FORUM CLOSING ON 14th JANUARY

Midget C Team Would Like To Thank Kennington Social Club For There Hospitality And For A Wonderfull Evening!!!

I just want to say a big thank you to kennington after the way we were treated. They were great all night. I also want to say a big thank you to people drinking in the pub at the time, you really made us feel welcome.

Now on to tonights result

MIDGET C 8 - 7 KENNINGTON SC

Too tired to put down the players results but im sure Beefy will and maybe just maybe a short comment on tonights match.................................

Also a big well done to our skipper who i believe doesn't have a nervous system in his body as he is amazing under pressure winning the deciding frame to win the match!!!

Well done the Mullet!!

bigbossman wrote:

---

Firstly, since when has a miscue be deemed not making an attempt to play an 'on' ball (are you talking from experience), obviously said player must have been aiming at something.

When your playing snooker and have been called foul and miss twice your warned IF YOU DONOT HIT BALL ON THIS SHOT YOU LOSE THE FRAME ( This also includes a MISCUE) So as a ref I wouyld have to say no legal shot was played

---

What absolute cow dung!

Firstly pool and snooker are completely different so what happens in one set of rules doesn't apply in the other games set of Rules. So if you're gonna make a comparison between two sets of rules, try and make it logical...

This loss of frame rule (in snooker) only applies where the player can directly hit an 'on' ball and not on every foul and miss situation i.e. if you where snookered behind a colour and where attempting to roll into the pack of reds, you'd never lose the frame on the 3 foul & miss rule 

Secondly, the snooker rules regarding Foul & Miss state "If the striker, in making a stroke, fails to first hit a ball on when there is a clear path in a straight line from the cue-ball to any part of any ball that is or could be on, the referee shall call FOUL AND A MISS unless either player needed snookers before, or as a result of, the stroke played and the referee is satisfied that the miss was not intentional". Therefore it doesn't follow that the referee will call a miss if a player mis-cues.

Thirdly, it's quite clear that people have got very little idea what they're on about when bitchin' about "the tactical foul" as during my frame vs Phil last night, I was praised for not playing the "tactical foul". I had nothing to gain by playing it otherwise I would've played it.

-- Edited by MING on Monday 11th of October 2010 01:26:55 PM

bigbossman wrote:

---

Lets just agree that the rule needs looking at,

---

I'll agree that the Legal Shot paragraph of the Loss of Frame Rule needs removing as the same rule provides for people who clearly and intentionally make no attempt to play an 'on' ball. Failing any such re-writing of the rules, the man from Blackball deemed te said shot LEGAL...


bigbossman also wrote:

---

Like last night , The minute rule which is never used but part of the rules

---

I'm very much in favour of employing the minute rule, however I've used my common-sense (something sadly missing in others) and experience of national and international tournaments in deciding not to enforce this as we have enough difficulty in getting people to referee properly let alone asking for teams to provide a stopwatch and getting someone to timekeep. People will argue over whether or not they'd been a minute or not.  The referee however, is entitled to introduce the minute rule if he/she feels players are taking too long over shots. But feel free to propose said introduction at the AGM...


bigbossman also wrote:

---

Like one of your players could clearly see one of his balls and tried to hit one he could not there for giving a shot and visit but did not really make an attempt to hit his ball because he should have taken the ball over the pocket and still be able to get on his other balls left on hte table.

---

I can only assume you're taking about Dougie's frame vs Dan Durham, seeing as Jamie commented on it at the time.
  
Dougie could clearly see the ball that wasn't over the pocket and i can only assume he felt that by playing it directly he might go in-off. What he actually tried to play; only he and the man upstairs can hazard a guess.

I can't exactly remember if he played off the cushion first or played it direct as I was that shocked...



The problem that seems to "non-compute" with people is that some people are playing the 'tactical foul' without any understanding of why they're doing it, a bit like potting 5 balls then getting into a tactical battle or potting 5 balls and leaving the tied up ones to last, there's just no logical reason..

 

we seem to be missing the crown house result.
Me thinks they might of lost?

