Selby's 6 minute shot time - ever justified?

SnookerFan wrote:So basically, Selby has brain damage and the referee should've told him to stop taking the snake hiss. Got it.

I guess a 'brain freeze' that lasts over 6 minutes whether playing snooker or doing anything else would point to some sort of cognitive issue.

I agree that if there was ever an occasion for a ref to intervene surely that was it, simply just to check that the player was still coherent if nothing else, it begs the question, what would it take for a ref to ask a player to move things along? a 10 minute + 'brain freeze'? I mean what if this mystery brain freeze condition had turned out to be a stroke? the 'lovely vicky' would have maybe had a legal case for negligence against world snooker?

Maybe Leo was having a brain freeze too.

A folie à deux moment between the two of them perhaps

Thankfully these brain freezes don't happen to often. I'd hate the local bus driver to leave the bus sitting at a green light for 6 minutes cos he's frozen and forgotten how to drive!

Dragonfly wrote:Thankfully these brain freezes don't happen to often. I'd hate the local bus driver to leave the bus sitting at a green light for 6 minutes cos he's frozen and forgotten how to drive!

Sometimes they forget they’ve switched routes & drive a double decker under a low bridge.

Its been known to happen...

Scullion was distracted by the match on the other table

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfVEkGhYkNc

We aren't stuck in the 80s Wild. What Ray Reardon did back then has nothing to do with the present.

The present is now, and Selby not long ago took an abnormal amount of time to play a specific shot, not snookered or anything. Should the referee have stepped in? Maybe, but only he was the best judge to assess the situation.

What he did was low. bucking apologists. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.

I don't think it's quite as clear cut as to whether the ref should have said something. If it was a brain freeze (I think it probably was), then the ref saying something and snapping him out of it is effectively helping the player - it isn't the ref's job to coach any of the players out of some sort of mental pit.

McManusFan wrote:I don't think it's quite as clear cut as to whether the ref should have said something. If it was a brain freeze (I think it probably was), then the ref saying something and snapping him out of it is effectively helping the player - it isn't the ref's job to coach any of the players out of some sort of mental pit.

I doubt he’d be accused of influencing the match for saying “Hey Mark - my nan who would be 145 today could’ve taken a shot in this time”

Scooper wrote:

McManusFan wrote:I don't think it's quite as clear cut as to whether the ref should have said something. If it was a brain freeze (I think it probably was), then the ref saying something and snapping him out of it is effectively helping the player - it isn't the ref's job to coach any of the players out of some sort of mental pit.

I doubt he’d be accused of influencing the match for saying “Hey Mark - my nan who would be 145 today could’ve taken a shot in this time”

I don't know, imagine if you were the opponent. You see Selby all at sea, he can't even see a simple safety, then the ref tells him he's taking a long time - he snaps out of it and plays a brillaint shot. You've gone from sitting back, smuggly sipping your water as you watch your opponent struggle with the simplest of shots to having the pressure piled on you.

I know this is just a stupid hypothetical, but the ref needs to be careful about how they intervene. Does anyone know if there are specific guidelines as to how refs are meant to imlepent the slow play rules?

Iranu wrote:Mark Williams has done it too, far more recently than Reardon. Acted like he couldn’t get through to a pot then sailed it in with ease.

In his autobiography, Ronnie said that MJW likes to play little mind games like that sometimes. He said sometimes MJW likes to act like a ball can't get through, to give the opponent some hope, then pot it with ease, just like you said.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Iranu wrote:Mark Williams has done it too, far more recently than Reardon. Acted like he couldn’t get through to a pot then sailed it in with ease.

In his autobiography, Ronnie said that MJW likes to play little mind games like that sometimes. He said sometimes MJW likes to act like a ball can't get through, to give the opponent some hope, then pot it with ease, just like you said.

I think that's what John Parrot used to do, but maybe MJW as well.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

thats abdullah the butcher not aboulomania

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

That's a strange looking cue you have there, BSP. Looks a bit battered.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

That's a strange looking cue you have there, BSP. Looks a bit battered.

Andre147 wrote:

Scooper wrote:Ref should’ve stopped the match.

He can't. At most in that situation he would have given Selby a word, but that is not a warning. A warning only comes if he did something similar again after being told not to do it.

Can't you warn him for taking too long ?

Or even better, can't you dock him the frame ?

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Andre147 wrote:

Scooper wrote:Ref should’ve stopped the match.

He can't. At most in that situation he would have given Selby a word, but that is not a warning. A warning only comes if he did something similar again after being told not to do it.

Can't you warn him for taking too long ?

Or even better, can't you dock him the frame ?

You can warn a player AFTER having a word of slow play. If after the warning he continues like that, then yes you can dock him a frame, and even the match if it were serious enough.

I think there should be a 2-minute shot clock for every shot at every event (except the Shootout), with increasing penalty points assigned for every X seconds over 2 minutes a player goes.