Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (416)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • You're all correct.

    Graeme was an idiot to block the white ball.

    The ref should have told mark there was no ball in hand,

    Although the ref never gave Selby ball in hand because the ball never left the tabel he did give ball in hand to graeme after mark selby slid the ball along the table not lifting it of the cloth.

    Graeme should have just potted the white.

  • I would have just faked a miscue and potted the white.

  • @athull08

    Selby didn't lift the ball. Watch it carefully, the ball doesn't leave the table, he slides it along the cloth.

    There's your reply!!

  • Stupid ref - he was always like that - absolutely twat ref as always with him

  • im not actually sure selby picked up the ball instead of sliding it.. and even then its a pretty douchey move for dott to not foul back for selby

  • Comment removed

  • Foul 4 to Mark Selby Foul Leave to Greame Dott....THAT WAS DISCUSTING !

  • Comment removed

  • why does the referee pick the ball up to give Graeme Dott ball in hand when the ball didn't leave the bed of the table?? Clueless ref?

  • @lthewlis It DID.

    Dott: You're saying Mark's fouled, but then you've lifted the white up

    Referee: Because the ball has left the bed of the table when HE (Selby) lifted it

    There's your answer.

  • Can't believe Graeme Dott accepted it and didn't give back a foul!

  • Dott should had let cueball go in

    Well the cueball was suppose to had gone in and it should had been a shot in the D for Mark Selby

  • Im sorry but i think dott did end up doing the right thing by playing it clearly not hard enough later on. I personally believe that was on purpose as it was way to light and he couldnt think of any other way to be fair.

  • Dott should have been a sportsman and lifted up the white again... therefore giving Selby the ball in hand that he deserved.

  • Why do people keep asking why Dott was given ball in hand? That's answered in the video.

    Dott to ref: "You're saying Mark's fouled, but then YOU'VE lifted the white up"

    Ref to Dott: "Because the ball has left the bed of the table when HE (Selby) lifted it"

    There's your answer!!!

  • Graeme Dott should have lost tthe frame for doing that , he would of in pool

  • why was mark selby 'hard done by'? it was a foul. the first one was an obvious foul cos a) the player cannot physically touch the ball unless he has the ball in hand (either break off or scratch) and b) the ball was not in the pocket, and the second one was a foul because he did not have the ball in hand as there was no scratch. i don't care if the ball was HEADING in, if it doesn't go in, its not a scratch, so selby shouldn't have touched the ball

  • Come on Graeme, just pot the cueball and that's it.

  • Why could Dott get to move the white ball?  The referee said it was because Selby lifted the ball from the table. He didn't - he pushed it and it never left contact with the bed of the table. I declare a rematch.

  • The referree was correct.. it was a foul.. the first player should not have blocked the pocket with the hand.. But the white ball didn't go in.. so its still on the table.. its not a ball in hand.

  • why didn't dott just pot the white on his shot so selby could have had his shot where he tried to before the mistake?

  • the ref was smiling, thinking, 'yeah im a cunt.'

    i was really surprised dott didnt just put selby back in from where he put the ball

  • At the end of the day, the players should know the rules, Dott was stupid to put his hand in the pocket to stop the cue ball, what did he think he was gaining?

  • Well, if i was Graham Dott - i would have put the white into one of the corner pockets, giving the shot back to Selby. There might be a small risk the Ref makes you concede the frame - but surely there is some common sense somewhere down the line...

  • @Will137 Yes. That's exactly what I was thinking. If something like that happened, it's only fair that you should give the shot back to Selby by potting the cue ball. However, only someone like Ronnie or Alex Higgins would do something like that I think...

  • @Will137 or handball it...

  • sorry but refs fault COMPLETELY - he has to explain the situation to mark selby simply because its not obvious

  • So if the ref (twat) chooses to implement an extremely draconian penalty, how can he then pick up the cueball and place it against the cushion? Where's the fucking consistency? Whatta nonce.

  • @killercabbage1 because that's the rules. He explained that. "Because the ball has left the bed of the table when HE (selby) lifted it"

  • ref messed it up, @ 0:57, he picks the ball up when it's still officially in play, and then lets dott play from anywhere in the D, which is 100% wrong.

