View Full Version : Att, Jewett, looked at tape

04-10-2004, 07:19 PM
Quote Jewett

"Double hits occurred only on miscues, so far as I recall. Well, and the close shots where the cue ball is immediately stopped by the object ball and the stick runs into it on the follow through.

As for whether miscues should be called fouls because the tip may have hit the ball twice or the ferrule got involved, I think that there should be no penalty for unintentional miscues unless the referee can clearly see a foul. Sometimes miscues do not have a second hit of any kind".

I went through as much of the tape as I could, some of it is messed up and jumps. I have to tell you, I will stick with my original opinion. I saw double hits on many of the shots. A small list is
14,15,19, 25, 26, 32, 33, 36, 06, 012, 35, 41, 43, 54, 56, 74, 87, and probably more. Almost all the miss cues, but not always the ferrule hitting the cue ball. Like I said, I only watched a small portion of the tape. It is rare that a ball is pocketed on a severe miscue and there is a loss of turn anyway, I don't see any reason to try to call a foul on a miscue even though there a good chance a foul did happen.