Yeah I really don't know why they don't use an overhead camera or multiple camera angles. Instead they opt for this ridiculous angled camera shot and nothing else
Great line from JP saying hes been in that many snookers today that his car is bound to be blocked in the car park that was the best thing about this clip
Blows my mind they don’t have a Hawk-Eye kinda system in snooker since the balls have to be replaced so often. A camera above the table takes a picture when the balls come to rest. Use a device that projects a ball shape or a dot, representing the ball, on the table from above. The tech is here already, so why not
@@Ploon72 my idea was that there’d be a projection of a dot or ball ON the table where the ref could see it. Then the ref could simply place the balls on those dots and call it a day. They have that already?
They have that kind of technology in use in big Chinese tournaments. The ref looks at a screen showing the last position of the balls and when he re positions the ball correctly, the screen image flashes.
Ok I get shit from my mates not knowing the difference between the reds and the brown. I’m glad I’m not alone in this. I just look out for where the brown is at all times from the start of the game so that I don’t goof it up
Same. In general I'm green/brown colourblind but on a snooker table it's the brown and the reds that are the problems. I have to check how many "reds" there are and then decide which of those is the brown.
@@Ploon72 Peter Ebdon has trouble telling the brown from the reds. I think he just remembers where the brown is when it's off its spot, and if he's not sure which ball is the brown, he asks the referee.
The ‘miss’ rule was originally enforced to stop players taking advantage by leaving the balls difficult after missing the object ball. No miss should have ever been called in my opinion, as he made a genuine attempt to hit the red.
you may be right, but see, thing is every snooker is different and easier or harder than each other. Sometimes players put a lot of efford on a good snooker and i think opponents shouldnt be getting away with it so easily.
Genuine attempt or not its whether making a genuine attempt and leaving it short even by a couple of millimetres is to your advantage reaching it can be achieved but has more risk and pro snooker the skill level is so good that if the referee deems it possible he will call a miss
The miss rule was created to stop a player deliberately missing to create an unfair advantage or to get out of a snooker with out trying, as it was assumed that any professional should be beyond those tactics and should have the skills to escape a snooker or at least make a decent effort . Anyone with any level of common sense could watch the efforts made here and agree that in the sense of fair play, a decent effort was made.
I agree. Misses are called way too often. Refs seem to almost always want an easy life by simply calling a 'miss' rather than making a decision regarding whether the player did everything within their ability to hit the object ball or not.
@Question Time It's not necessarily an advantage from playing a deliberate foul. For example there could be a situation where an object ball is quite easy to hit via one cushion, but playing it that way risks leaving it on for one's opponent. However there could be a way to hit it via two cushions that's much more difficult but minimises the risk of leaving it on. In that situation if the player chooses the latter option and fails to hit the object ball then they haven't done everything within their ability to hit it, making a 'miss' applicable. That isn't the situation in the video. The player only has one reasonable way to hit the ball and does everything he can to hit it, which is why I don't think a miss should be called.
@Question Time In the video I don't think he is. He's not playing a foul shot, he's playing a legal shot but failing to execute it because it's so difficult. He hasn't gained an advantage in the end because he's left the red pottable for Wilson, whereas if he hit the red he might not have. Plus he gave points away.
@Question Time Then that would have just been tough luck for Wilson, I guess. As long as you don't deliberately foul and you make the absolute best possible attempt to hit the object ball in the referee's opinion then it shouldn't be called as a miss.
In the original position 2:30 he could have hit the top cushion nearly behind the black spot but when replaced 4:17 that's impossible. Click on the video to freeze it and see this clearly
Agree! It's hard to believe no one noticed that, from players to referee to video commenters. Maybe we have a privileged view here :-) Anyway, I would never had attempted to go back between the brown and the cushion in the first place, but what do I know...
I don't think it was an impossible snooker, freezing the video at both shots shows how big a difference.there was in the position, yeh he had.to give it more side than he wanted but could have compensated by directing more toward the black spot
It's an absolute joke that they still have not implemented over table camera freeze frames. It would be easy as pie then. It's like they want to make it as difficult as possible
Not easy, but far from impossible, what made it difficult was the bad replacement of the balls by the referee, there was no learning curve because the balls were never the same places.
They didn’t need to be, he only needed to apply the exact amount of english to the cue ball to hug the rail to the side pocket... it’s the exact amount of english that’s necessary to make that happen is what makes that shot so extremely difficult... I’d say 1 in 10 for a pro. 1 in 50 for an better than average player such as myself.
@@jasong9502 - Needed to be exact for him to gauge the side, millimetres convert to centimetres when using side to correct the cue ball. Tough job for the referee, but essential if the same shot is to be repeated. Ratio's would be 7/10 for a pro and for a an amateur perhaps 1/20. There was actually a time where the balls were so replaced so badly that he looked to the opposite cushion to play one cushion across the table with left hand side but you can see him telling the referee he has it wrong, again.
It's a really tough shot. In order to get the ball to come towards the near rail he has to give it left English. The brown ball blocking the left side of the que is what makes this shot very difficult
@@TreYay83 - Left hand side is the last thing he plays on this. He tries to play it with a trace of check, right hand side, to mend the cue ball and that is the correct shot, The ref never puts the balls back in the same place, it makes it almost impossible to play the same shot.
@@dougieroberts7045 you are probably right. I always thought the spin on the ball always switches when it hits a bumper. So left spin off the que would cause right spin... Jesus after thinking about it I have it backwards... my bad lol
@@hamoostaffat It exists. You can buy it for a pool table with software and projector for like $900. It's really impressive. So yeah they could easily do it for this.
@@JeffMartin84 i know it exists ffs that's what I said, and if anyone who has bothered to follow the projector idea over the years knows they won't use it yet till it gets faster, as you still need a few secs to scan the table between each shot which as stated by the wpbsa years ago it would disrupt quick players, I'm not saying it can't be done but it can't be done quick enough for professional televised snooker yet, people should really follow the stories they are trying to tell others about, before saying stupid things like my home entertainment could be used in a professional setting just as good. Jeez man, think
it was possible to go bottom cushion, right cushion above the middle pocket, between blue and green, top cushion then towards the red. risked the in off though
Since the camera angle is fixed maybe you can use the footage from before, and make it a little bit transparent then put the the current picture above it, now you can adjust the ball until its position is pixel perfect to the previous one
In one of the china tournament they had some technology to help replace the balls it looked good but I don't know what happened to the technology that was used, maybe in the end it was not accurate enough but it was a great way to at least get the ball back to nearly the correct position and with a little human intervention I am sure that it was a way forward.
wouldnt be difficult, a camera directly above the table looking down would be best, then as Se ti said a dedicated screen for the ref with a transparent image of the position overlaid on the live picture would eliminate 99% of error
ABSOLUTELY!!! I am sooooo glad that you can see that has been a huge stumbling block in the flow and accuracy of a game. I was beginning to think I was the only one.