    @ 2:00 dott should have been playing the ball from where Selby inadvertedly placed it, not where Dott wants to

  • @thegoodnamesrallgone The referee thought that the ball left the table when Selby moved it - but I don't think it did - unless it was a small lift up from the table?

  • @kranser yeah, if selby lifted it, it was very minimal, hard to see it happened so fast

  • @kranser it is not a question of whether or not it actually left the table.

    As soon as Selby held the white in his hand, Dott gets ball in hand, whether or not the white actually leaves the table.

  • @thegoodnamesrallgone No, the ref was 100% RIGHT to give Dott ball in hand.

    it is not a question of whether or not it actually left the table.

    As soon as you hold the white in your hand illegally (like Selby did), your opponent gets ball in hand, whether or not the white actually leaves the table.

  • dont be so pedantic u boring old bastard- use some common sense!!

  • this should be tactically used ingame now. Just push it away from the pocket,and let me be valid HAHA

  • dott should've just potted the white thats what i would've done

  • @rodgetaylorjnr that's exactly what he should of done!

    as dott would of lost 8 points for a foul as selby lost 4!

  • It is a foul and graeme dott did it deliberately and as i believe it to be that is a loss of frame if you make a deliberate foul.

  • what I don't understand is why did Dott get his shot in hand? The cueball had still not left the bed of the table

  • In that case, you could stop the ball in the jaws of the pocket before it goes in seeing as your losing your 4 points anyway but the other player has a much harder shot ahead. Stupid.

  • Looks like a fun frame...

  • I actually don't think Dott was realizing what he was doing. He looked as surprised as Selby did

  • Now I know why Dott isn't a popular player even though he is very good. What a prick.

  • Referee was correct, but Dott was a retard for doing that

  • @MrAnDEh92 Yeah, but if the ref had any sense he would have let it go. What has happened to common sense these days? By the way, i'm definitely trying this trick next time I play my mates!

  • You would think that both snooker players would know the rules about fouling. If you use your hand to prevent the cue ball from rolling into the pocket, its going to be a foul, just like if you stopped another ball from rolling in the pocket thats going to be a foul also, but I think the players should be told that if the cue ball doesn't leave the table at its own accord then putting it in the "D" sectionof the table will be another foul.

  • The guy Selby & Dott talk to at 1:17 has been at every single session in the World Championship this year so far, in exactly the same seat. Now THAT'S dedication.

  • @DevilboyScooby I'm pleased that I am not the only person who has noticed this

  • @DevilboyScooby He;s there every year often wearing a Coventry City Shirt

  • Dott pushed the ball with his hand, then Selby slid the ball across the table, which imo is exactly the same thing. Why then, does Selby not get ball in hand in the first place? Either way, Dott should have just potted the white the second time round and show a bit of sportsmanship.

  • ALAN CHAMBERLAIN FOREVER!!!!!!

  • the ref is right and it is mark's own shit fault thAT he does not know all of the rules

  • the ref is right but the rule is shit and needs to be changed just like playing a technical foul when snookered on all colours in order to avoid the costly miss process

  • Quiet confusing here... Graeme is normally never such a player. You would see it sooner from Ronny I think. That ref. is not good eitherway. He screws up frames many times. But Graeme should have been fair at the point of 4 points from Selby towards him...

    I kind-off understand why Graeme did what he did. But even Graeme finds the rule odd, in this 'case' of the situation.

  • Chamberlain is a motherfucker!!I dun like him even though if Selby din do something wrong.I jz dun like his personality,he is cunning to me.

  • The ref should have said something to Selby before he lifted it. The smile on his face afterwards makes you think he was just a cheeky twat who knew all this was going to happen.

  • Why wasn't Selby awarded 8 points for the original foul? Dott makes contact with the white twice as he fists it away.

  • If you are going to be really pedantic, contrary to what AC said, the cue ball did actually leave the bed of the table when Dott fisted it away from the table. Go to 2.18 and you can see it leave the bed of the table by a couple of milimetres only.

  • @adp1070 It's not a case of whether or not it left the table physically. The ref was correct. The rule is, Selby took hold of the white, when he wasnt allowed to, which gives your opponent ball in hand, whether or not you actually lifted it.

    Your other comment: Yes Dott touched it twice, but you can't foul twice in the same shot.

