Matchroom please create a camera angle that is behind the breaker and 35° to each side, that is zoomed into the break box line. As that is the only way to tell with nearly 100% certainty if the ball is in contact with the line or past it. That seems simple enough to do. Not only that, would make it reviewable and end all unnecessary controversy.
@@geoffreyvanwyk4588 break is way too easy and predictable at this level without the box. However, this break would have still been illegal because it was past the head string line. Had nothing to do with the box.
Regarding Shane's lag technique, it actually makes a lot of sense to have a bit of an angle. Think about it...they measure by distance from the rail perpendicularly. So, if you hit it at an angle, even though it might still bounce off the rail the same distance, the actual distance perpendicular to the rail would be less.
I'm curious about this. My main cue sport to play and watch is snooker. When they cue at the ball, it's like a lazer; straight back and straight forward. But I see a lot of pool players, as I watch more and more, and even when I go play, do a but of a dip when they pull the cue back. I'm curious about if that's intentional or what the reason for it is.
it's the equipment i think. some pool cues are heavier than snooker cues, and players who grow up with such equipment can't lazer straight like that even if they try, and over time the dip becomes more accentuated
@@truonglongnguyen2148 that's interesting. I do see it a lot more in American pool vs English pool. Maybe the English pool players started off in snooker?
@@mxcafx English pool players play with snooker cues it seems. i think the closest game to American pool in terms of equipment is actually Carom or 3-cushions, and players there also have the same kinda dip
The whole ball is supposed to be inside the line, i think. That looks like it should have been a foul, too. I saw a couple foul at the Derby because edge of cue ball was pass the line.
@@observer991I'm genuinely curious about this. Let me preface by saying objectively, it appears to be a foul with my naked eye. People don't seem to understand that the camera angle is favorable to the breaker. Nearly impossible to tell because of perspective and the fact the camera lense isn't flat. The thing I'm curious about, is even with an app and telestrator lines, what amount of certainty can you say it was a foul? I know you can tell how different each break position is pretty easily. Seems the only way to tell with absolute certainty if it was a foul, is to be able to see the break box line. Could get near certain with a camera perfectly inline with the break line, with the right tools. Seems it's impossible to have great certainty given the angle, no matter what. I honestly have no idea why matchroom doesn't have a camera behind the breaker, to each side at 35° zoomed into the break box line. Seems to be a simple way to solve the issue. Also seems crazy to even risk going past the line. The extra millimeter seems silly when considering the risk vs reward. But what do I know?🤷🤣
@@joshuastover5533no, atleast 50% of the ball has to be behind the line for matchroom. To put it more precisely, where the cue ball comes in contact with the table can not be past the break box line. Can't speak for Darby but would guess it's the same. It's easy to tell from the refs position because if he can see the line, in it's entirety, behind the cueball, it's a foul. Nearly impossible to tell from the angle offered. Perspective is very favorable to the breaker and can't see exactly where the cue ball is in contact with the table.
The "rail-first combo makes the pocket bigger" (4-6 combo in the 3rd rack) is the same reasoning behind the angled lag that Shane does. It makes the target area bigger.
Those are called magic racks. Used to keep the rack as tight as possible for the break and they are removed as soon as possible when no balls are on top of them.
I politely disagree. He'll never be able to break in. He has a terrible temper and a God complex. At the Olympics in Birmingham, he was punished heavily for his behavior against Alyousos Yapp.
I took a screen shot of the overhead on the questionable break. Then I used photo program to superimpose lines over the cue ball to see where they intersected and where the center of the ball is. Sanjin was robbed.
That's cool and all but a precise conclusion can't be taken given the angle. Which is why it's not reviewable. Unless you can see threw the cue ball, you can't tell if the bottom of the cue ball, what matters, is past the cue ball. If the bottom of the cue ball is past the line, then over half the cue ball is past the line. Which is a foul. The PERSPECTIVE is favorable to sanjen because the camera is in the middle of the table, past the line. If the camera was behind him the by same distance and you did the same trick, it'd look like he clearly fouled. The should have a table high camera view at 45° behind the breaker, then the line would be visable. The ref is perfectly positioned, slightly behind the line. They look down the line and if there is not a break in the line, where the cue ball is in contact,it's obvious. Marcel could see the entire line across the table. It was a foul.