He put right side on it, so when it bounces of the nearside cushion (relative to the camera) and it’s going back up the table it has left on it. When it makes contact with the red, the energy of x-axis is transferred in the opposite direction whilst travelling up the table. In layman’s terms… he played it with side. Angles, top, bottom and side are exaggerated at slower speeds 👍🏼
@@jx_g the side was well gone off the white by the time it hit the red. The red drifted off a lot. My guess is it rolled off when it hit the joint in the slate because that's exactly where it happened.
Sooner or later, they will come up with an automated solution to ball respotting. LIke an iPad the ref can use to directly see the prior positions using a wireless connection to the booth.
I am amazed the referees have no app to help them position the balls correctly. One that automatically shows a magnified difference between the previous and current position.
Little massé between cushion and brown. Cue 80° elevation and firm but small and controlled shot, direct curve, cueball rolls 10 inches for the hit on te red. Good for a righthanded person.
3:26 if by using the rest he was putting too much side on the cue ball because that was the only place he could make contact on it then maybe he should have tried using the spider, where with the extra height he might have been able to hit the cue ball closer to the middle and end up putting on less side.
But the trouble with the spider is you're striking down more on the cueball, which you probably know makes the shot much more difficult and it encourages the white to swerve before the bounce if not hit at the right pace. For me, i'd always use the rest and just aim further towards the black spot to compensate for too much side. But i'm not a pro.
Exactly what I just said earlier in the thread. He was that fucking lazy to use the extended spider he was bound to apply too much side. If he used the extended spider no side would have been needed and he would have completed the escape quite easily. Mr Parrot of course has to try and make a fucking mountain out of a mole hill as per usual. Parrott was also wrong when he said Wilson wasn't "applauding the decisions" at all. Wilson in reality was pissed off because the ref never awarded the miss. Just watch his face when he walks to the table. Only today Wilson was bleating on again in the Masters when Gilbert was getting the run of the balls, I thought he was going to cry! Gilbert won in the end thank god, Wilson beat himself as per usual! Good riddance Wilson! You're crap!
@@bagalwalagamer9676 I thought about that too, but the trouble then is you are changing the angle the cue ball hits the left cushion on the way back up, so it would be bouncing more away from the red.
@@brianmcsherry1338 I’m fairly certain that once a miss is called, it continues to be so no matter what the next shot. Of course, that doesn’t mean that Kyren has to ask for it to go back
@@johnb8956 yeah it normally just continues to be called a foul unless the ref thinks the shot isn’t on then he’ll just call a miss. Kryen was looking at the ref like why isn’t it foul and a miss again haha
You would figure that they would have a projector above the table pointing down that could save the position of the balls before each shot... the balls were way off each shot
Exactly, with the tech available today there must be a better way. Unless its like an ump in baseball, can be done with lasers but its part of the game.
@Guru Amirite Hawkeye was developed in the UK, for cricket, and was first adopted there and at Wimbledon for tennis. Snooker is way behind other "British" sports.
2:30 If he hits the top cushion a little to our left of the black spot it will hit the green side cushion, go between green and blue, rebound off the baulk cushion hopefully miss the yellow and might get near the red? (I think - maybe - with a little side perhaps?)
Exactly what I thought looking at it, I don't think you'd need the side either as the cushions on the pro tables slide so much more than a club one, going off the side cushions plain ball on the pro tables is like playing every shot with running side on a club one.
@DG The miss rule was introduced to stop players from playing a foul shot that left their opponent in a worse position deliberately. Key word is deliberately. A miss is called if and only if the ref decides the player did not make the best effort to escape the snooker, usually due to players also attempting a safety shot during the escape attempt, increasing the difficulty of the shot for a lower risk outcome. In situations where a legal shot is impossible or there is only one route to escape and the player attempts it, a miss should not be called. The other player still has the option to either take the next shot or make his opponent take it (from the new position). The miss rule is *not* designed for players to milk points out of a difficult snooker. This is why if snookers are required then the miss rule is not applicable as it's never in that player's interest to do anything except try for a legal shot
@DG They don't. In the event of no miss, If the foul shot results in a snooker, a free hit is enacted. If the foul shot results in an impressive safety shot the player can opt to have the fouler take the next shot.
@DG Then no advantage has been gained. The fouler commited a foul, 4-7 points are awarded to the opponent and the opponent has clear, full view of both sides of an on-ball. This is a situation preferable to being snookered and therefore is advantageous to the opponent and not the fouler.
I think Dunn could have used the spider. That way, he could get whatever side spin he wanted. I think the referee should not have called a foul without a miss until he tried that.
0:16 A glitch in the Matrix, several people in the audience have frozen. One guy notices, gives the chap next to him a double take and tries to communicate with him to no avail.
It would be so easy, a laser system above the table which draws out an outline of where the balls should be right on to the table. especially for high level games such as this
Only trouble with not calling a miss is that it means a medium-difficulty snooker generates a higher reward than a very hard snooker. Perhaps the solution would be to tell the player they can take the miss or take a 25-point penalty.
The striker shall, to the best of his ability, endeavour to hit the ball on. If the referee considers the Rule infringed, he shall call FOUL AND A MISS unless only the Black remains on the table, or a situation exists where it is impossible to hit the ball on. Professional players would often take a more difficult route out of a snooker, committing a foul by not hitting the snookered ball with the realisation that, taking the easier route (much easier to hit the ball on with the possibility of leaving the opposition an opportunity to win the frame) hence, the miss rule being introduced. This referee showed his expertise by recognising the position of the balls as constituting an 'impossible snooker'.
The experts in the comments is shocking 😄. Unless you’re capable of reaching a place in the tournament, pipe down. Money where mouth is simple. They don’t call it snooker for nothing 🙄
Right? Guy at the top trying to say that former world champion John Parrott is wrong about the difficultly of the shot, and that he, a random internet moron, should be trusted more.
I reckon that the position of the yellow and green balls are what makes this a hard escape,it looks like they're cutting off the baulk cushion. And in saying that,hitting the red via the baulk cushion risks an in-off,so I think he tried the best option.
Placement of cue ball at 2:34 is different than 3:28. I know the English Snooker rules allow you to place cue ball and other balls back to the position, but I do not like playing that way for this very reason. At 2:34, there was more angle to shoot towards the right side of the table, but the position of the cue ball was worse after the ref tried to put it back. If I were playing the game, I would want it back exactly at the position it was in, but it will never turn out perfect doing this, which is why I prefer to play the game as shoot it were it lay or make the other opponent shoot where it lay. This way there is no argument when gambling, because there is no ref, and the opponent always gets to choose how the balls will be positioned to their favor.
Very difficult but not impossible, best way I can see is similar to what he is trying but go between the pink and black with right side spin, off the head cushion then down the side rail, very difficult but easier than trying to squeeze between the brown and side rail.