    Like when a player pots the black and sends the white into a pack of reds. If one of the reds goes in, its a 7 point foul, but if 2 go in, its still 7 points.

  • stupid reff.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • I would gladly slap Alan Chamberlain just to wipe that smile off his face!

  • Dott is a complete bastard... if he had any decency, he would have put the cue ball in the D and pot it straight into a pocket to give Selby the 4 points he deserved as well as the cue ball in hand.... skinny cunt with no class.

  • @stiddlyrehman but then the ref could call a "miss"

  • This whole affair means absolute fuck all seeing as there is no pot on in the first place! it doesnt matter who takes the shot cos both would probably play the same safety anyway!

  • @TheOptimod yes of course but you would have did the sa

  • By the way, who won the frame? What was the final score? I take it Selby won.

  • when selby moved the ball it never the bed of the table, dott should have not had ball in hand

  • @dxtrfn80 no, the ref was absolutely correct about that too

  • alan chamberlain is a mad bumble! OLD SAD MAN!!

  • @sorush147 He was also correct. You either play by the rules or you don't.

  • @TheOptimod yes of course it was, but what about common sense? and you would have done the same, i'm sure

  • dott thats awful!!! he should have potted the white!!! what a scott? tight!!!!

  • dott should have potted the white again purposly so it wouldnt have made a difference

  • dott should have purposely fouled to undo his mess.

  • what a stupid referee? So everytime the white ball goes in, I should just pop it out with my hand and I even get ball in hand? It should be Selby's turn for god sake....

  • selby cudnt place the white in the D because the cue ball never left the bed of the table so he was fouled. dott then can place the white in the D because selby lifted the white. but did selby lift the white or roll it on the bed of the table? Fuk u ref ur shite

  • why is it always Allain Chamberlain?

  • @DevilboyScooby lol I was just thinkin that myself!

  • I'm really disappointed to see Dott not pot the white like a gentleman... Ugh, not cool :-(.

  • @ 1:31 Referee said:

    - Greame's foul was not a ball in hand, because the white ball never left the table

    (white ball still touching the cloth)

    - Mark's foul is a ball in hand, because he lifted up the white ball (the white ball left the table)

    - But if you look back @ 0:32 Mark didn't lift up the white ball, he was sliding it.

    So that means that the white ball also never left the table.

    And It wasn't a ball in hand for Greame either.

  • @mrPidgeon spot on. the first time it came off from the table was when the ref picked it up. He messed up on this one. Greame should have known better also.

  • @Deathugee no, that's wrong. The referee was completely right, technically.

  • @mrPidgeon No, you've got that wrong.

    However pedantic, the referee is right.

    It's not a question of whether the ball physically left the table.

    The point is, even though Selby was only sliding the white, he did take hold of it. If a player takes hold of the white when he's not allowed to, the opponent gets ball in hand.

    The difference is, Dott only knocked it, but Selby actually took hold of it.

    A strange rule, I know, but the referee was 100% correct. 

  • LMFAOOOOOOO

  • a deliberate foul can be like if one player wants to play safe off the pack and the other player prefers not to,one player plays the other close to or touching the pack and so the other player just plays a push shot into the pack and looses 4 points but has the table the way he wants,that type of play will not be allowed and that is why you don't see it done.delberate foul is not tolerated and the frame can be awarded to the other player.that is why you don't see players doing it..

  • Graeme should have put Mark back in from in the D!!!

  • the ref is wrong,if a player makes a deliberate foul he can and should award the frame to the other player,in this case it was a clear case,so if he want to go strickly by the rules as he did then he must award the frame to the other player.simple enough,so all these comment so far are wrong,like if dott potted the white,that would have been a deliberate foul as well.

  • @191246mann NO!!!

    A deliberate foul DOES NOT automatically lose the frame!

    A player loses the frame if he deliberately touches an OBJECT ball, not the cueball!

    However pedantic it seems, the referee is completely right.

  • Look how smug the ref is. Jobsworth

    No common sense whatsoever

  • Alan chamberlin is 100% right on this one.. the players hands should never interfere with the balls at any point, ( unlike the manouver dott executed that you would play at the local snooker centre during a friendly game)

    However i think alan could have explained the sitiation to mark.. oh well!

