Shane Van Boening vs Francisco Sanchez Ruiz | Semi Final | 2022 UK Open Pool Championship
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 พ.ค. 2023
- Shane Van Boening takes on Francisco Sanchez Ruiz for a spot in the 2022 UK Open Pool Championship Final in London.
Watch the 2023 UK Open Pool Championship, 30th May - 4th June, full broadcast details available at matchroompool.com
#matchroompool #nineball #pool #9ball #ukopenpool - กีฬา
Good thing Matchroom never learns and continues to put the winner in the thumbnail
Good thing this match was a year old when they posted it.🙄
@@p0uty100% what happened to me just now
Shouldn’t u be happy they’re putting content out for free?
Thanks i had no clue they did that. Now because of you, you’ve spoiled every game ill watch from now on…
@@quinnbaker1935after the fact. Kid of a dumb comment
The ref shouldn't call a foul unless there is CLEAR evidence of a foul, and there wasn't -- the benefit of a doubt should always go to the shooter. And in fact, as everyone is saying, even if it hit the rail first, if it had hit the 3 squarely, it would have just followed the 3, but instead it went forward. That isn't possible unless it cut the 3, and at that distance, that's not possible without hitting the rail again. Marcel needs to watch Dr. Dave's videos on how to tell a foul by watching where the balls go after contact.
100%
Whoever thinks thats a foul doesn’t understand the physics of pooll
Ok
If it would be a foul, the cue ball could not come off the rail at that angle.
Marcel Eckardt on a power trip once again.
He is very (in)famous for it. A menace to the game. Same in snooker.
Can anyone explain to me why svb got foul? and what the rules is?
If you can't tell it's not a foul.
LoL
That's what I said when I didn't see the last foul they called on me for moving the cue ball with my bare hand.
So interesting to hear the commentary then and compare to FSR’s achievements now
I was not there, but from what I see, I would say he touched the paint of the ball first... you can see it when you look at the black dots on the cue ball. It is crystal clear.
I mean without replay i wouldnt blame him for calling foul but in slow motion it definitely wasnt. But man that was tough lol.
not a foul. if you put your video on .25 speed and watch it a few times you can see a single frame of the three ball moving first before the rail hit
25:33 def hits the 3 ball first. This is not a foul.
You can tell because, if it hit the rail first it would have slightly changed the cue ball trajectory and speed differently after contact with the 3.
AND, if it's too close to call tie goes to the runner/shooter.
The shot by SVB @ 25:33 was definitely NOT a foul. After watching the slow-motion instant replay at 0.25 speed, it becomes clear (at least to me) that the shot was in fact legal. This has to be the toughest shot to call I think I've ever seen, and I have watched a ton of professional pool.
Edit: I also love how Jayson Shaw shows good sportsmanship by getting involved in the debate and insisting that Marcel rule in Shane's favor.
Are you saying it's not a foul because white hit object before hitting the rail or they hit at the same time? Looks to me that it hit rail and object at same time, which I don't know what that call would be.
@@Vlassakis22 Yes. The rules clearly state that either the cue ball or any object ball must hit a rail after initial contact, but in this particular instance, it was difficult to make a ruling on the legality of the shot because the contact motion happened incredibly quickly. Hope this helps.
@@jeffbassplays ty for that, I couldn’t figure it out what the regulations are exactly. But in my opinion, after rewatching it a few times, it looks like it hit the rail first.
@@jeffbassplays tbh I can't tell whether it hit rail and ball at the same time or rail after hitting the ball. Problem is that there's no slow-mo camera and we can't tell 100% whether the rail is hit before, after or at the same time. But in any dispute where there's no 100% correct ruling even with technology, I'd stick with ref's initial decision.
Anyways as Karl Boyes said in bts vid, if SVB ran the cue ball 1ft less in the previous shot than he did the dispute would never happened.
Edit: btw, when I looked at it again, the 3ball didn't move until the 3ball, cue ball and the rail come in contact at the same time.(at least with the footage we have) Which in this case it would've been a foul as rules stated that simultaneous contact would be a foul. The cueball looked like it travelled more distance because there's a touch of left spin making the cue ball travel a bit more and the slick condition made the balls travel sllight bit more.
Just like the commentator said. If the cue ball hit the rail first then the 3 ball, the cue ball should hit the rail again, I.e. twice hit. But cue ball clearly only hit rail once. It should be a legal shot.