I think there should be a rule that the player needs to have a certain number of attempts before the ref decides to call no miss. Say for example they need to have 5 attempts and then the ref can decide to either keep calling miss or call no miss. I always feel bad when a player lays an amazing impossible snooker and only gets 8 points from it.
I agree. If you lay an impossible snooker you may make 8 points, if you lay one that's not as good you may get 16+ points from it because the ref will keep calling a miss.
Personaly I think that "miss" rule shuld be banned it is stupid, especially when reff is not serving it makes tha geme not enjoyeble. At pro level it puts down the tempo
I think the miss rule has to be kept, as there's plenty of times that players are clearly more focusing on not leaving a ball as a pot, rather than genuinely trying to hit a ball. So in those many instances the miss rule is perfect. However, in order to make it easier for refs it's just, generally, allowed to be called every time. Which I think is wrong, as there's clearly times when the player IS making a genuine attempt to just hit the ball, and they just miss it, and yet it still gets called a miss - and that's not why the miss rule is in place. There should be more responsibility put on the refs to make more of a judgement call and use common sense on a lot more occasions - rather than just call miss 99% of the time.
It's about making the most genuine attempt at hitting the ball on. If someone just narrowly misses on the second, but he is still required to play the shot another 3 times, his 5th shot may be miles off the second and would be considered a miss. And you can't just arbitrarily award the other player 3 fouls worth of points to compensate. The ref has to take into account the position of the balls for the other player too, the red was in an easily potable position to top corner.
Jimbo, I saw a comment about fouls and misses a while back, and I think it made the right point. If a red and a black is worth 8 points, how many points SHOULD be possible from a safety? If that answer is 20+, you start getting to the point that players stop potting balls, and play safeties a lot sooner. It wouldn’t take a lot of analytics the first time the bottom seed in a tourney gets his best career result by looking for safeties instead of pots. And then when you consider the fact that safeties can be set up simply because of the where the balls end up at the beginning of a frame, before the first ball is sunk, does it really make for good snooker when someone plays a safety 10 points into a break at a sizable rate?
I believe he could have made it, if he had played it softer, which he ofc didn't want to, as it would have left the red in front of the pocket (from the last position). From the original position, it looks like it could have been played past the pink and round in 3 cushions.
I'm not trying to sound big headed here, but I'm a pretty decent pool player and rarely play snooker and I can get out of that. Side cushion with extreme right hand side then when it hits the bottom cushion the spin reverses and the cue ball will run back up the side cushion and there's a chance of knocking the red into the middle bag
Yes.. my first thought also. Small massé around the brown. Avoid hitting the cushion in the first place. Small direct curve, but firm little shot with high elevation cue.. For a righthanded person a good option.
Isn't it about time someone came up with a camera suspended above the table that takes a snapshot after every shot that was also capable of projecting or connected to something that could then project the position of the balls onto the table perhaps with coloured spotlights. I've thought about this for a while and actually thought it would inevitably happen, but it hasn't to my surprise.
What a gem of an idea in this digital world we live in.It I guess could easily be done.We have virtual ref.s in soccer,tennis etc.The teck is there to be had.
I would think there should be an easy fix to repositioning the balls with our modern technology. A camera could tell if a ball is a few pixels too far one direction or the other. I’m sure it’s akin to baseball and they don’t want to remove the umps from calling balls and strikes but it’s just silly to me watching them give hand gestures “left left no too much back to the right” 😂 Edit: and furthermore I just took a screenshot of all three of the first positions and they are definitely not the same. I feel like that alters the match a ton….
Kyren's reaction when no miss was called shows he loves hedging his bets on free points. If only he didn't bother so much like Ronnie does and actually pot some balls he'd be a better player.
Seeing as the red was the only ball he could play for, if the ref determines that the player's shot was the easiest shot he could play to try and hit it and that the effort was good. It isn't a miss. However, the ball replacement was pretty bad.
Far from impossible snooker, but the miss rule is overused due to players trying not to leave an advantage for their opponent. If he could only see right hand side then aim a bit further left on bottom cushion. Not rocket science. Also made easier by ref's bad ball replacement.
The further left you hit the cushion, the smaller the hole to pass through (due to the angle of approach). Also, coming at such an angle, even if the cue ball passes through the hole, it may hit the cushion, and miss the red.
Either you get it or you don't, take your lumps and move on. This 2nd chance is bs because they will never, get it exactly right which defeats the purpose of "I could've got that".
If you lay a snooker which is impossible to get out of, the other player should simply lose the match or keep playing until giving up. Not calling a miss is a reward to the opponent, even if they leave an easy starter.
I've wondered about that. It could change the game a lot though. If that were the rule we'd see far more snooker attempts. Unless a player is needing snookers to win there is far more incentive (now) to play for potting points. A snooker (now) is usually only attempted as a superior safety (again, not considering when snookers are required to win). One problem with snookers, such as in this situation, is that the players can take turns snookering one another. So some snooker attempts are can "backfire". Creating and escaping snookers is entertaining, but just up to a certain point.
What an idiotic thing to say. So rather than break building, you just take pot the easiest color on the table, planning to eventually get a snooker when there are only a couple reds left?
@Question Time I think you miss the point. I couldn’t tell you the numbers, but how many breaks end up being enough points to win a frame-- including ~50ish point breaks that happen early, then both players score about 25 more points, but the initial ~50 was more than the other guy scored-? Maybe 1 in 10 or 1 in 20? Somewhere in there. So there’s about a 10% chance any break will win the frame. Part of this hinges on the fact that there’s a limit to how many points you can score from one snooker. Now, let’s implement the original post’s rule about winning a frame outright from a single snooker. People are pretty smart, they learn. Take basketball for instance. They’ve figured out that with good enough shooters, it’s better to shoot a lot of 3’s. Or Baseball- theyve figured out it scores more points to try to hit home runs than trying to get base runners and sacrifice. Or Football- the rules have made passing a better way to score more points. Ok, so back to snooker... what happens when rather than needing a lot of precision shots to win a frame (as well as a couple cannons) you change the rules so that only one really good snooker can win a frame? You may as well plug the pockets, because players are going to start going for a lot more safeties. Even funnier when someone is winning a frame by a good amount.
@Question Time Wow, man. A little aggressive. You’re still missing the point. IF, and the word IF is important here. IF you change the rule so that one snooker can win a frame, it would change the play style. Rather than going for the cannon, players start picking off loose reds, and start setting up the game winning snooker. Instead of aiming for the colors that have drifted off their spots, players would use those as a barrier. You don’t seem to grasp that players tend to go for the runout, partially because the points from a snooker aren’t infinite. Make a snooker a frame winner and you change the strategy.