  • @thorny1977 ''the players hands should never interfere with the balls at any point'' How about when you place the white ball inside the half circle after your opponent pots the white? Think...

  • @KoivuTheHab That's not 'interfering' with the balls, that's a part of the game.

  • @TheOptimod It is normal in professional snooker to deliberately touch the white ball with your hands because you are pissed off? What ''game'' have you been watching exactly? What makes you think what Dott did here is part of the game?

  • @KoivuTheHab The game I've been watching is called Snooker, right that's cleared that up.. Now what I meant was placing the ball in the D is the only time you can touch the white legally. Dott was wrong I don't deny that. Selby was wrong to move the white ball as it hadn't actually entered the pocket due to Dott being unprofessional.

  • @TheOptimod Guess we were talking about entirely different things, when I said 'deliberately' earlier I was of course talking about Dott, not Selby. Seems like there is a major loophole in the rules of snooker, I could just pick up the white ball before it enters the pocket and place it in an unfavourable position for my opponent and I would only be giving up 4 points as a penalty. I guess I could just pick up the white ball at any moment if it suits me.

  • @KoivuTheHab This is true...

  • @KoivuTheHab but if you were to place it say behind a colour, with your opponent going for reds next, he wud have a free ball because you fouled and left him snookered so it would not be of advantage to you. he can just pot the colour as 1pt or snooker you even more behind the colour you place him behind.

  • @damokc1803 Why the hell would he miss the color while making a snooker? It's extremely rare for pros to shot the white too slowly for it to hit the intended color. You sound like you don't understand the situation at all.

  • @KoivuTheHab i didnt say anything about anybody missing any ball. you said anyone couldd pick up the ball and place it behind a colour to snooker someone. even the ref in this situation says, and the key line is "LEFT THE BED OF THE TABLE" if you pick the ball up off the bed of the table and put it in "an unfavourable position for my opponent" as you siad below this would be a foul BY YOU and because you lifted the ball from the bed of the table, your opponent can place it anywhere in the "D"

  • @KoivuTheHab Bear in mind that after a foul you can be put back in so placing the cue ball somewhere too unfavourable would be a bad move. However, you can definitely improve your situation by the picking up and moving of a ball, say from where my opponent is about to be in the balls to somewhere safe.

  • @Cream147player Yes you can - but if the ball leaves the table when you move it, I think your oponent gets the ball in hand and can play from anywhere in the D

  • @KoivuTheHab But still, in case of a foul, you can force your opponent to continue to play from that position. So if you hide the white ball beneath a coloured one, I can force you to continue, so where would the point be? :)

  • @Vox24 That's not the point. I can just pick up the ball and put it against a wall anywhere around the table. One word: GAY

  • @KoivuTheHab It's not gay at all. Pick the white ball up and put it against a wall! It would be a 4 points penalty. Since it is a foul, I can force you to continue from that exact position (in this case from against the wall). So picking the balls up won't give you any strong advantage.

  • @Vox24 You are once again missing the point. A 4 point penalty isn't an issue in professional snooker. For example if I have a lead of 30 points with one red remaining and I miss my shot and you are perfectly lined up to pot the red and finish off the frame I can just pick up the white ball and put it anywhere around the table. I can do this each time I miss my shot, 10-15 times if needed I will still win. I would win all games and I wouldn't be breaking any rules, this makes sense to you?

  • @KoivuTheHab If you would do this 10-15 times a match, you would give away 10-15 * 4 points whici would mean 40-60 points. This amount is pretty an issue. Anyway, I am sure that the reffere would not admit this, since it would be against the fair play rule and snooker along with golf and other sports is like a gentleman's one. Most of the times a player commites a foul he lets the reffere know about it and assume the mistake. So I don't think that such a way of playing snooker would be tolerated

  • @Vox24 I notice you don't watch a lot of snooker, most frames aren't won by a margin or 40 or so points, frames are usually won by a much wider margin, for a pro the only thing that makes a difference is continuing the break because after all they pot almost 90% of the balls. Obviously the referee wouldn't tolerate such actions, but this isn't the point, you came here saying it doesn't make any difference and that it isn't an advantage. This is a major loophole, even using it once can win it.