ANIMAL wrote:

---

we seem to be missing the crown house result.
Me thinks they might of lost?

---

Methinks they didn't.......they won 11 - 4!

And STILL no most wins........what's going on?

 

   8ballpotter wrote:

---

Sorry, ive been unwell. Crown House 11-4 Wheatsheaf

Ming,

Michelle said she was emailing you the result card did you recieve it?  

---

 Yes, I received it...  

 I'm still checking it for authenticity as we were 3-1 up when I left, just awaiting the CCTV footage to confirm my suspicions...

 

ANIMAL wrote:

---

we seem to be missing the crown house result.
Me thinks they might of lost?

---

ANIMAL, to continue posting you'll have to add your full name to your profile please.

Super Midget CCCC wrote:

---

Midget C Team Would Like To Thank Kennington Social Club For There Hospitality And For A Wonderfull Evening!!!

I just want to say a big thank you to kennington after the way we were treated. They were great all night. I also want to say a big thank you to people drinking in the pub at the time, you really made us feel welcome.

Now on to tonights result

MIDGET C 8 - 7 KENNINGTON SC

Too tired to put down the players results but im sure Beefy will and maybe just maybe a short comment on tonights match.................................

Also a big well done to our skipper who i believe doesn't have a nervous system in his body as he is amazing under pressure winning the deciding frame to win the match!!!

Well done the Mullet!!

---

Now tell the truth Peanut the match was played in fine spirit uptill the middle of the second leg and we all know what happened in the frame between Fulla and boinky don't we .

I haven't made my mind up yet whether to discuss this particular frame with the emperor or not but I am not going to post it on here.

Ultimately this frame ended up being the difference between the teams which I hoped it wouldn't.

A little birdie tells me those hulligans you so kindly associated yourselves with were actually "Close friends" of some of your team. Pretty poor if this is true that said players did not ask them to shut the ~@!" up but actually bought them drinks and at the end were participating in some of antics towards the end (not when people were playing though) when people were playing their shots  personally I don't care if this is true or not it doesn't change their general behaviour.

Their is my short report - lets see how long it takes for the Midgets spokesman to respond

 

Midget c's spokemans report!

On the game which involved fulla, it was a very tricky in fact impossible shot to get out off! Now maybe it wasn't the best attempt in the world but you had Julian reffing the game so if he thought it was not a good enough effort he should of said something but he didn't, so i'm not sure you have a point there!

As for the Kennington Football lads i am 100% positive none of our players knew them but there reasons at the end for cheering us on was " the kennington pool team players are a boring bunch " i must agree i was very surprised and i do believe it did help our game as we felt like the home team!!

Also i did feel a bit sorry for some of your lads with the comments made from them but i do believe it was up to the club staff to keep them quiet but they never.

At the end of the day they were paying customers buying a lot of drinks so it would be right to keep them in as they were only having a laugh like most young lads do!!

End of report! 

DocJ wrote:

---

Super Midget CCCC wrote:

---

it was a very tricky in fact impossible shot to get out off!

---

Surely that's a re-rack then?

 

---

there is a difference between actually physically impossible to get out of, and one that happens to be impossible in reality...

 

This is not gonna be good news for our captain!!!

oh i thought you was?

Never mind all over with now, hollis is then responsable!

pots wrote:

---

I dont think ive ever seen jules ref ,come to think of it ,none of them can ref to save their lives, its a joke ,all hollis is intrested in is the food ,and once that comes out you dont see him ,MING can you bring in a ref rule where they stay at the table dont talk ,no going to the bar ,no disappearing when the food is out ,surley you can come up with something

---

Rule 346 - Retribution for irresponsible refereeing.

The Away team player may thump, without penalty, the referee if he/she neglects their post during a frame in which they're refereeing...

Should, when carrying ou said retribution, the referee fall on the table and disturb the balls, they should be replaced, as near as possible to their original postion by any subsitute referee...
I believe a cue case is the preferred weapon of choice these days

 

-- Edited by MING on Friday 15th of October 2010 08:52:23 AM

 Still no most wins   ?????????????????????????