It definitely wasn't a foul. Feel free to Google Dr. Dave's analysis of the shot where he uses high speed cameras to show that it was a good shot.
Timecode?
If it is that close why not just let the balls play as is instead of calling a conclusive foul.
don't you have a slowmo slower than that?
I can tell everyone in the comments right now whether it was or was not a foul it did not decide the outcome of this game also he put himself there he didn't have those crazy eyes and this particular match SVB is one of my all-time favorite player's but FSR earned every bit of it🎉 🎉
Who else Like this color of felt?
SVB’s shot was definitely not a foul. Like Jeremy said it’s the physics of pool. It would help if the refs had a concept of the physics behind it rather than just knowing the rules. Disgraceful. SVB’s probably been playing pool longer than Marcel has been alive, and should listen to him when he’s trying to explain what happened rather than stubbornly sticking to an opinion that is clearly wrong. @matchroompool1 needs to get better replay officials and educate their refs better. There is no “someone needs to handle the situation and make a decision”. You watch the damn replay til it’s clear or listen to players that have far more experience than yourself on the matter. Even Jayson Shaw said it wasn’t a foul. This really taints the respectability of the game when refs don’t even know how the physics of the sport their refereeing work. Disgraceful.
Clear foul🧐
Good call.
It hit at same time
Is this recent or 2022
Ruiz always gets lucky rolls.
Those lucky rolls must be what’s getting him all these championships😂
FSR Vuela vuela....no te hace falta equipaje....
If this controversial foul or no foul things happens again, use headphones. Could distinctly hear both contacts
When is not running a couple of racks have a effect on the outcome? Come on announcers
بالله اذا في احد عربي يتابع يفهمني ايش صار بضربة فان بوينينج فاول ولا ايش بالضبط؟؟
اي فاول، لان بعد ما يضرب ال q باصغر رقم عالطاولة، لازم الكرة البيضاء او الكرة الهدف تصطدم بحرف الطاولة يعني ال rail, اذا لم يحصل اصطدام يعني فاول
@@hasan_spoonie كل الشكر
that def was a foul. you can tell if u zoom in 8x and play at .25 speed
My idol❤
Here we go again with the "foul" 🙃
The amount of commercial breaks is insanely too much. I now have tendinitis in my finger for hitting the fast forward button. Literally 20 minutes of play in a 90 minute video.
I won't watch this format again
It’s either commercials, pay per view, or no pool.
hahahah Jayson stay out of this
replace this ref...
I agree
Membosankan🥱😴
Jeremy Jones too much in love with Vanboening. He over thinks everything on the pool table. Should have known rules on time clock at Mosconi Cup. Don’t like his commentary.
Is is a foul
Francisco sanches deberia trabajar en circo se le da bien , hace muchas payasadas para tirar una bola
first
Bottom line FST beat that ass 😅
First
get those referees some glasses. That is bul sh*t. Ref calls a foul its a foul rofl. It was a bad call.
It was a foul. It's logical because the cueball took the same way as the objectball. This is only possible when you hit rail first! Otherwise the cueball would have taken a different path when you hit the objectball first and then the rail. Simple is that. But the main problem was the bad position play by SVB in that situation.
You have it backwards watch dr Dave ! Educate yourself before you babble
You’re wrong
Kicking at that speed was a mistake. Period.
SVB is such a crybaby... he made another bad position shot and had to kick. he then made a bad kick that to everyone in real-time looked like a foul. The slow-mo replay did not prove an error by the ref and so the call stands.
Except it was a good kick. Why are you always an ahole in the comments?
I am a huge SVB fan but I think that was a foul
You’d be wrong
Bad shot ball hit rail first then 3 no rail after
Clear as day I’m surprised SVB thought otherwise 🤨
Clear as day?? Is that why a reply was shown a half billion times?
in game 5, whatever that ref decided (foul), is incorrect. He's the worst officiator. Everytime he interjects himself into matches, he has this smug demeanor and he's been objectively wrong on multiple games I've watched. He's like the anti-ref. If he tells you it's going to snow in Antarctica tomorrow, say your prayers and learn to swim because the ice caps will fully melted by lunchtime.
Who cares if was/wasnt a foul, SVB still wouldnt of got near to winning this match.
Shane,arnold say(hasta la vista baby)
Shane,dont shake you head,foul,foul,foul,,be honest
Shen no foul
Foul,foul,foul,foul