You are talking a millimeter or 2 difference. Can't tell that it was "exact," given the camera angle. The only way to know is by looking down the line from the position the ref is in. The ref only calls a foul if the entire line is visable. As there should be a break in the line where the bottom of the cue ball is in contact with the line. In the case of the foul, he saw the whole line and called a foul. It was a foul. That being said, match room should have a camera angle that is zoomed in on the break box and can also see the line. Then it would be reviewable and take away all speculation.
@@brandonnunn6706 The camera angle on top of the table isn't centered to that line. It is centered focus on the center of the table. Of course from that angle, the cue ball would be seen to be 'inside' the box. But the ref still called it. Meaning he saw with his very eyes, in front of the line when Sanjin broke, and was a foul. Stop defending childish behaviour conceding racks when there is a ref for a definitive purpose.
@@70bidadari48 the ball has to be behind the headstring or that line you see as well as inside of the other 2 vertical lines present. They switched to where the professionals can only break the balls with in a designated space to make it more difficult for them. But always ask away the billiard world is a beautiful place my friend👍
for the foul controversy, look at 20:36 for the placement that was called a foul He's got about 1/3 of the ball over the line. then look at 21:31 for Sanjin's next break, he's got about 1/4 of the ball over the line. Then at 36:25, same thing, about 1/4 of the ball is over the line. So... if the rule is that 100% of the ball must be behind the line, all of these should have been fouls. If the rule is that at least 50% of the ball should be behind the line, then none of them are fouls. Not saying the ref did anything malicious, but he was 100% wrong.
Incorrect. You can't make these decisions because we're seeing from a camera POV. It's simply not accurate. The camera perspective warps objects that are not centered to it. That's how cameras work. So no, you're wrong. The ref did everything correct, from calling the foul shot to being professional and calm, even when little baby Sanjin threw a tantrum.
You have x ray vision?! It's literally IMPOSSIBLE to tell that with the camera angle offered. The ref is in a much better position to make the call than any of us. That being said, hopefully matchroom gets a camera angle from behind the breaker, zoomed into to the break box line. Then it'd be reviewable and end unnecessary controversy.
@@donkeydiehard879 no its not literally impossible, you can see the center of the cue ball, and you can see the line. it is CLEARLY behind the line. stop with that "a hurr durr its the camera angle" bs
@@ClassicMist360 lmao because it IS the camera angle. The camera is centered to the center of the table. Do you know how cameras work? I assume you don't with that comment.
So many tools in the comments... the overhead view is not reliable enough for all you keyboard warriors saying it was the wrong call... He's a great ref and trust his call 100%. Sanjin shouldn't have acted like a baby and conceded that game, might've actually won the match if he didn't. Live and learn I guess, he'll keep maturing.
you can see the center of the cue ball, and you can see the line. it is CLEARLY behind the line. stop with that "a hurr durr the camera isnt reliable" bs. referee acted like a complete baby too. he's a good ref for snooker, not for pool, wayyy too many terrible calls in pool.
@@ClassicMist360 Okay mr. Keyboard Warrior, get off Sanjin's dick and try reffing for Snooker and Pool. Just by using simple logic, this ref being the SAME REF for many big events, snooker or pool, means he's actually credible and keeps a good track record. If he didn't, he wouldn't be in Matchroom or WNT etc, seeing how strict Emily Frazer is with her management of tournaments.
This ref called the same break foul in World Championship( on Johann Chua? ). I think only if it's obvious outside the box, then ref shall call it. In this top camera, it's not obvious outside the box.
