incident in selby higgins match

zack01

Hi,
did anyone see what happened tonight in i think frame 23, one red left and Higgins needed a snooker, the red is in the baulk end and selby is cueing from between pink and black spot,the commentators reckon he can see a fraction of the right side of the red, selby asks the ref (alan chamberlin) to clean the red and he refuses!! Selby attempts to hit the red but catches a colour and fouls, did anyone see this, and what was that all about with the ref??
I think the referee failed dismally here, he is one of the more senior refs and has been around a long time, i think he is too busy looking into the audience and smiling at people than refereeing!! even in the last frame he approached both players and said he was too early to consider a rerack, Willie Thorne commentating rightly pointed out that it's the players decision to rerack that early and not the refs,
Any opinions on this?????

newballsplease

i didnt see it but highlights on bbc1 NOW. its

11(25)11

so it might be coming up

mdwexford

I think he thought there was a chance of moving the colour the red was beside if he cleaned it.

I was surprised at Willie Thorne's comment about the re-rack, i thought it was entirely the referee's decision whether or not to do it, not the players.

Gingy

In the Dott v Selby game, Selby was in a tough safety and he jokingly said to Chamberlain - 're-rack', but the ref said something like, 'it's not a stalemate scenario', so there clearly must be some rules regarding re-racks.

ArmaniJeanss

mdwexford wrote: »

I was surprised at Willie Thorne's comment about the re-rack, i thought it was entirely the referee's decision whether or not to do it, not the players.

This is a very common misconception in local clubs.
Theres a tight safety battle going on, seemingly going nowhere, and some idiot will selfappoint themselves as referee and say '3 more shots each, then a re-rack'.
But my understanding of the actual rule is that either player can refuse a re-rack (one player might have a 10 shot plan to break the stalemate and win the frame, and the ref isn't entitled to take that away opportunity from him).

Conversely if both players agree to a re-rack then its their decision, not the referees, though he can give his opinion.

Alan Chamberlain has been a bit of a disaster this week.

Aaron M

mdwexford wrote: »

I was surprised at Willie Thorne's comment about the re-rack, i thought it was entirely the referee's decision whether or not to do it, not the players.

The commentators on Eurosport also said the same thing as Willie Thorne - that the decision for an early re-rack was entirely down to the players themselves and not the referee. They also were not at all happy at the referee refusing to clean the red ball either.

spongeman

Can I give my honest opinion on the 2nd re-rack ?

Selby was in a tight spot and did'nt fancy it. When he asked Higgins, Higgins appeared to pause before agreeing to it ( as both players have to agree to a re-rack).

I think Selby was chancing his arm.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RocketRonnie

mdwexford wrote: »

I think he thought there was a chance of moving the colour the red was beside if he cleaned it.

There was a chalk mark on the red, but it was the oppisite side of the red therfore not affecting Selby's shot.
It seems that the ref's reason for not cleaning the ball was in case he would move the ball into a slightly more favourable position for Selby.

This would seem to mean that the top referees in the world don't always place the cleaned ball back in the exact position??
Will we be seein a lot more of the players who may run a fraction out of position askin for the white to be cleaned in the hope of gaining an advantage now????

spongeman

It was an unusual request to have the red cleaned, especially in the position that the red was in. If it was a black on the spot nobody would have thought any more about it.

Possibly the ref was right in this instance ?

ArmaniJeanss

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Guess I was wrong in my earlier post then, looks quite clear cut.
I think thats a new rule though, it definitely hasn't always been like that (and Thorne and Virgo seemed unaware of it as well).

PauloMN

spongeman wrote: »

Can I give my honest opinion on the 2nd re-rack ?

Selby was in a tight spot and did'nt fancy it. When he asked Higgins, Higgins appeared to pause before agreeing to it ( as both players have to agree to a re-rack).

I think Selby was chancing his arm.

Totally agree. Higgins didn't seem that enthusiastic about the 2nd re-rack, but seems to have just went along with it. I don't think Selby was particularily worse off than Higgins was though.

He must have been sorry he asked for it when he saw Higgins's next break off though.

mickdw

and what about the dot v selby match where dot went in off but stopped the white dropping in with his hand and pushed it into the baulk area. Selby comes to the table, grabs the white and places it in the D, Ref calls a foul and wanted him to play from where it landed. Now he is possibly right going by the letter of the law but it was a crazy situation.