  • @KoivuTheHab I am sorry, but you don't get the point! If you would like to get an advantage out of moving the white ball behing another ball or behind a wall in order to put me in for a tough shot, I can force you to continue from that position instead of playing it myself. So you cannot make me lose points with this, because the only one who will lose points is you. Believe me, I play snooker and I know what I mean, think a little bit more about it...

  • @Vox24 Don't you get it? It's not about losing points, it's about continuing the break, How hard is that to understand? I can put you into a spot after each and every one of my shots where you will not be able to pot a ball and continue your break. If I make a bad shot after you force me to continue I can just pick up the white ball again and try again until I feel my shot is satisfactory. If I want I can do this until I get the white ball into a snooker position or until you can't pot anything.

  • @KoivuTheHab I'd imagine finding an advantageous position that didn't give away a free ball would be difficult.

  • @pingunet Not sure why that would be difficult, besides if you have the white ball in your hand are you telling me it would be difficult for you to place the ball so that it would be a very hard shot for your opponent even if it was a free ball situation? Doesn't actually change anything at all as you can just pick up the ball again if your opponent happens to shoot a briliant shot,

  • @KoivuTheHab no, if you picked the white up, you would give your opponent ball in hand, just like what happened when Selby picked the white up.

  • Alan chamberlin is 100% right on this one.. the players hands should never interfere with the balls at any point, ( unlike the manouver dott executed that you would play at the local snooker centre during a friendly game)

    However i think alan could have explained the sitiation to mark.. oh well!

  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't see where Selby lifts the ball from the bes of the table?

  • @raiderjim This isn't the point. When the ref says it didn't leave the bed of the table he is talking about Dott's shot.

  • @KoivuTheHab Sorry it has taken me 6 months to reply (I never check my inbox) but Dott pushed the ball with his hand, then Selby slid the ball across the table, which imo is exactly the same thing. Why then, does Selby not get ball in hand in the first place? Either way, Dott should have just potted the white the second time round and show a bit of sportsmanship.

  • @raiderjim Because rules are rules even when they are wrong. This is a loophole, and yes Dott should have potted the white...

  • Ref absolutely right to call second foul, and there is NO discretion allowed, as a ref is not permitted to inform a player in any way that he is about to commit a foul. however, mark did not lift the ball from the bed of the table, and hence the ref should not have lifted the white to put Dott in-hand. Dott should have had to play it from where it lay. As for the commentators, their their talk of discretion is complete bull. There isn't any. Rules is rules.

  • czyli kosztem 4 punktów można wziąć białą bilę w rękę i ustawić w pozycji snookera nie do wyjścia. Zadziwiające niedociągnięcie w zasadach snookera.

  • What's wrong with Dotts chin? Bad zit?

  • graeme dott is a real pussy here!!!

  • i think that the only solution is thus... Dott should have been taken outside by the doorman... strung up ... and beasten to within an inch of his life... with his cue of course ... then his cue should have been placed in a compromising position...and sharia law could have come into effect at this time and Dott should have had the offending hand chopped off....Selby should have been given Dotts car..and his air miles and all his tesco clubcard points... then told he's a very naughty boy

  • worst ref in history

  • its a foul

  • if dott potted white when the decision was made then that would have been sporty but he didnt...?

  • When the ref says it left the table when mark moved it into the D, i watched it again, he dragged it along the table not off the table. I do that myself when i play...

  • Dott shouldn't have act like he's in the club, reff should have told Mark it wasn't a ball in hand OR give Dott a warning and let Mark have the ball in hand, Dott should have been a gent and pot the white again. Selby did nothing wrong imo.

  • foul of the referee

  • in my opinion the first foul must be free ball

  • Mark Selby didn't lift the ball up he dragged it

    so also the ref shouldn't have picked it up because it also didn't leave the bed of the table

  • @fjasonf No, the ref was right to pick it up and give Dott ball-in-hand. If a player holds the white and moves it, like Selby did, under the rules, it counts as having left the table, even if it didn't physically leave the table. Pedantic or not, the ref is 100 percent correct. I'm not saying I agree with the rules, but that they were enforced correctly.

  • Mark Selby didn't lift the ball up he dragged it

    so also the ref shouldn't have picked it up because it also didn't leave the bed of the table

  • dott should have have potted the white... but, the useless cunt probably would have missed

  • @chad6258 PMSL! :)

  • @chad6258

    Yes, Dott should have had the decency to pot the white - another professional foul?!