At 12:58 ref looks at ball from diamonds, anyone who’s been around a table for as long the ref could instantly look at the placement. Middle of ball must be behind imaginary line made by second diamonds.
The cue ball can not be more than 50% past the breakline. It's not the back edge. The perspective will make it seem that the cue ball is in the break box, even if it's 5mm past it. It's literally impossible to make a conclusion from the camera angle offered. The only way to tell with 100% certainty is to be able to see the break line. If the breakline is visable, the length of the table, behind the cue ball, it's a foul. The ref is in the PERFECT position to see that. It was a foul. Hopefully matchroom puts a camera behind the breaker, zoomed in on the break box line in the future. That will make it reviewable and end all unnecessary controversy.
Regarding the foul call, the overhead camera is perhaps the worst camera view in pool because of how it skews the perspective and is not representative of what is actually there in real life. Think about how many times you see shots from the overhead that looks like it's impossible for cue ball to hit the object ball, and then the player executes the shot with no issues. It's the same here. The ref is standing right next to the break line watching it and obviously can see it better than the tv viewer through the shitty overhead camera.
Its against the rules for a ref to interfere with the game during the shot. He is not allowed to warn him of an incoming foul, that would be like giving a player advice on how to pocket a ball. Think of it in football, the ref doesn't run over and let a lineman know he is lined up in the neutral zone, you let the play happen then call the foul.
@@lodrbyroni This ! Perfect answer. Refs enforce the rules and law. Rules prevent you from doing anything illegal, and refs make sure you are punished when that happens. Besides, these are PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS. They SHOULD know the rules, instead of being a baby and conceding the rack just because you committed a foul. (I'm talking to OP)
Part of the problem is that refs are inconsistent. As the rule is written, it was a foul. Even from a favorable camera position, it is pretty clear that the half the cue ball is beyond line. Which is the only way we can judge if it's past the line. Which is far from precise. Refs are standing perfectly inline or slightly behind to ensure the bottom of the cue ball is not past the line. Marcel is young and has made mistakes. This however, was not one of them. In this event, it was the mistake of the young competitor losing his head and conceding a rack on a foul, with plenty of balls still on the table. Which is what cost him the match. I will say, my hat is off to him composing himself and making shots when he returned.
I just don’t get why the ref didn’t (A) say hey you need to back up before even striking. Then (B) when he did strike and foul he should have just shown him the replay it doesn’t affect anything not like the balls are going anywhere just show the replay prove to him he was in the wrong and move on plain and simple.
@@mikemillican5852 Refs aren't supposed to interfere at all, and the replay wasn't in an angle you can see anything from, that's why he said that there was no replay
@@mikemillican5852well, no. It’s not the ref’s job to stop a player from committing a foul. It’s his job to call the foul when it occurs. If he says something to him before he breaks, then that sets the precedent that a ref should warn a player before any foul, like “Hey, your shirt is about to touch that ball.” Can’t be done.
The cue ball has to be 50% behind the break box line. To be more precise, where the cue ball comes in contact with the table, must be on or behind the line. It was a foul because the ref was able to see the line behind where the cue ball was. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tell from the camera angle given because perspective makes it APPEAR to be behind the line. Given that the ref is in perfect position to see the line, it was a foul.
Sanjin was robbed, the cue ball was at most 1/3 over the line. Refusing the replay was arrogant and unprofessional. I would recommend the referee be sanctioned hard.
The ref was a jerk. He was the reason Pehlivanovic lost. The cue ball was inside the box. And why no replay?! Pehlivanovic is the next big thing in 9 ball and 10 ball pool.
I would like to chat with SVB. If you read this message, please chat me.. I would like to share little secret for being champion all the time. Cause in my opinion the way you play is the best
Foul or not, the ref’s attitude is a complete disgrace. Don’t see many people talking about that. Dude needs to get his head out of his own ass and be a professional. What a disappointment of an official.