Here's why the shot is so hard: Because the edge of the pocket extends a little on the cushion, he can't hit it just at a plain angle. He NEEDS the right hand side to get to the red at all. Next problem is the bridging over the brown in addition, so he has to lift up the queue as well. It is very very hard to judge the side with that, its basically a lucky guess. I agree with the ref, the first attempt was too far away, but the last one was pretty close. He tried to hit the red, he had enough speed and he played it as best to his abilities... so no miss.
It's to do with the ruling known as 'foul and a miss' where the balls can be replaced a normal foul without 'miss' being called by the ref means balls don't get replaced to same position
Far from impossible when there's a 3 cushion escape that he clearly didn't want to use because he probably would have left the red on miss should have been called I think
If this is the case it really is pointless playing the best snooker ever. They should've called miss till he atleast needed snookers himself to win. Basically saying play snookers but don't be so good the other player can't escape them.
So you want some crazy game with a 50+ sq ft table and 6 pockets and 15 reds and 6 colors, and the object of the game is to nudge one of the colors close to the cushion so that you can auto win the frame by tucking the cue in behind it? That’s a lot of effort to play nothing but safeties.
@Question Time you still have the option of making your opponent play the shot from where the balls land, and you've had the points from the foul, so it's still worth playing a good snooker.
@Question Time huh?...crossed wires, I think. The original comment said there's no point playing a great snooker unless ref keeps calling a miss so the player who laid the snooker can rack up a ton of points...I was saying it's still worth playing the snooker because if your opponent fouls, you get the points then you choose whether to play from where the balls land or make your opponent play again.
he could have gone around the angles, but their was no benefit in him doing that bcos he would probably leave the red on if he hit it. Therefore the fact he did not attempt to make any other route to the red, means IMO, missed should have been called until at least 1 genuine attempt to hit the red off 4/5 cushions. i dont see why the player with the advantage should lose out from the exchange. In this scenario, i cant disagree with the refs decision at that very moment, it made tactical sense, as the player with the advantage still had an easy saftey / legit pot attempt.
I must say the big thing in this, if a player is in a bad snooker, he has his 1st shot, foul and a miss. Why not when re spotting the balls, just mark the table with something so that the most important balls in the snooker have a mark to go back to so that if it needs another re spot, it can be done fairly and efficiently. This whole staring at a screen a mile away and moving the balls in ridiculous sometimes and takes so long to do.
@@mr_BlueJT22 No but marking the table could affect how it plays, also if the ref uses the screen properly the balls should always be in the right place...I really can't understand how they ever get it wrong 🤷♂️
Take an overhead polaroid pic of the balls and then hand the pic to the ref he will then have a way to re-spot the balls correctly. He can hold the pic in his hand to make sure the balls are in the same place. I've also seen where the before and after screens are placed on top of one another so there is no way you can get the spotting wrong.
![Impossible to escape [Snooker Controversy, Interesting situation]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P1JB3inHIM0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Impossible to escape [Snooker Controversy, Interesting situation]](/img/tr.png)
Ball positions
2:14 original
3:32 2nd
4:07 3rd (edit: 5:20)
The distance between brown and pink got bigger each time!
Yeah I really don't know why they don't use an overhead camera or multiple camera angles. Instead they opt for this ridiculous angled camera shot and nothing else
And why not overlay on screen, or project onto the table, the original ball positions as he moves them so that they can be placed spot on?
Actually third attempt was changed and latest look is on 5:20
@@germanboy3161 Yep, it's the most logical solution. Very strange that it hasn't yet been implemented in this age of tiny, discrete, high-rez cameras.
Great line from JP saying hes been in that many snookers today that his car is bound to be blocked in the car park that was the best thing about this clip
It was a funny line. Delivered at just the right moment.
Yeah I laughed lol
Blows my mind they don’t have a Hawk-Eye kinda system in snooker since the balls have to be replaced so often.
A camera above the table takes a picture when the balls come to rest. Use a device that projects a ball shape or a dot, representing the ball, on the table from above.
The tech is here already, so why not
They do, do this
They do that, at least in the big tournaments like the World Championship. But the balls still have to be put back manually.
@@Ploon72 my idea was that there’d be a projection of a dot or ball ON the table where the ref could see it. Then the ref could simply place the balls on those dots and call it a day.
They have that already?
They have that kind of technology in use in big Chinese tournaments. The ref looks at a screen showing the last position of the balls and when he re positions the ball correctly, the screen image flashes.
@@davidmartin1093 goooot it got so it’s not widely available but it’s out there. Alright then
See the cue and the brown balls repositioning:
Initial snooker position: 2:14
Last snooker position: 5:19
Easier last one
I have never seen this referee as a good one. He is the worst. No personality. Lack of judgement. Stupid face and unnecessary attitude.
@@hazelaze7184 Ronnie rates him though :)
lol
Snooker is such a fascinating and subtle game. Even all the time wasted re-positioning the balls is part of it.
Took me a minute and a half to figure out that one of the two reds was actually the brown ball! lol that made things tougher for sure
Same as lol
I played with a friend who was green-red colour blind and couldn’t tell the green, red and brown balls apart. Made for an odd game.
Ok I get shit from my mates not knowing the difference between the reds and the brown. I’m glad I’m not alone in this. I just look out for where the brown is at all times from the start of the game so that I don’t goof it up
Same. In general I'm green/brown colourblind but on a snooker table it's the brown and the reds that are the problems. I have to check how many "reds" there are and then decide which of those is the brown.
@@Ploon72 Peter Ebdon has trouble telling the brown from the reds. I think he just remembers where the brown is when it's off its spot, and if he's not sure which ball is the brown, he asks the referee.
The ‘miss’ rule was originally enforced to stop players taking advantage by leaving the balls difficult after missing the object ball. No miss should have ever been called in my opinion, as he made a genuine attempt to hit the red.
you may be right, but see, thing is every snooker is different and easier or harder than each other. Sometimes players put a lot of efford on a good snooker and i think opponents shouldnt be getting away with it so easily.
and conveniently left it safe....
Genuine attempt or not its whether making a genuine attempt and leaving it short even by a couple of millimetres is to your advantage reaching it can be achieved but has more risk and pro snooker the skill level is so good that if the referee deems it possible he will call a miss
Dunn is hard 2 watch , always looks like he's just been told his dogs died.
lol
And he killed them by accident
Shaun "what's in the water where you live" 🤣🤣
The miss rule was created to stop a player deliberately missing to create an unfair advantage or to get out of a snooker with out trying, as it was assumed that any professional should be beyond those tactics and should have the skills to escape a snooker or at least make a decent effort . Anyone with any level of common sense could watch the efforts made here and agree that in the sense of fair play, a decent effort was made.
I agree. Misses are called way too often. Refs seem to almost always want an easy life by simply calling a 'miss' rather than making a decision regarding whether the player did everything within their ability to hit the object ball or not.
@Question Time It's not necessarily an advantage from playing a deliberate foul.
