Same as other ruling- was correct and rules are rules- if it had been called at the time. Its not just grosvenor that enforces a verbal action is binding even out of turn. If you play a WPT etc you will find the same applies just players dont say daft things and other players dont try and takeadvantage or angle shoot.
Saying I will call you whatever you bet so shortly after the previous ruling is a very stupid thing to do. The OP is a c**t imo for allowing the player to fold and then trying to claim his chips. If he wants to stick to the rules he should have made sure his hand wasn't folded by calling for a ruling before pushing allin which is what frazer did. In this case at least the guy gets to play the pot out and he may actually still win the pot. By allowing the player to fold then asking for a ruling afterwards it meant he avoided the risk of an outdraw which is just plain angle shooting.
imo (and poker is a game of opinions) the rules should have been interpreted differently in this situation and the player should've kept his chips and been warned about future comments. The OP should have been informed to get rulings before the players has a chance to muck if he wanted to angle shoot (yes as TD I would've made it clear I thought he was angle shooting and would have told him how to do it "properly"). Once the next hand has been played then a ruling cannot be made on any previous hands (another one of Grosvenors rules) and I would have used this rule to over rule the "verbal actions are binding" rule.
OP is a dog
other guy is a fool for making such a stupid comment.
rule doesnt need taking out at the next rules meeting it just needs modifying/clarifying. Table banter should be allowed but I seem to be one of the only ones who thinks an actual verbal declaration should be binding. If you say "you bet and I will call" you are trying to stop the other person betting. If they bet you should have to call.