Ref was calm and proffessional. What was it that was a disgrace? Also, he has been a ref not ONLY for pool/9 Ball WNT, but he has a longer career in SNOOKER. You'd think that his experience and career records would be spectacular, seeing as how we see his face in almost any event, whether it is in Matchroom or Snooker. So no, the ref is VERY professional. Who's NOT proffessional is Sanjin, who conceded the RACK IMMEDIATELY and crying to the toilet like a baby just because he could not see the replay, which shouldn't even need to be seen, because THERE IS A REF. Dumbass.
Bad call by Marcel Eckardt, same position on couple of subsequent breaks which were deemed fine. Looking at it from above, center of the cueball was on the line, really shameful ruling.
It's literally and physically IMPOSSIBLE to tell PRECISELY where the cue ball is in relation to the break line, with the camera angles offered. Can do all the screenshots and magic tricks you want. From the perspective offered, the cue ball would APPEAR to be on the line unless it was approximately 5mm past it. The best, most precise and currently only way to be certain is by seeing the ENTIRE breakline. Which the ref can. We can not. So should let them make the call.
That commentator has too much confidence in the ref that ball was no place near over the line that ref is known for doing to much he called a break foul how can u call that ridiculous
Love watching SVB play pool, I learn a lot by his shots
Shane’s Z shot! 👏🏻
Mah gaud. One of the best shots in pool.
24:36
Matchroom please create a camera angle that is behind the breaker and 35° to each side, that is zoomed into the break box line. As that is the only way to tell with nearly 100% certainty if the ball is in contact with the line or past it. That seems simple enough to do. Not only that, would make it reviewable and end all unnecessary controversy.
There would be one less rule to worry about if they just forget about the box.
@@geoffreyvanwyk4588 break is way too easy and predictable at this level without the box. However, this break would have still been illegal because it was past the head string line. Had nothing to do with the box.
michael and jj is my by far favorite commentators.
13:13 can someone explain why this was a foul? The commentators never fully explained and I’m confused
In this format the cue ball must be in the break box on the break. The ref ruled it was outside the box when he shot.
Efren: Nice Z Shot Shane
Jose Parica: wanna play 8ball Efren? I'll spot you 3 balls.
Regarding Shane's lag technique, it actually makes a lot of sense to have a bit of an angle. Think about it...they measure by distance from the rail perpendicularly. So, if you hit it at an angle, even though it might still bounce off the rail the same distance, the actual distance perpendicular to the rail would be less.
That may be so for people who are super-consistent. Thumbs up for seeing that.
That double bank with hard left kick was why Shanegerous is worthy.
Where's that shot in the match?
@@markgargan5793 thinking he maybe meant the Z bank kick earlier in the match
@@jh3809 have you got the time handy? Be nice to see it. I saw a kicked three that went in like a hanger but it was just a kick?
@@markgargan5793 it was the Z bank russian twister kick early in the match by Shane Dawg
@@blakefriedman8794 no time handy for that shot Blake?
I'm curious about this. My main cue sport to play and watch is snooker. When they cue at the ball, it's like a lazer; straight back and straight forward. But I see a lot of pool players, as I watch more and more, and even when I go play, do a but of a dip when they pull the cue back. I'm curious about if that's intentional or what the reason for it is.
it's the equipment i think. some pool cues are heavier than snooker cues, and players who grow up with such equipment can't lazer straight like that even if they try, and over time the dip becomes more accentuated
@@truonglongnguyen2148 that's interesting. I do see it a lot more in American pool vs English pool. Maybe the English pool players started off in snooker?
@@mxcafx English pool players play with snooker cues it seems. i think the closest game to American pool in terms of equipment is actually Carom or 3-cushions, and players there also have the same kinda dip
@@truonglongnguyen2148 I've seen carom, but not enough to notice. That's great! Thanks!
My guess is maybe because Shane does it so everyone has copied it haha
21:30 Same exact placement on the next break, no foul this time.
4:04 as well. The ref is out of control.
It's a bit further - but still within the line, is it the line or diamonds that determine that?