For example there could be a situation where an object ball is quite easy to hit via one cushion, but playing it that way risks leaving it on for one's opponent. However there could be a way to hit it via two cushions that's much more difficult but minimises the risk of leaving it on. In that situation if the player chooses the latter option and fails to hit the object ball then they haven't done everything within their ability to hit it, making a 'miss' applicable.
That isn't the situation in the video. The player only has one reasonable way to hit the ball and does everything he can to hit it, which is why I don't think a miss should be called.
@Question Time In the video I don't think he is. He's not playing a foul shot, he's playing a legal shot but failing to execute it because it's so difficult. He hasn't gained an advantage in the end because he's left the red pottable for Wilson, whereas if he hit the red he might not have. Plus he gave points away.
@Question Time Then that would have just been tough luck for Wilson, I guess. As long as you don't deliberately foul and you make the absolute best possible attempt to hit the object ball in the referee's opinion then it shouldn't be called as a miss.
@Question Time It's not about being on sides, it's about going by what's written in the World Snooker rulebook.
He won't thank me but can't help but think Dunn looks like Alastair Campbell
I can see that. I was thinking Charlie Stayt from BBC Breakfast myself.
In the original position 2:30 he could have hit the top cushion nearly behind the black spot but when replaced 4:17 that's impossible. Click on the video to freeze it and see this clearly
That is a pretty big difference, indeed. But if it's so easy for us to see, how come the guys at the monitors don't see it?
@@speaketh A puzzle indeed!
Agree! It's hard to believe no one noticed that, from players to referee to video commenters. Maybe we have a privileged view here :-)
Anyway, I would never had attempted to go back between the brown and the cushion in the first place, but what do I know...
I don't think it was an impossible snooker, freezing the video at both shots shows how big a difference.there was in the position, yeh he had.to give it more side than he wanted but could have compensated by directing more toward the black spot
It's an absolute joke that they still have not implemented over table camera freeze frames. It would be easy as pie then. It's like they want to make it as difficult as possible
Poor job by the refs imo. Press 3 and 5 to see the repositioning.. it's a huge difference
As well as the person behind the screens.
You can also press 4, you see how the pink makes his way :D
4:14 Ha ha ha, those commentators don't spare each others feelings :)
Not easy, but far from impossible, what made it difficult was the bad replacement of the balls by the referee, there was no learning curve because the balls were never the same places.
They didn’t need to be, he only needed to apply the exact amount of english to the cue ball to hug the rail to the side pocket... it’s the exact amount of english that’s necessary to make that happen is what makes that shot so extremely difficult... I’d say 1 in 10 for a pro. 1 in 50 for an better than average player such as myself.
@@jasong9502 - Needed to be exact for him to gauge the side, millimetres convert to centimetres when using side to correct the cue ball. Tough job for the referee, but essential if the same shot is to be repeated. Ratio's would be 7/10 for a pro and for a an amateur perhaps 1/20. There was actually a time where the balls were so replaced so badly that he looked to the opposite cushion to play one cushion across the table with left hand side but you can see him telling the referee he has it wrong, again.
It's a really tough shot. In order to get the ball to come towards the near rail he has to give it left English. The brown ball blocking the left side of the que is what makes this shot very difficult
@@TreYay83 - Left hand side is the last thing he plays on this. He tries to play it with a trace of check, right hand side, to mend the cue ball and that is the correct shot, The ref never puts the balls back in the same place, it makes it almost impossible to play the same shot.
@@dougieroberts7045 you are probably right. I always thought the spin on the ball always switches when it hits a bumper. So left spin off the que would cause right spin... Jesus after thinking about it I have it backwards... my bad lol
A good player is a good player, but everyone appreciates a good referee
"what's in the water where you live?" ;DDDD 4:14
The replacing of the balls, which I see so often, was absolutely shocking. What do the refs be looking at before the shot is taken?
Yeah he played a different shot each time they were replaced, and we're not talking margins. They were way out.
@Guru Amirite This has been bought up by so many people now, hard to believe it can't be done with todays tech.
@@hamoostaffat that’s not modern tech, projectors were invented in the fkin late 1800’s there’s no reason they shouldn’t have one
@@hamoostaffat It exists. You can buy it for a pool table with software and projector for like $900. It's really impressive. So yeah they could easily do it for this.
@@JeffMartin84 i know it exists ffs that's what I said, and if anyone who has bothered to follow the projector idea over the years knows they won't use it yet till it gets faster, as you still need a few secs to scan the table between each shot which as stated by the wpbsa years ago it would disrupt quick players, I'm not saying it can't be done but it can't be done quick enough for professional televised snooker yet, people should really follow the stories they are trying to tell others about, before saying stupid things like my home entertainment could be used in a professional setting just as good. Jeez man, think
it was possible to go bottom cushion, right cushion above the middle pocket, between blue and green, top cushion then towards the red. risked the in off though
I thought same thing at first. Equally very difficult though
I know nothing about snooker and this is in my recommendation
Maybe it's a sign...
You don't know what you're missing.
It’s awesome
@@dublinius the red
Watch and learn kid
This is possibly the one area of snooker that needs improvement, finding some sort of technology that allows for the quicker replacement of balls.
You could have some sort of lighting system that shines down from above the colours of the balls and where they go?
Since the camera angle is fixed maybe you can use the footage from before, and make it a little bit transparent then put the the current picture above it, now you can adjust the ball until its position is pixel perfect to the previous one
In one of the china tournament they had some technology to help replace the balls it looked good but I don't know what happened to the technology that was used, maybe in the end it was not accurate enough but it was a great way to at least get the ball back to nearly the correct position and with a little human intervention I am sure that it was a way forward.
wouldnt be difficult, a camera directly above the table looking down would be best, then as Se ti said a dedicated screen for the ref with a transparent image of the position overlaid on the live picture would eliminate 99% of error
ABSOLUTELY!!! I am sooooo glad that you can see that has been a huge stumbling block in the flow and accuracy of a game. I was beginning to think I was the only one.
2:10 - Wow, professional tournament tables and cloths can run so untrue? Look at how much the red curves off line!
He put right side on it, so when it bounces of the nearside cushion (relative to the camera) and it’s going back up the table it has left on it. When it makes contact with the red, the energy of x-axis is transferred in the opposite direction whilst travelling up the table.
In layman’s terms… he played it with side. Angles, top, bottom and side are exaggerated at slower speeds 👍🏼
@@jx_g the side was well gone off the white by the time it hit the red. The red drifted off a lot. My guess is it rolled off when it hit the joint in the slate because that's exactly where it happened.
Sooner or later, they will come up with an automated solution to ball respotting. LIke an iPad the ref can use to directly see the prior positions using a wireless connection to the booth.
Has any of the replayers tested these snookers?
I am amazed the referees have no app to help them position the balls correctly. One that automatically shows a magnified difference between the previous and current position.
Shaun Murphy getting all misty eyed about the sportsmanship in snooker.
