Miss when hitting ball-on and ball not-on simultaneously?

[mensch72]

Hitting a ball-on and a ball not-on simultaneously is a foul. Can a miss be called because a ball-on was not hit "first"? Or is hitting it simultaneously a special case of hitting it "first"?

[vmax]

I suppose it depends on the scenario, if you're snookered on that particular ball on or trying to pot it and there's another ball on that can be contacted full ball then yes a miss should be called.
If you're snookered on all balls on and there's an easier escape to another ball on then yes a miss will be called, but if all balls on are difficult to hit or it's the only ball on then it would take a pretty mean spirited ref to call a miss, that's if they can spot a simultaneous hit while standing behind the striker like all pro refs do these days.

[DeanH]

Judging a simultaneous contact is the most difficult to make and unless absolutely clear-cut, the Striker is given the benefit of the doubt - therefore no Miss.

If clear-cut simultaneous, then Foul and a Miss; but the rules for Foul and a Miss need to be confirmed as well, such as requiring penalty points, impossible to hit, etc.

[DeanH]

I suppose it depends on the scenario, if your snookered on that particular ball on or trying to pot it and there's another ball on that can be contacted full ball then yes a miss should be called.
If you're snookered on all balls on and there's an easier escape to another ball on then yes a miss will be called, but if all balls on are difficult to hit or it's the only ball on then it would take a pretty mean spirited ref to call a miss, that's if they can spot a simultaneous hit while standing behind the striker like all pro refs do these days.

vmax - "full ball contact" has nothing to do with whether a Miss is called or not; "full ball contact" is purely for whether "three attempts and lose frame" scenario is started or not