The whole ball is supposed to be inside the line, i think. That looks like it should have been a foul, too. I saw a couple foul at the Derby because edge of cue ball was pass the line.
@@observer991I'm genuinely curious about this. Let me preface by saying objectively, it appears to be a foul with my naked eye. People don't seem to understand that the camera angle is favorable to the breaker. Nearly impossible to tell because of perspective and the fact the camera lense isn't flat. The thing I'm curious about, is even with an app and telestrator lines, what amount of certainty can you say it was a foul? I know you can tell how different each break position is pretty easily. Seems the only way to tell with absolute certainty if it was a foul, is to be able to see the break box line. Could get near certain with a camera perfectly inline with the break line, with the right tools. Seems it's impossible to have great certainty given the angle, no matter what. I honestly have no idea why matchroom doesn't have a camera behind the breaker, to each side at 35° zoomed into the break box line. Seems to be a simple way to solve the issue. Also seems crazy to even risk going past the line. The extra millimeter seems silly when considering the risk vs reward. But what do I know?🤷🤣
@@joshuastover5533no, atleast 50% of the ball has to be behind the line for matchroom. To put it more precisely, where the cue ball comes in contact with the table can not be past the break box line. Can't speak for Darby but would guess it's the same. It's easy to tell from the refs position because if he can see the line, in it's entirety, behind the cueball, it's a foul. Nearly impossible to tell from the angle offered. Perspective is very favorable to the breaker and can't see exactly where the cue ball is in contact with the table.
The "rail-first combo makes the pocket bigger" (4-6 combo in the 3rd rack) is the same reasoning behind the angled lag that Shane does. It makes the target area bigger.
Shane happy he’s not on the wrong end of it this time
SVB is a hard nick name🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
sanjin giving marcel side eyes through the rest of the match
tremendo tiro Z BRAVO SHANE .
What do they remove after the break?
Those are called magic racks. Used to keep the rack as tight as possible for the break and they are removed as soon as possible when no balls are on top of them.
24:55 awesome!
What is feathering the cue ball?? Ref called that
Sanjin is pretty good..in the future he will probly be top 10 in world
I politely disagree. He'll never be able to break in. He has a terrible temper and a God complex. At the Olympics in Birmingham, he was punished heavily for his behavior against Alyousos Yapp.
Can somebody explane me,why is foul in 3rd rack?
Nitko normalan….
Ball was over the line, but didn't
I took a screen shot of the overhead on the questionable break. Then I used photo program to superimpose lines over the cue ball to see where they intersected and where the center of the ball is. Sanjin was robbed.
That's cool and all but a precise conclusion can't be taken given the angle. Which is why it's not reviewable. Unless you can see threw the cue ball, you can't tell if the bottom of the cue ball, what matters, is past the cue ball. If the bottom of the cue ball is past the line, then over half the cue ball is past the line. Which is a foul. The PERSPECTIVE is favorable to sanjen because the camera is in the middle of the table, past the line. If the camera was behind him the by same distance and you did the same trick, it'd look like he clearly fouled. The should have a table high camera view at 45° behind the breaker, then the line would be visable. The ref is perfectly positioned, slightly behind the line. They look down the line and if there is not a break in the line, where the cue ball is in contact,it's obvious. Marcel could see the entire line across the table. It was a foul.
You'd have to be EXACTLY in line with the break line in order for your method to work.
@@donkeydiehard879 That's all very nice .................... I disagree. Sanjin got robbed on an arbitrary call.
@@donkeydiehard879 I accounted for that. Nah, Sanjin got robbed on an arbitrary call.
Camera placement not really accurate. Just unfortunate that the ref saw it. He’s been paid to do his job, not by a player. Learn from it and move on.
Can someone tell me what size is the pool table
9 by 4.5 feet
What a great ref. #LoveMarcel
That out tho!!!