Little massé between cushion and brown. Cue 80° elevation and firm but small and controlled shot, direct curve, cueball rolls 10 inches for the hit on te red. Good for a righthanded person.
That darn snooker, got me again
3:26 if by using the rest he was putting too much side on the cue ball because that was the only place he could make contact on it then maybe he should have tried using the spider, where with the extra height he might have been able to hit the cue ball closer to the middle and end up putting on less side.
But the trouble with the spider is you're striking down more on the cueball, which you probably know makes the shot much more difficult and it encourages the white to swerve before the bounce if not hit at the right pace. For me, i'd always use the rest and just aim further towards the black spot to compensate for too much side. But i'm not a pro.
That would definitely swerve the cue ball and would be far tougher.
Instead, he could have just aimed a bit further from the pocket to counter the more spin imparted.
Exactly what I just said earlier in the thread. He was that fucking lazy to use the extended spider he was bound to apply too much side. If he used the extended spider no side would have been needed and he would have completed the escape quite easily. Mr Parrot of course has to try and make a fucking mountain out of a mole hill as per usual. Parrott was also wrong when he said Wilson wasn't "applauding the decisions" at all. Wilson in reality was pissed off because the ref never awarded the miss. Just watch his face when he walks to the table. Only today Wilson was bleating on again in the Masters when Gilbert was getting the run of the balls, I thought he was going to cry! Gilbert won in the end thank god, Wilson beat himself as per usual! Good riddance Wilson! You're crap!
@@bagalwalagamer9676 I thought about that too, but the trouble then is you are changing the angle the cue ball hits the left cushion on the way back up, so it would be bouncing more away from the red.
You gotta give hats off to Kyren Wilson for his amazing sportsmanship (: such a wonderful chap (:
He was looking at the ref like why isn’t it foul and a miss lol now if it was the first 3 times. Wilson didn’t do anything to help him
What I don't get it at all
Don’t forget Dunn. The only reason he ended up in that situation was because he was being nice to Kyren and the ref
@@brianmcsherry1338 I’m fairly certain that once a miss is called, it continues to be so no matter what the next shot. Of course, that doesn’t mean that Kyren has to ask for it to go back
@@johnb8956 yeah it normally just continues to be called a foul unless the ref thinks the shot isn’t on then he’ll just call a miss. Kryen was looking at the ref like why isn’t it foul and a miss again haha
You would figure that they would have a projector above the table pointing down that could save the position of the balls before each shot... the balls were way off each shot
I was going to make this exact comment, but you beat me to it.
Some kind of laser setup that saved the positions after every shot.
Exactly, with the tech available today there must be a better way. Unless its like an ump in baseball, can be done with lasers but its part of the game.
There's billions of different ways to solve this silly little problem, they're just that fucking idle!
@Guru Amirite Hawkeye was developed in the UK, for cricket, and was first adopted there and at Wimbledon for tennis. Snooker is way behind other "British" sports.
and what about the "red cushion-long cushion-baulk cushion-red" route?
Wait, couldn't Mike use a spider and then hit the white with less side spin to hit the red?
2:30 If he hits the top cushion a little to our left of the black spot it will hit the green side cushion, go between green and blue, rebound off the baulk cushion hopefully miss the yellow and might get near the red? (I think - maybe - with a little side perhaps?)
Exactly what I thought looking at it, I don't think you'd need the side either as the cushions on the pro tables slide so much more than a club one, going off the side cushions plain ball on the pro tables is like playing every shot with running side on a club one.
It's what makes snooker a great game of risk and caution, fast and slow.
I'm disappointed seeing a referee use common sense.
Good for him, there are far too many misses called nowadays.
You should never call another man's Mrs!!
@DG The miss rule was introduced to stop players from playing a foul shot that left their opponent in a worse position deliberately. Key word is deliberately.
A miss is called if and only if the ref decides the player did not make the best effort to escape the snooker, usually due to players also attempting a safety shot during the escape attempt, increasing the difficulty of the shot for a lower risk outcome.
In situations where a legal shot is impossible or there is only one route to escape and the player attempts it, a miss should not be called. The other player still has the option to either take the next shot or make his opponent take it (from the new position).
The miss rule is *not* designed for players to milk points out of a difficult snooker.
This is why if snookers are required then the miss rule is not applicable as it's never in that player's interest to do anything except try for a legal shot
@DG They don't. In the event of no miss, If the foul shot results in a snooker, a free hit is enacted. If the foul shot results in an impressive safety shot the player can opt to have the fouler take the next shot.
@DG Then no advantage has been gained. The fouler commited a foul, 4-7 points are awarded to the opponent and the opponent has clear, full view of both sides of an on-ball. This is a situation preferable to being snookered and therefore is advantageous to the opponent and not the fouler.
@DG That is only an option if the miss rule is called. Which has been covered. Extensively at this point!
I think Dunn could have used the spider. That way, he could get whatever side spin he wanted.
I think the referee should not have called a foul without a miss until he tried that.
Shouldn't that no miss call have been a free ball though or does the cushion stopping an edge of the object ball not count as snookered?
You cannot be snookered by the jaws of the table, only another ball.
0:16 A glitch in the Matrix, several people in the audience have frozen. One guy notices, gives the chap next to him a double take and tries to communicate with him to no avail.
But he blinked ya dingus
Great decision from the referee. I wish they would use discretion in these situations more often.
Shaun takes commentating too seriously 😂😂
Computers are running every aspect of our lives, but they can't find a computer to put a ball back in the same place lol
It would be so easy, a laser system above the table which draws out an outline of where the balls should be right on to the table. especially for high level games such as this
@@aakksshhaayy I know. Literally the easiest thing in the world
It's shocking how bad the refs are at putting the balls back where they were
I called a miss in a County tie yrs ago on 1 of my team m8s & the place Erupted🤣🤣🤣🤣
The pink was off its line. 100% 💯
Well played still
Great snooker and entertaining comments
Only trouble with not calling a miss is that it means a medium-difficulty snooker generates a higher reward than a very hard snooker. Perhaps the solution would be to tell the player they can take the miss or take a 25-point penalty.
Nah that's just stupid
The striker shall, to the best of his ability, endeavour to hit the ball on. If the referee considers the Rule infringed, he shall call FOUL AND A MISS unless only the Black remains on the table, or a situation exists where it is impossible to hit the ball on.
Professional players would often take a more difficult route out of a snooker, committing a foul by not hitting the snookered ball with the realisation that, taking the easier route (much easier to hit the ball on with the possibility of leaving the opposition an opportunity to win the frame) hence, the miss rule being introduced. This referee showed his expertise by recognising the position of the balls as constituting an 'impossible snooker'.
that is a nasty snooker. good call by the ref
The experts in the comments is shocking 😄. Unless you’re capable of reaching a place in the tournament, pipe down. Money where mouth is simple. They don’t call it snooker for nothing 🙄
Right? Guy at the top trying to say that former world champion John Parrott is wrong about the difficultly of the shot, and that he, a random internet moron, should be trusted more.
