Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rule History

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rule History

    Is there a source to find the history of rule changes and when they were made? For example, when did the "foul and a miss" take place? I would like to be able to compare the rules and their changes from 1950 to present.
    I am motivated to learn as I get into the strangest conversations with old gits age 80+ who claim to have played by very different rules in their youth.

  • #2
    Kootcha

    The foul and a miss rule came in to snooker in1996. A variety of imperfections were tidied up in 2011. In 1995 the rules committee presented the findings of their investigations (September 1995) and Regional Tutor, the late Jim Carter, bought them to the various counties in the South East area. I think the first match to be played with the new Miss rule did not happen until 1996 though, but I cannot guarentee that to be absoulutely correct. although I am not quite one of your 'old gits' as I am just a boy of 67, I do remember playing under slightly more relaxed conditions back in the 60's and 70's

    Comment


    • #3
      I seem to recall that the old light blue rule book actually came into effect in September 1995, and it was that version that introduced the lengthy 'foul and a miss' rule. However, the previous version of the rules did also have a definition of a Miss: "A miss is when the refere considers the striker has not endeavoured to hoit the ball on".

      Because of certain players abusing the rules, and playing deleiberate misses, the 1995 rules sought to 'clarify' when a miss should be called, but many would argue it just muddied the waters!

      Comment


      • #4
        Delighted to have some answers after such a long wait.
        When did "angled" come into disrepute and when did jumping a ball stop being acceptable?
        I have an original copy of Joe Davis' book and both were acceptable around 1960.
        I bow to your old git status as I am only 66

        Comment


        • #5
          The 'angled after a foul' rule which enabled a player to also have the option from playing from in hand was withdrawn with efect from the September 1995 rule book.

          I'm a *LOT* younger than you, and passed my referees examination in 1990, but even then it was a foul to play a jump shot. Not sure when it came in to the rules.

          Comment


          • #6
            I started playing in 1980 and became a referee a couple of years later.
            Unfortunately I do not have a copy of the rules at that time but I am sure that
            1. If angled after a foul the opponent had the option of playing from hand
            2. a jumpshot was illegal but OK if the cue ball hit the object ball and then jumped it (now illegal)
            3. A miss was purely at the discretion of the referee (which in my opinion it should still be)
            I cannot remember when these changed but there was a major revision in 1995

            I am still refereeing at 63

            Comment


            • #7
              You have to realise (and not many people do) that, until some time in the mid-80s (at least as late as 1981, but not as late as 1986), there was not an all-encompassing rulebook specifically for snooker, as there is today.

              Instead, there was an overarching "Rules common to games played on an English biolliard table" - covering the dimensions of the table, and all the non-shot-specific things like fouling with oart of the body, push strokes, jump strokes etc., followed by the specific rules relating to each game - billiards, snooker and so on.

              Jump shot
              The jump shot was originally a foul, defined as the cue-ball jumping over any ball. However, a miscue by Alex Higgins in the 1982 Masters, correctly by the rule of the day called a foul by referee John Smyth, highlighted unintended consequences of the rule. It had been intended to outlaw jumping to escaoe snookers, and also possibly jumping to pot a ball over the pocket. However, being in the 'General' rules, it appled to other games which may have different tactical nuances (e.g. in billiards there is no such thing as a snooker, and a ball over the pocket could simply be planted). But as it was written, it was penalising players for uunintentional miscues - or even overactive cushions - that happened to send the cue-ball flying over another ball.

              (In fact, one of the reasons it was written as it was, was to disallow the billiards in-off stroke whereby the player jumps the cue-ball over an object ball which is over the pocket, so the cue-ball drops in - touching the object ball on the way down to validate the in-off. The rule had previously been written "cue-ball jump over an intervening ball" and it was realised that this would not outlaw the shot just described, as you could hardly call the object ball 'intervening' if it was fully intended to be a part of the stroke!)

              As a result of the Higgins incident, or at least spurred on by it, in March 1982, it was proposed that the Rule be re-worded (for professional matches only) to more or less what the rule is today, i.e. that the only relevant time for penalising a jump shot is before (or as part of) the first impact of the cue-ball. A postal vote of its members was conducted by the WPBSA (to depart from the official rules, still held in copyright by the B&SCC) concerning three rules, one of which was this jump shot amendment.

              As it was, the B&SCC went with these amendments themselves anyway, although I cannot spot the official announcement of this despite relatively in-depth rolling coverage in Snooker Scene at that time.

              Foul and a Miss

              The "deliberate miss" was always in the rulebook but it did, as my quote marks sugget, have very positive undertones of wilful intent and the referee, if he called it, was seen as accusing the player of cheating, more or less. Furthermore, the referee did not wait for the opponent to decide whether to have the balls replaced; he just did it. Having said that, the rule was used and occasional clips do survive.

              At the same time as the above jump shot considerations, the Miss rule was looked at and the proposal was to see whether the incoming player wished to play from the position left (or say 'play again' in the normal run of things) or if he'd prefer the balls to be replaced. Apparently a player [i]could[/b] be warned for loss of frame, even if snookered, although I can find no reference to that in any of the rulebooks I have in my possession.

              In the early 1990s the Rule at professional level was made more stringent and the explanations on tv were that a miss would be called if a player gained an advantage from a foul (although only ever, of course, applied on a failure to hit the ball on). This led to the famous images at Sheffield in 1992 of Dennis Taylor querying Len Ganley's decision - "Len, I've got to query that, I've missed the red by that much!", his face becoming as red as the object ball in question. A month earlier, Steve Davis became the first victim of the 'Three misses and out' rule when able to see reds clearly, in the decider of his Irish Masters clash against local favourite and newcomer Ken Doherty.

              As stated upthread, it was in September 1995 that the rule was change to more or less what it is today. All reference to the 'deliberate miss' went out of the window, as had the 'gaining an advantage' which had become even more controversial that the deliberate aspect. Hitherto, all that had been written in regards the retaking of a shot was: "If a breach of Rule 3.3(j) occurs ['the referee considers that the player has not endeavoured to hit the ball on'], the offending player has to play again from the original position, if requested by the next player."

              Incidentally, another thing that was looked at in about 1984 was the removal of responsibility of the striker for checking that balls are correctly spotted before playing. However, in the event, it was not until the 1995 rulebook that this was acted upon - so right up to 1995 a non-striker could claim a foul if the referee misspotted (or failed to spot) a ball and the striker continued playing.

              Comment


              • #8
                [QUOTE=The Statman;670176]You have to realise (and not many people do) that, until some time in the mid-80s (at least as late as 1981, but not as late as 1986), there was not an all-encompassing rulebook specifically for snooker, as there is today.

                Instead, there was an overarching "Rules common to games played on an English biolliard table" - covering the dimensions of the table, and all the non-shot-specific things like fouling with oart of the body, push strokes, jump strokes etc., followed by the specific rules relating to each game - billiards, snooker and so on.

                wow lots of great info here. thanks

                Comment

                Working...
                X