@13:30.... Foul but @21:30 it's in the same spot and no foul? Either both are a foul or neither are.
just try to click the time you tag, its different. click the @13:30 and click the @21:30
Never saw SVB play so well.... kick shots, impossible shape....excellent.
He's played way better before, plenty.
15:44 This is an awfully long bathroom break. Is he taking a dump or is he hiding in the replay booth?
Looks like he was within the break box... Ref was being an a**hole for no reason.
Don't split the screen, its not good. Just focus on one match pls.
Dude literally broke from the exact same spot and no foul was called smh
You are talking a millimeter or 2 difference. Can't tell that it was "exact," given the camera angle. The only way to know is by looking down the line from the position the ref is in. The ref only calls a foul if the entire line is visable. As there should be a break in the line where the bottom of the cue ball is in contact with the line. In the case of the foul, he saw the whole line and called a foul. It was a foul. That being said, match room should have a camera angle that is zoomed in on the break box and can also see the line. Then it would be reviewable and take away all speculation.
Dude I screen shot it and is was the exact same spot
@@brandonnunn6706 The camera angle on top of the table isn't centered to that line. It is centered focus on the center of the table. Of course from that angle, the cue ball would be seen to be 'inside' the box. But the ref still called it. Meaning he saw with his very eyes, in front of the line when Sanjin broke, and was a foul. Stop defending childish behaviour conceding racks when there is a ref for a definitive purpose.
Every problem is this with this Ref I will say it everytime! Any controversial bs is under his watch smh 🤦♂️
Apparently he sucks reffin pool, i saw videi where he was titulered best snooker ref
It was clearly a foul...he's made mistaken but not this time
@@kevinbailey7052 so was he over the line? what was the foul... i'm actually not sure whatsoever
can someone explain me why it was a foul? im a newbie in billiards
@@70bidadari48 the ball has to be behind the headstring or that line you see as well as inside of the other 2 vertical lines present. They switched to where the professionals can only break the balls with in a designated space to make it more difficult for them.
But always ask away the billiard world is a beautiful place my friend👍
Where was the foul??
Ball was over the line. Foul.
for the foul controversy, look at 20:36 for the placement that was called a foul He's got about 1/3 of the ball over the line. then look at 21:31 for Sanjin's next break, he's got about 1/4 of the ball over the line. Then at 36:25, same thing, about 1/4 of the ball is over the line. So... if the rule is that 100% of the ball must be behind the line, all of these should have been fouls. If the rule is that at least 50% of the ball should be behind the line, then none of them are fouls.
Not saying the ref did anything malicious, but he was 100% wrong.
This exactly what I was asking, thank u
Incorrect. You can't make these decisions because we're seeing from a camera POV. It's simply not accurate. The camera perspective warps objects that are not centered to it. That's how cameras work. So no, you're wrong. The ref did everything correct, from calling the foul shot to being professional and calm, even when little baby Sanjin threw a tantrum.
Bottom of the Round cue ball was inside the box.
You have x ray vision?! It's literally IMPOSSIBLE to tell that with the camera angle offered. The ref is in a much better position to make the call than any of us. That being said, hopefully matchroom gets a camera angle from behind the breaker, zoomed into to the break box line. Then it'd be reviewable and end unnecessary controversy.
@@donkeydiehard879 no its not literally impossible, you can see the center of the cue ball, and you can see the line. it is CLEARLY behind the line. stop with that "a hurr durr its the camera angle" bs
@@ClassicMist360 lmao because it IS the camera angle. The camera is centered to the center of the table. Do you know how cameras work? I assume you don't with that comment.
@@narobong my brother in christ, you can quite literally see it clear as day. there is NO debate.
So many tools in the comments... the overhead view is not reliable enough for all you keyboard warriors saying it was the wrong call... He's a great ref and trust his call 100%. Sanjin shouldn't have acted like a baby and conceded that game, might've actually won the match if he didn't. Live and learn I guess, he'll keep maturing.
you can see the center of the cue ball, and you can see the line. it is CLEARLY behind the line. stop with that "a hurr durr the camera isnt reliable" bs. referee acted like a complete baby too. he's a good ref for snooker, not for pool, wayyy too many terrible calls in pool.