@@PJBonoVox 😆 yep
Q? Why does the referee no pick the white ball up immediately when a foul is obvious?
Referee refused to call miss because he did not want to have to keep replacing the balls in the correct position.
I reckon that the position of the yellow and green balls are what makes this a hard escape,it looks like they're cutting off the baulk cushion. And in saying that,hitting the red via the baulk cushion risks an in-off,so I think he tried the best option.
6:02 I'm a little teapot ...
....i am snookered and I can't get out
@@dkizxpt-su3ze nice one :D
@@paulkenney700 Your comment was superb! 🤣
Snooker is a game of skill, you shouldn't be punished for putting your opponent into an impossible snooker. You should be rewarded for it.
The other player let him reset it
Otherwise would have moved on
That’s why it’s called snooker 🙄😆
Placement of cue ball at 2:34 is different than 3:28.
I know the English Snooker rules allow you to place cue ball and other balls back to the position, but I do not like playing that way for this very reason.
At 2:34, there was more angle to shoot towards the right side of the table, but the position of the cue ball was worse after the ref tried to put it back. If I were playing the game, I would want it back exactly at the position it was in, but it will never turn out perfect doing this, which is why I prefer to play the game as shoot it were it lay or make the other opponent shoot where it lay.
This way there is no argument when gambling, because there is no ref, and the opponent always gets to choose how the balls will be positioned to their favor.
Geoff Hurst playing snooker now ?
Very difficult but not impossible, best way I can see is similar to what he is trying but go between the pink and black with right side spin, off the head cushion then down the side rail, very difficult but easier than trying to squeeze between the brown and side rail.
At 2:06 Pay Attention To The Red Ball Moving Away From The Middle Pocket. 🤷♂️.
Who's in the commentary box with Parrot?
wow
it's awesome
Class respect on a level of shopping for milk
I think there should be a rule that the player needs to have a certain number of attempts before the ref decides to call no miss. Say for example they need to have 5 attempts and then the ref can decide to either keep calling miss or call no miss. I always feel bad when a player lays an amazing impossible snooker and only gets 8 points from it.
I agree. If you lay an impossible snooker you may make 8 points, if you lay one that's not as good you may get 16+ points from it because the ref will keep calling a miss.
Personaly I think that "miss" rule shuld be banned it is stupid, especially when reff is not serving it makes tha geme not enjoyeble. At pro level it puts down the tempo
I think the miss rule has to be kept, as there's plenty of times that players are clearly more focusing on not leaving a ball as a pot, rather than genuinely trying to hit a ball. So in those many instances the miss rule is perfect.
However, in order to make it easier for refs it's just, generally, allowed to be called every time. Which I think is wrong, as there's clearly times when the player IS making a genuine attempt to just hit the ball, and they just miss it, and yet it still gets called a miss - and that's not why the miss rule is in place. There should be more responsibility put on the refs to make more of a judgement call and use common sense on a lot more occasions - rather than just call miss 99% of the time.
It's about making the most genuine attempt at hitting the ball on. If someone just narrowly misses on the second, but he is still required to play the shot another 3 times, his 5th shot may be miles off the second and would be considered a miss.
And you can't just arbitrarily award the other player 3 fouls worth of points to compensate.
The ref has to take into account the position of the balls for the other player too, the red was in an easily potable position to top corner.
Jimbo, I saw a comment about fouls and misses a while back, and I think it made the right point. If a red and a black is worth 8 points, how many points SHOULD be possible from a safety? If that answer is 20+, you start getting to the point that players stop potting balls, and play safeties a lot sooner. It wouldn’t take a lot of analytics the first time the bottom seed in a tourney gets his best career result by looking for safeties instead of pots.
And then when you consider the fact that safeties can be set up simply because of the where the balls end up at the beginning of a frame, before the first ball is sunk, does it really make for good snooker when someone plays a safety 10 points into a break at a sizable rate?
I believe he could have made it, if he had played it softer, which he ofc didn't want to, as it would have left the red in front of the pocket (from the last position). From the original position, it looks like it could have been played past the pink and round in 3 cushions.
I'm not trying to sound big headed here, but I'm a pretty decent pool player and rarely play snooker and I can get out of that. Side cushion with extreme right hand side then when it hits the bottom cushion the spin reverses and the cue ball will run back up the side cushion and there's a chance of knocking the red into the middle bag
Efren would have gotten out of that snooker and potted the red.
This is why the game is called snooker 😂😂!
2:09 is it me or did that red do a massive C along the rail...? It didn't touch the cushion?! I thought these tables are supposed to be perfect >.
This strange rule of replacing balls and replay doesn't exist in USA.
The ball-in-hand rule is less controversial.
Surely the masse is on ?
Yes.. my first thought also. Small massé around the brown. Avoid hitting the cushion in the first place. Small direct curve, but firm little shot with high elevation cue.. For a righthanded person a good option.
@@MartinvanRhee Yes it is easy to see it and make it for good carom billiard players but for snooker players or british viewers impossible to see it!
Isn't it about time someone came up with a camera suspended above the table that takes a snapshot after every shot that was also capable of projecting or connected to something that could then project the position of the balls onto the table perhaps with coloured spotlights. I've thought about this for a while and actually thought it would inevitably happen, but it hasn't to my surprise.
What a gem of an idea in this digital world we live in.It I guess could easily be done.We have virtual ref.s in soccer,tennis etc.The teck is there to be had.
The technology is there, we're gone to the moon for fucks sake!
The shot at 2:39 , it seems as if he can shoot into the cushion hard to compress it and hit the red.
Look at 4.42 , they both clash cues in despair of snooker torment battle!
I would think there should be an easy fix to repositioning the balls with our modern technology. A camera could tell if a ball is a few pixels too far one direction or the other.
I’m sure it’s akin to baseball and they don’t want to remove the umps from calling balls and strikes but it’s just silly to me watching them give hand gestures “left left no too much back to the right” 😂
Edit: and furthermore I just took a screenshot of all three of the first positions and they are definitely not the same. I feel like that alters the match a ton….
Good shots.
3 cushion escape top side & baulk cushions come on guys
Is that Mark Selby commentating with John Parrott?
Murphy mate
@@theresadelaney6601 o yes
Kyren's reaction when no miss was called shows he loves hedging his bets on free points. If only he didn't bother so much like Ronnie does and actually pot some balls he'd be a better player.
Jimmy would have got out of it
Seeing as the red was the only ball he could play for, if the ref determines that the player's shot was the easiest shot he could play to try and hit it and that the effort was good. It isn't a miss. However, the ball replacement was pretty bad.
Far from impossible snooker, but the miss rule is overused due to players trying not to leave an advantage for their opponent. If he could only see right hand side then aim a bit further left on bottom cushion. Not rocket science. Also made easier by ref's bad ball replacement.
