pasunegirafe wrote: OoNebsoO wrote:
That gif posted above certainly helped. Slower speed one
Also, Mark Selby, professional player for 19 years appears quite confident that it did hit it.
Yeah, it does look like it got a tiny
bump from the cue ball
There may have been movement. Then again, it may have been an optical illusion. As for my opinion, I tend to agree with you....the Black very probably did move, wobble at least. However, to assume that any possible wobble of the Black that may be observed is automatically a result of contact with White is erroneous, to say the least. Balls on billiard tables can be seen to move slightly seemingly on their own quite regularly. Surely, you have seen it yourself. There have been times that balls have fallen into pockets of their own accord. Quite commonly, when balls are touching and the striker plays the White away, the "leaning" object ball will wobble slightly when White is struck. It doesn't mean a foul has occurred. Simply placing one's hand on or off the cloth is enough to transmit motion through the medium of the cloth fiber and can cause noticeable movement of surrounding balls (the same type of wobble we are suggesting here) and this can occur over quite a surprising distance. It does not necessarily indicate contact between balls.
One of the lesser touted possible causes of kicks is static electricity. We usually think of static as a "cling" effect, such as a sock sticking to a pair of blue jeans in the laundry. But the opposite is also potentially true....in some circumstances, static electricity can be a repulsive force so perhaps both White and Black had similar charges and repelled each other without touching. Don't believe that is possible? Look at this...https://youtu.be/ce8wjs7K0aI?t=60
Of course, cloth is fabricated from interweaving threads causing high spots and low spots in the surface. So there are many possible explanations for what occurred. I am not arguing your point that the Black may in fact have moved. However, to dismiss the opinion of a recognized professional Referee as being wrong based on your own shady observation of an incident that has many possible explanations, some of which we may not even be aware, is rather bold of you to say the least.
I should add Selby was very probably quite confident that the Black moved. And he was probably quite correct...he had a similar vantage point as the camera and unless he has Superman's x-ray eyes, he also had no view of the required contact point. The Referee was literally the only one in the room properly positioned to make the call. Jan Verhaas asked the Marker his opinion on the matter (which is allowed by the Rules by the way) and he was going to change his ruling based on the Marker's opinion that it appeared
to touch. But then the Marker retracted....he really had no way of knowing if there had been contact, even if in video replay he could see that there had been movement.