  • @chad6258

    Looolll I was thinking the same, But I guess he had his brain not working at that time....

  • @chad6258 agreed... i would have done that myself. But then there is the deliberate foul rule where the referee can award the remaining value of the balls on the table ( or the frame ) to the opponent if you were to deliberately knock in the cueball. Given what happened here Chamberlain would have probably done just that

  • so your telling me you can intercept the white if its heading for the black to only concede 4 instead of 7, that ref knew mark was gonna move it he just wanted to be a dick about it

  • Comment removed

  • to be honest, mark didnt even "lift" the ball...he just slid it to the D zone, so technically the ball never left the table.

  • Disappointing refereeing at this level of snooker.

  • ref is right. This is world class snooker, what Dott did, though it was boyishly funny, was inappropriate at world-class level. Even the commentator says he doesn't like it when players do that.

  • The question should be not "was that a foul?" but rather "what kind of foul was it?"

  • Chamberlain is a pratt. He's refereed me in amateur matches and just loves to feel important. Also if you play against a well known pro he favours them with tight decisions e.g miss rule.

  • This ref is a meglomaniac, everybody knows it. Technically he is right, but in the civilized world we attempt to credit people with responsibilities with a modicum of common sense. The sooner this ref goes from the game, the better for the game.

  • well i don't really play snooker...but i think that was unfair..

  • thats not how a true pro should play.. shame on him.

  • i think dot should have moved the ball like selby did just to give him back his 4 points and let him have his shot but nover mind ey the ref does come accros as not been the nicest or best ref but yes he was "right" but he could have used his discretion or atthe least told selby toplay it were it lays

  • U can't give double points on a foul no matter how many times he punched the ball it's one foul. What Graham Dott should have done was delibrately pot the white so Mark got the 4 points back. That would have Bern the sporting thing to do.

  • Comment removed

  • And technically the cue ball never left the bed of the table because Selby never lifted the cue ball

  • @mancity1000 I disagree completely with what you said about Alan Chamberlain. Pedantic or not, he got the rules absolutely right, including giving Dott ball in hand. I'm not saying I agree with those rules, in fact, I think they should be changed, but with the rules as they are at the moment, he is completely right.

  • This is a silly incident, the ref should realise its just common sense to Selby to place the cue ball where he wants it. Alec Chamberlain is a bad referee to be fair anyway

  • @mancity1000 I agree about Chamberlain being a bad referee, remember when he refused to clean the red ball against Selby. Must hate Selby or something

  • @Warney151287 Indeed

  • that is a stupid rule.. you shouldnt be allowed to touch any ball unless u have white in hand..

  • so with this rule you could take the white ball with your hand - the other player gets 4 points - and put it in a position behind some other balls from where your opponent has to play it?!

  • @01000110I01010101 Technically, yes!

    Well, only if the player knocked it into the difficult position without actually holding it, because that would give the opponent ball in hand (which is why Dott got ball in hand).

    But a player wouldn't do that anyway. Snooker is a very sporting game (most of the time). The only reason Dott touched the white in the first place is because he assumed Selby would get ball in hand.

  • I think the ref was right. These are pro players and should know the rules. This is not down your local snooker club, this is the real deal.

    But I think the bed of the table rule should be changd otherwise whats to stop a player stoping an in off right in the jaw of the pocket to snooker another player?

    Dott has shown that sportsmanship has gone out of the game a little bit by not potting the white and giving Selby the shot from the D which he diserved.IMO

  • @03D23036 You're absolutely right.

    I think they should change the rule to mean that if a player illegally touches the white, like Dott did in the first place, the opponent gets ball in hand.

    But with the rules as they are at the moment, the referee is right about everything he did, including giving Dott ball in hand when Selby lifted it.

  • Dott isn't very sportsman like. I've seeen him on a few occasions doing things that seem a bit off!!

  • If Graham wasn't such a cock he would have just potted the white and made everything even again!!

  • Balls to the rule and the ref. Dot did what many snooker players do, and shelby had not part tot play in this. The fukng ref should have warned Dot and picked up the ball. Everyone wants some sunshine up their arse and the ref did so in this case.