The further left you hit the cushion, the smaller the hole to pass through (due to the angle of approach). Also, coming at such an angle, even if the cue ball passes through the hole, it may hit the cushion, and miss the red.
everytime the ref replaces the balls they are in a different spot,
Either you get it or you don't, take your lumps and move on. This 2nd chance is bs because they will never, get it exactly right which defeats the purpose of "I could've got that".
What if he was left handed?
They seem to replace the balls in proper position with no problem in China
7:19 Terry doesn't even call a miss on this escape either. Could it be he misread the scores and thought Dunn needed snookers?
Dunn did need snookers.
@@gazzawhite Oh yeah. Points took a while to add on.
That was evil!.....As JV would say, "tough school".....
Who'se JV?
At least the ref should have an ipad to be able to see closely the position whilst at the table
If you lay a snooker which is impossible to get out of, the other player should simply lose the match or keep playing until giving up. Not calling a miss is a reward to the opponent, even if they leave an easy starter.
I've wondered about that. It could change the game a lot though.
If that were the rule we'd see far more snooker attempts. Unless a player is needing snookers to win there is far more incentive (now) to play for potting points. A snooker (now) is usually only attempted as a superior safety (again, not considering when snookers are required to win).
One problem with snookers, such as in this situation, is that the players can take turns snookering one another. So some snooker attempts are can "backfire".
Creating and escaping snookers is entertaining, but just up to a certain point.
What an idiotic thing to say. So rather than break building, you just take pot the easiest color on the table, planning to eventually get a snooker when there are only a couple reds left?
@Question Time
I think you miss the point.
I couldn’t tell you the numbers, but how many breaks end up being enough points to win a frame-- including ~50ish point breaks that happen early, then both players score about 25 more points, but the initial ~50 was more than the other guy scored-? Maybe 1 in 10 or 1 in 20? Somewhere in there. So there’s about a 10% chance any break will win the frame. Part of this hinges on the fact that there’s a limit to how many points you can score from one snooker.
Now, let’s implement the original post’s rule about winning a frame outright from a single snooker. People are pretty smart, they learn. Take basketball for instance. They’ve figured out that with good enough shooters, it’s better to shoot a lot of 3’s. Or Baseball- theyve figured out it scores more points to try to hit home runs than trying to get base runners and sacrifice. Or Football- the rules have made passing a better way to score more points.
Ok, so back to snooker... what happens when rather than needing a lot of precision shots to win a frame (as well as a couple cannons) you change the rules so that only one really good snooker can win a frame? You may as well plug the pockets, because players are going to start going for a lot more safeties. Even funnier when someone is winning a frame by a good amount.
@Question Time
Wow, man. A little aggressive.
You’re still missing the point. IF, and the word IF is important here. IF you change the rule so that one snooker can win a frame, it would change the play style. Rather than going for the cannon, players start picking off loose reds, and start setting up the game winning snooker. Instead of aiming for the colors that have drifted off their spots, players would use those as a barrier.
You don’t seem to grasp that players tend to go for the runout, partially because the points from a snooker aren’t infinite. Make a snooker a frame winner and you change the strategy.
Could he not have used the spider to bridge over the brown and avoid getting right hand side ?
Here's why the shot is so hard: Because the edge of the pocket extends a little on the cushion, he can't hit it just at a plain angle. He NEEDS the right hand side to get to the red at all. Next problem is the bridging over the brown in addition, so he has to lift up the queue as well. It is very very hard to judge the side with that, its basically a lucky guess. I agree with the ref, the first attempt was too far away, but the last one was pretty close. He tried to hit the red, he had enough speed and he played it as best to his abilities... so no miss.
What a pink!!!
Why can't they just have lasers point to where the balls should be put back?
Still don't understand why they don't have tech to reorganize the balls.
I’m not up on my terms, but it seems the ref would call no hit as opposed to no miss as the title suggests
It's to do with the ruling known as 'foul and a miss' where the balls can be replaced a normal foul without 'miss' being called by the ref means balls don't get replaced to same position
@@mattgrieves4466 thank you for he explanation
Nothings impossible. 😁
Could you fly to the moon and back without any equipment ?
No, you couldn't. So that is impossible ! 😊
@@superfinster I grew wings and flew up there last year that’s old news pal... it’s 2021 now .. anything’s possible!!
Far from impossible when there's a 3 cushion escape that he clearly didn't want to use because he probably would have left the red on miss should have been called I think
Nothing is impossible to efren. Hope he's the one playing.
What do you mean?
If this is the case it really is pointless playing the best snooker ever. They should've called miss till he atleast needed snookers himself to win.
Basically saying play snookers but don't be so good the other player can't escape them.
Not really, you still get the points from the foul and have the option to make your opponent play the next shot from where the balls land.
The best snooker ever is one where if your opponent is trying to hit the ball they will leave it on for you to clear up.
So you want some crazy game with a 50+ sq ft table and 6 pockets and 15 reds and 6 colors, and the object of the game is to nudge one of the colors close to the cushion so that you can auto win the frame by tucking the cue in behind it?
That’s a lot of effort to play nothing but safeties.
@Question Time you still have the option of making your opponent play the shot from where the balls land, and you've had the points from the foul, so it's still worth playing a good snooker.
@Question Time huh?...crossed wires, I think. The original comment said there's no point playing a great snooker unless ref keeps calling a miss so the player who laid the snooker can rack up a ton of points...I was saying it's still worth playing the snooker because if your opponent fouls, you get the points then you choose whether to play from where the balls land or make your opponent play again.
he could have gone around the angles, but their was no benefit in him doing that bcos he would probably leave the red on if he hit it. Therefore the fact he did not attempt to make any other route to the red, means IMO, missed should have been called until at least 1 genuine attempt to hit the red off 4/5 cushions. i dont see why the player with the advantage should lose out from the exchange. In this scenario, i cant disagree with the refs decision at that very moment, it made tactical sense, as the player with the advantage still had an easy saftey / legit pot attempt.
I must say the big thing in this, if a player is in a bad snooker, he has his 1st shot, foul and a miss. Why not when re spotting the balls, just mark the table with something so that the most important balls in the snooker have a mark to go back to so that if it needs another re spot, it can be done fairly and efficiently. This whole staring at a screen a mile away and moving the balls in ridiculous sometimes and takes so long to do.
Nobody wants marks on the table
@@nakkadu nobody wants mis spotted balls either.
@@mr_BlueJT22 No but marking the table could affect how it plays, also if the ref uses the screen properly the balls should always be in the right place...I really can't understand how they ever get it wrong 🤷♂️
Take an overhead polaroid pic of the balls and then hand the pic to the ref he will then have a way to re-spot the balls correctly. He can hold the pic in his hand to make sure the balls are in the same place. I've also seen where the before and after screens are placed on top of one another so there is no way you can get the spotting wrong.
why it impossible to hit? I dont get it?