@@ClassicMist360 Okay mr. Keyboard Warrior, get off Sanjin's dick and try reffing for Snooker and Pool. Just by using simple logic, this ref being the SAME REF for many big events, snooker or pool, means he's actually credible and keeps a good track record. If he didn't, he wouldn't be in Matchroom or WNT etc, seeing how strict Emily Frazer is with her management of tournaments.
I’m not a fan of sanjin but marcel was wrong
This ref called the same break foul in World Championship( on Johann Chua? ). I think only if it's obvious outside the box, then ref shall call it. In this top camera, it's not obvious outside the box.
And the same ref called a soft break warning in AlexP-Filler match / called SVB no rail foul last year. Why always him??
At 12:58 ref looks at ball from diamonds, anyone who’s been around a table for as long the ref could instantly look at the placement. Middle of ball must be behind imaginary line made by second diamonds.
That ball was tottaly in the break box.
Whole ball, not the edge, right?
it was more inside than outside.
The cue ball can not be more than 50% past the breakline. It's not the back edge. The perspective will make it seem that the cue ball is in the break box, even if it's 5mm past it. It's literally impossible to make a conclusion from the camera angle offered. The only way to tell with 100% certainty is to be able to see the break line. If the breakline is visable, the length of the table, behind the cue ball, it's a foul. The ref is in the PERFECT position to see that. It was a foul. Hopefully matchroom puts a camera behind the breaker, zoomed in on the break box line in the future. That will make it reviewable and end all unnecessary controversy.
saw him cheat twice ive lost all respect for him
Có cảm giác svb ra gậy không thẳng
what in the world, his next break was just as far over the line as the break he got called on, poor referreeing in my opinion.
Regarding the foul call, the overhead camera is perhaps the worst camera view in pool because of how it skews the perspective and is not representative of what is actually there in real life. Think about how many times you see shots from the overhead that looks like it's impossible for cue ball to hit the object ball, and then the player executes the shot with no issues.
It's the same here. The ref is standing right next to the break line watching it and obviously can see it better than the tv viewer through the shitty overhead camera.
Why can't the ref just warn the player if the cueball is over the line?
Unfair for the other players that would get ball in hand from that error
@@andresilius5790 depends on how you define fair.
Its against the rules for a ref to interfere with the game during the shot. He is not allowed to warn him of an incoming foul, that would be like giving a player advice on how to pocket a ball. Think of it in football, the ref doesn't run over and let a lineman know he is lined up in the neutral zone, you let the play happen then call the foul.
@@lodrbyroni This ! Perfect answer. Refs enforce the rules and law. Rules prevent you from doing anything illegal, and refs make sure you are punished when that happens. Besides, these are PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS. They SHOULD know the rules, instead of being a baby and conceding the rack just because you committed a foul. (I'm talking to OP)
Somebody paid the ref off. Pos.
Z SHOT!!!
Reyes is the undisputed GOAT imo. I think even Shane agrees. I also think Shane would put earl in his prime above himself.
Reyes is great all around but the level of players today would smoke anyone from his era.
Dumb
Not a typical Shane positioning after sanjin fouled😅 impressive as always❤
But the commentators are boring.
Take care of business now
Best of tournament matchroom pool
Marcel really makin it clear he’s the worst ref
Part of the problem is that refs are inconsistent. As the rule is written, it was a foul. Even from a favorable camera position, it is pretty clear that the half the cue ball is beyond line. Which is the only way we can judge if it's past the line. Which is far from precise. Refs are standing perfectly inline or slightly behind to ensure the bottom of the cue ball is not past the line. Marcel is young and has made mistakes. This however, was not one of them. In this event, it was the mistake of the young competitor losing his head and conceding a rack on a foul, with plenty of balls still on the table. Which is what cost him the match. I will say, my hat is off to him composing himself and making shots when he returned.
