They have tech that can map the calls location instantly... just use a projector to display on the table where the balls were previously... save a lot of faff! I have a set up like that for board games.
Wouldn't it be technically possible to mark the spots with coloured laser-light right on the table to ease the referees put the balls back on their last positions?
You probably dont give a shit but if you are stoned like me during the covid times you can stream pretty much all of the new movies on InstaFlixxer. Have been streaming with my brother for the last days :)
Yes, but thats a projection system that needs a camera and projector, and a computer to run it. Would be fine for the bigger matches but not all matches
4:38 imagine you're that referee who called "Foul and a Miss" which needs a large amount of relocation and THEN 6:08 the player yeets the cue ball across the board nearly hitting you 😂
commentators: "Apologies to the audience for having to watch this boring realignment" GTKomissaR;: "Hey what a great thing to collect together for a RU-vid compilation"
We can track the position of a soccer ball within a mm traveling 60 mph with constantly moving bodies obstructing sight lines using cameras mounted 500 ft from the field. It's certainly doable. Just a question of if there is a big enough market to develop a system for snooker
The ball tracking that is used in Cricket is years ahead of Snooker, I don't even think they would need Lasers just some Hi Res camera's and good software.
Well, it wasn't really snooker, I mean, I think it was included right at the end for a bit of fun, nobody thinks it's snooker, least of all the players.
In wargaming, we have laser pointers that project a line instead of a dot, so we can tell for sure whether a mini is behind cover. Snooker referees should have them as well for determining free ball.
3D projection onto headset with view of table before shot taken that ref can see and also see table live. Once both lined up visually then balls can be placed exactly. Thus getting the super imposed vision we se on our tv's
First clip, refs should have some sort of tablet instead of keep asking another person. It would make the whole process easier and then the person who she is originally asking can just confirm it's all ok.
The miss rule is a farce. They're basically saying player A intentionally and dishonestly does not leave player B at an advantage with the foul. They then ask player A if the ball is back in the right place.. so is he dishonest or not? 🙄
It's 2021 and we certainly have relatively inexpensive technology that can be used to make this process easier (a tablet with a simple before and after screenshot for the ref would be one example), and yet, they still don't utilize this to this day?
ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HGL4DOmbHfI.html ssme players but not Michaela. And of course it's a bullshit yelling 'murican' crowd...
@@john_wheels There's no reason to pick on Americans for the ebullient crowd. Especially as it was played in London, not in America & to a European crowd. Whilst I did find the crowd annoyingly loud, I won't impugn their standing based on country of origin. Rather snobbish comment that. 2010 Power Snooker Masters Trophy - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Power_Snooker_Masters_Trophy
First clip, Mark left a straight red into the middle pocket.. according to the miss rule how is that leaving your opponent at a disadvantage. Not even a miss for me
Another reason the miss rule is a farce here. If the balls go everywhere then how can they claim the player left his opponent at a disadvantage "on purpose"
Ronnie was being a tool in the last clip. Given what the format was meant to be, and that he has effectively won with that scoreline given the amount of time remaining, he should just play or put ali back in without replacing the balls.
Great Video ;) Got a question to the viewers about a rule: What if a Player fouls a Color (When on Game on colors) when the Opponent Player needs Snooker? Does the fouled Color gets respotted?
pultz666 Yeah sorry wasn‘t able to describe my Problem correctly. So if the Green Ball is on and the Opponent Player requires Snooker, and i Pot the Green Ball but the Cue Ball goes in aswell, the Green will ne respotted on its Place?
Dein Name lässt vermuten, dass ich azf deutsch antwirten kann 😀 Eine Farbe wird so lange wieder aufgesetzt, bis sie beim Endspiel auf die Farben korrekt gepottet wurde.
Because a player made a foul shot and the ref called a "foul and miss". The another player has the option to play on or tell the ref to restore back to let his opponent to retake the shot
The miss rule was created because players were intentionally fouling and leaving the opponent in a bad position where them getting a free ball wasn't enough to make up for it. Once they got enough of a lead, they would foul. if the opponent let them play, then they could make another red and a color, and then foul again, increasing the lead overall. If the opponent played on, they could only get those same two shots, and they would be stuck, and end up giving the original fouler another turn. So when such a foul is done, the opponent can force everything back to undo the damage to the position the foul did, and make them try again. But this rule requires determining intent, which is hard to prove. Intentional fouls can be disguised, and honest attempts can just HAPPEN to ruin the other players position. So instead, if the ref feels the player could have done better, it will be a foul and a miss. If the ref saw a simpler shot that would have let the opponent in better position, it will be a foul and a miss. If the shot wasn't hit hard enough it will be a foul and a miss. it's nearly ALWAYS a foul and a miss in pro games, unless an exception prevents a miss from being called.
Why have this rule of miss to have to put the balls back? Why not let the ref make the call when it's too complicated to put back and let the opponent player decide if the want to play or pass. If that's not enough of an advantage then allow the opponent player to move the white anywhere on the table.
Give the ref a tablet with a big high pixel density screen, which can zoom right in on the thing they need to see. none of this walking back and forth to look at a shitty computer monitor, none of that "closer to me, no, towards you" nonsense
In baseball a player would be ejected for questioning the umpire like Robertson did on that free ball. About time they bring in punishment for dissent in snooker.
Replacing the balls on a foul is the most stupid rule. It should be the next players option to take the next shot or give it back to the other player. What a complete waste of time time and effort
The red near the left pocket I believe he wasn't able to play that one due to the pink so he only the other one towards the right one and in that shot you are playing to a blind pocket however it's a risk that he probably should have taken, any professional shoud be able to pot that ball in that circumstance
I disagree. Let's analyse two possible reds: 1) near left corner, 2) blind pocket cutback to right corner. Also 3) he would "win an easy frame". To play 1), he is hampered by the rail and would end up (with plain ball) near the black cushion. You might say he can play a screw or a stun shot but he can easily get stuck by the black or the reds near the left cushion, not to mention making the shot highly risky. 2) that shot is pretty reckless as he would be almost guaranteed to leave the red near the left corner had he missed it. 3) the out-of-commission black, the red on the black cushion and near right cushion all make this quite difficult, seeing Lines was 30 points behind
@@lucas29476 well, Nigel Bond hit a more dificult in the UK championship against Trump, at the 9th frame i think, so i dont think we need to analyse anything. I think that kind of shot would be a no thinker for Ronnie, Higgins and the rest elite.
