Outstanding outing(s):
- Larry P was perfect scoring 80. Note: He also scored another 20 for the absent Julian’s roster spot – although it does not go toward Larry’s individual average credit.
- Esteban Q was one 8-ball short of being perfect. He scored 77.
- Tim Cox finished with 76.
- Braxton L had his best night of the season and climbed out of the individual standings cellar.
RAFFLE Status:
- Jim S had a solid break on Table 09 sinking the 6-ball and the 8-ball. The 1-ball and niner were both headed toward the northwest corner pocket.
They collided and neither dropped, but the 1 was left hanging. All other balls were free and clear.- Jim sank the 1 and the cue-ball landed with a near-straight-on shot for the 2.
- His draw shot dropped it in the southwest corner pocket, and caused the cue-ball to carom off the northwest rail for great shapes on the 3.
- He stop-shot sank it in the southeast corner and was again perfect for the 4-ball in the north side.
- Three balls to go (5, 7, and 9) and no interference or complications.
- He had good shape on the 5-ball, but it rattled in the northeast corner pocket and stayed on the table.
- The many observers moaned in sadness for Jim. To his arguable credit, he did the entire sequence without significant pause between shots. He was “on a roll.” To the arguable credit of the onlookers, they respected his roll, and did not interfere with distraction.
- Andrew S unfortunately finished his roll even quicker with a dry break on Table 09.
- The raffle pot rolls over to Week 10.
OTHER:
- There was a rare call out to the League Officers after a League Operator decision was objected. The case concerned a game from the previous week that was originally scored as a victory by each player.
- Team A’s player won on Team A’s scoresheet, and Team B’s player won on Team B’s scoresheet.
- After the entire match between both teams ended, neither player on that night could recall any details on how the 8-ball was sunk or who sunk it. Each player had firm belief of their respective victory, but after a lengthy discussion Team B’s player relented and agreed to the Team A player’s victory.
- Subsequently, the League Operator found an early-morning text from Team B’s player with explicit memory of how the game had finished. An interview was conducted with a key witness mentioned in that text and the League Operator decided that the evidence was sufficient to overturn the previous decision. Player B’s victory was input and reflected in the standings on Saturday.
- Tonight (Week 09), Team A’s captain objected to the overturn decision and per rule 23 (Disputes), the League Officers were briefed about the information above and unanimously elected to have the game replayed.
- Team A’s player chose not to play it which would technically mean the score should become 10-0 in favor of Team B’s player
- Although neither team was motivated in any way and to any degree by thievery in their firm beliefs of respective victory, there were statements made alluding to the opposite.
- The League Operator felt compelled to quell the unnecessary and mistaken animosity between the teams. He therefore and subsequently had an idea to try something new. He requested video evidence from the venue.
- The video evidence confirmed that Team B’s player had indeed won the game. The 8-ball was barely off the northwest rail of Table 12 and just north of the west side pocket. The cue-ball was slightly on the eastern side of the table approximately midway between the head spot and the center point of the table. There was one object ball from Team A’s player behind the head string. Team B’s player struck the cue-ball, cutting the 8 into the northwest corner pocket and there was no foul and no scratch.
- Lessons learned from this:
- Venue video is an excellent means to likely resolve this kind of uncertainty dispute in the future.
- The League Operator will not overturn an agreement even if the agreement turns out to be contrary to evidence.
- A significant amount of broken glass was seen on the carpet between Table 05 and the northern wall of the venue during league play. The League Operator called for assistance to get it cleaned. There was no game being played on Table 05 at the time. There was a game being played on Table 04.
- The venue’s worker picked up the large pieces of glass by hand and then used a vacuum to ensure glass scraps would not harm someone.
- A player on Table 04 reacted loudly and angrily and rudely to the vacuum’s usage while his game was in progress. The League Operator defended the vacuum usage as being more urgent for safety reasons and, besides, it was not currently the reacting player’s turn to shoot.
- The reacting player objected and so the League Officers were again called upon, but at least two of the officers were no longer in attendance. No further action was taken and the game concluded normally.
- It was otherwise a normal league night, although there were a few players who ended with unusual scores for them.