Leave it to the Ref?

[tikay]

An odd situation arise in a televised snooker match last night between Ronnie O'Sullican & Luo Honghua.

Using the rest in a crowded spot on the table, he had to lift the rest & cue quickly to avoid the cue ball returning off the top cushion.

One of the commentators spotted that his cue had nudged a red, & the instant replay confirmed it, but the Ref missed it, the audience apparently missed it, & so, strangely, did Ronnie, though I am 100% sure he never realised he had committed a foul.

He was 2-3 down at the time, went on to compile a frame winning break, & eventually the match. It almost certainly altered the outcome of the game, if not the match.

After the game, Ronnie goes into the Studio & they show him the foul. He looked (to me) genuinely shocked & upset, & insta said "I'd happily play the match again".

He also strongly suggested that the commentator should have informed the Match Referee or scorers of the infraction. The Presenter retorted "no, the commentators are not permitted to interfere".

Should the commentator inform the ref, or leave it be? We see a lot of this in televised golf, when the camera, or an eagle-eyed viewer spots an infraction, & action is taken retrospectively.  

I'm not sure it's correct, these things happen & I'm inclined to say leave it to the ref.

Here's the incident, & his studio reaction;

[RED-DOG]

I think Ronnie has great integrity and is a very fair player. However. Listening to him saying "Why what's happened? What? what's happened? seemed to scream to me that he knew he'd done it.

That aside, I think retrospective action should be taken. Surely it's the fairest thing.

[tikay]

I think Ronnie has great integrity and is a very fair player. However. Listening to him saying "Why what's happened? What? what's happened? seemed to scream to me that he knew he'd done it.

That aside, I think retrospective action should be taken. Surely it's the fairest thing.

I trust him completely, & can't imagine he'd ever do such a thing - but yes, that innocent & repeated "what happened, tell me" did seem a little odd.

Generally, when it happens, as a snooker player, we know, & surely he would have known? Even so, I can't bring myself to think he would deliberately conceal it. 

[bobby1]

It was a shame wasn't it as you would like to think the ref and the player would spot that a lot of the time. The reason I think it got missed is when playing with the rest the cue on rest makes a lot of noise anyway doesn't it, especially when you are picking them both up off the table. Given the timing of it all it looked to me like he was juggling the cue and rest as he picked the cue off it and was looking at the ball he was potting going to the pocket.

So another mild noise when his cue touched the red could easily have been lost among that cue on rest and picking them off the table noise. If he had played the shot without the rest I feel it would have been more audible and the ref and Ronnie would have heard the cue touching the red ball and Ronnie would have felt it. It deffo changed the match tho didn't it?

[bobby1]

I think Ronnie has great integrity and is a very fair player. However. Listening to him saying "Why what's happened? What? what's happened? seemed to scream to me that he knew he'd done it.

That aside, I think retrospective action should be taken. Surely it's the fairest thing.

TBH Tom I thought the same thing, the studio guys seemed to sense it sounded wrong too.

[tikay]

It was a shame wasn't it as you would like to think the ref and the player would spot that a lot of the time. The reason I think it got missed is when playing with the rest the cue on rest makes a lot of noise anyway doesn't it, especially when you are picking them both up off the table. Given the timing of it all it looked to me like he was juggling the cue and rest as he picked the cue off it and was looking at the ball he was potting going to the pocket.

So another mild noise when his cue touched the red could easily have been lost among that cue on rest and picking them off the table noise. If he had played the shot without the rest I feel it would have been more audible and the ref and Ronnie would have heard the cue touching the red ball and Ronnie would have felt it. It deffo changed the match tho didn't it?

 .

That all makes sense to me. I had to watch the reply twice before I spotted it. Am pretty sure the Chinese kid never saw it either.

And yes, it almost certainly changed the course of the match. Ronnie was 2-3 down, compiled a match-winning break from the incident, & went on to win 3-5.

[Tal]

Generally you know when you've touched or knocked a ball. This was one that could have been flicked without realising, though, so it's certainly plausible. Has Ronnie ever cheated? Seems a bit late to start if not.

Gut says didn't know.

[RED-DOG]

I definitely don't think he knew at the time. What I thing has happened is he has found out post match but pre interview and didn't know what to do for the best.

[Karabiner]

Is it time for VAR?

[nirvana]

Is it time for VAR?

:-)Most def, can't expect refs to keep up with the pace of the modern game.

[RED-DOG]

Also, it's beyond credibility that Ronnie doesn't spot the foul in the replay until the presenter tells him what to look for.

I saw it immediately first time and I bet everyone else who watched it did too.


(On the replay that is, not live)

[Pokerpops]

100% commentator should draw the refs attention to it.

Same % that the ref should have seen it.

Hard to understand how Ronnie missed it, but I wouldn’t dream of suggesting that he did and kept quiet. This is a sport where the slightest of touches in feathering a cue stroke is self-policed.

I think it was rather lairy of the TV co to put him on the spot like that tbh.