selby, then Selby got a kick?

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

The ref though clearly had a role in this rofl <doh> rofl

Harold will be sick even though it's a tin pot event.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby TheRocket

Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

kolompar wrote:
Lucky wrote:That should be replayed...the ref made it up as he went on. Pisser

I thought the same, totally ruined a good match
terrible referee, they should get rid of him
remember when he refused to clean the white for Selby, then Selby got a kick?


ABSOLUTELY.

I too said when that happend I couldnt believe what the ref did there. <doh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Lucky

Its tinpot but for the lower ranked players jts big cash.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

TheRocket wrote:Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.


Youre right, it is considered a push shot if the player makes contact with the touching ball when he strikes it, and thats why Cope was given ball in hand.

But the first foul the ref was totally wrong, the cue ball hit 2 cushions and the ref still declared a foul after he hit a red. <doh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby PLtheRef

Andre147 PGC wrote:
TheRocket wrote:Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.


Youre right, it is considered a push shot if the player makes contact with the touching ball when he strikes it, and thats why Cope was given ball in hand.

But the first foul the ref was totally wrong, the cue ball hit 2 cushions and the ref still declared a foul after he hit a red. <doh>


So the second call Marcel made was a push on the black?

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby TheRocket

Andre147 PGC wrote:
TheRocket wrote:Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.


Youre right, it is considered a push shot if the player makes contact with the touching ball when he strikes it, and thats why Cope was given ball in hand.

But the first foul the ref was totally wrong, the cue ball hit 2 cushions and the ref still declared a foul after he hit a ref. <doh>


It clearly decided the match. Harold hit the ball absolute perfectly and everything was safe. There is a valid point that Harold would have won the match if the stupid ref hadn't give a foul. And regarding the pushshot the ref again is guilty, lol. He needed 8 second or like that to explain Harold that it was touching ball. Because of the time being almost over Harold then played this stupid rush shot which was a push at the end. And this 7 point foul gave Cope the lead.

Ref clearly decided the match here.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby TheRocket

PLtheRef wrote:
Andre147 PGC wrote:
TheRocket wrote:Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.


Youre right, it is considered a push shot if the player makes contact with the touching ball when he strikes it, and thats why Cope was given ball in hand.

But the first foul the ref was totally wrong, the cue ball hit 2 cushions and the ref still declared a foul after he hit a red. <doh>


So the second call Marcel made was a push on the black?


We can't be sure for 100% but I think, it's highly likely. If it was touching ball (white+black) it was definitely a pushshot because Harold just rushed that shot without really thinking what he is doing. And as I wrote, that was because of the ref. Ref needed 8 seconds to explain to Harold that it was touching ball. And Harold didn't have the time anymore to just play the white to the top cushion.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

TheRocket wrote:
Andre147 PGC wrote:
TheRocket wrote:Just for the understanding. The foul, Harold made on the black was a push shot then?
If it was touching ball, I don't even understand why he played that shot, probably because of the time. He was in a hurry. Otherwise he could have just played the white to the top cushion.


Youre right, it is considered a push shot if the player makes contact with the touching ball when he strikes it, and thats why Cope was given ball in hand.

But the first foul the ref was totally wrong, the cue ball hit 2 cushions and the ref still declared a foul after he hit a ref. <doh>


It clearly decided the match. Harold hit the ball absolute perfectly and everything was safe. There is a valid point that Harold would have won the match if the stupid ref hadn't give a foul. And regarding the pushshot the ref again is guilty, lol. He needed 8 second or like that to explain Harold that it was touching ball. Because of the time being almost over Harold then played this stupid rush shot which was a push at the end. And this 7 point foul gave Cope the lead.

Ref clearly decided the match here.


He did TR no doubt <doh> :no:

And yeah PL it was a push shot, but like TR said the ref took SO LONG to explain that to Harold that he eventually got it all mixed up and confused played the black around the table...

It's a tin-pot event, but still in no way should a ref have anything to do with the final outcome of a match.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby PLtheRef

Not sure whether I'm following this correctly, he's a fault even if he's made a correct call on a black ball push?

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

PLtheRef wrote:Not sure whether I'm following this correctly, he's a fault even if he's made a correct call on a black ball push?


It was touching ball on the black but Harold had only 1 sec left after the ref took so long to explain that to him and then when he was confused he just rushed the black, a foul was given and suddently Cope went 3 points ahead, with ball in hand.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby kolompar

we have too much snooker variant games
6 red, power snooker, shootout, and now this new one with Marcel Eckert's rules

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

After that though Harold tried to clear up on the last sec but when he potted the final blue to be ahead in points the time was already over.

There was then some confusion as to who won, but they gave the victory to Cope.

But that wasn't the major issue, the major one was the 2 bad calls from the ref against Harold.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

kolompar wrote:we have too much snooker variant games
6 red, power snooker, shootout, and now this new one with Marcel Eckert's rules


rofl <ok> :wave:

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

I will review that frame later, but the ref was at fault there no doubt.

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Blavdes

Maybe Marcel is onto something like in football people spend weeks debating referee decisions, so maybe snooker refs should start making the rules up as they go it would cause some headlines <laugh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby Andre147

TheRocket wrote:Oh man, this is pathetic, this 10 seconds time rule. They should make it 20.


15 isn't that bad, but 10 <doh>

Re: Snooker Shootout 2014

Postby PLtheRef

Andre147 PGC wrote:
TheRocket wrote:Oh man, this is pathetic, this 10 seconds time rule. They should make it 20.


15 isn't that bad, but 10 <doh>


I'd make the field 32 and play the matches 15 seconds and play it as 1 frame match. I think with a 10 minute format, 10 second matches are necessary


   

cron