I just don’t get why the ref didn’t (A) say hey you need to back up before even striking. Then (B) when he did strike and foul he should have just shown him the replay it doesn’t affect anything not like the balls are going anywhere just show the replay prove to him he was in the wrong and move on plain and simple.
@@mikemillican5852 Refs aren't supposed to interfere at all, and the replay wasn't in an angle you can see anything from, that's why he said that there was no replay
@@mikemillican5852well, no. It’s not the ref’s job to stop a player from committing a foul. It’s his job to call the foul when it occurs. If he says something to him before he breaks, then that sets the precedent that a ref should warn a player before any foul, like “Hey, your shirt is about to touch that ball.” Can’t be done.
Brain dead take lol
why it was a foul ? i donˋt understand ! can somebody explain it to me ?
The cue ball has to be 50% behind the break box line. To be more precise, where the cue ball comes in contact with the table, must be on or behind the line. It was a foul because the ref was able to see the line behind where the cue ball was. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tell from the camera angle given because perspective makes it APPEAR to be behind the line. Given that the ref is in perfect position to see the line, it was a foul.
Sanjin was robbed, the cue ball was at most 1/3 over the line. Refusing the replay was arrogant and unprofessional. I would recommend the referee be sanctioned hard.
joss
*can i go toilet please*
The ref was a jerk. He was the reason Pehlivanovic lost. The cue ball was inside the box. And why no replay?! Pehlivanovic is the next big thing in 9 ball and 10 ball pool.
👍😏
🗣️
How is asking to see the replay unsportsmanlike. Ref kinda acting high and mighty. I think I saw him on another video acting all cunty.
Poor refereeing
Đánh thế thì chịu
It was absolutely not out of the breakbox, anyone who has clear enough vision can tell
It's supposed to be clearly behind the line. No part of the ball. So no, you're wrong...
Sixth rack . .
I would like to chat with SVB. If you read this message, please chat me.. I would like to share little secret for being champion all the time. Cause in my opinion the way you play is the best
Never liked this referee.
Foul or not, the ref’s attitude is a complete disgrace. Don’t see many people talking about that. Dude needs to get his head out of his own ass and be a professional. What a disappointment of an official.
Ref was calm and proffessional. What was it that was a disgrace? Also, he has been a ref not ONLY for pool/9 Ball WNT, but he has a longer career in SNOOKER. You'd think that his experience and career records would be spectacular, seeing as how we see his face in almost any event, whether it is in Matchroom or Snooker. So no, the ref is VERY professional. Who's NOT proffessional is Sanjin, who conceded the RACK IMMEDIATELY and crying to the toilet like a baby just because he could not see the replay, which shouldn't even need to be seen, because THERE IS A REF. Dumbass.
Terrible referee
Konrad Juszczyszyn? Sounds like something biden would say
Bad call by Marcel Eckardt, same position on couple of subsequent breaks which were deemed fine. Looking at it from above, center of the cueball was on the line, really shameful ruling.
DAZN sucks and matchroom knows it!
It's literally and physically IMPOSSIBLE to tell PRECISELY where the cue ball is in relation to the break line, with the camera angles offered. Can do all the screenshots and magic tricks you want. From the perspective offered, the cue ball would APPEAR to be on the line unless it was approximately 5mm past it. The best, most precise and currently only way to be certain is by seeing the ENTIRE breakline. Which the ref can. We can not. So should let them make the call.
Worst ref ever!!!!!
SVB is in danger right now, no more funds.
Silicon Valley Bank on bankruptcy notice 😥
nies
ها حب
I'm a Shane fan, but man that Sanjin call does not feel legit at all.
Sanjin a stud, no homo.
SVB!!!!
Winner Shane
That commentator has too much confidence in the ref that ball was no place near over the line that ref is known for doing to much he called a break foul how can u call that ridiculous
i think svb already too old?