Verbally Nominating Free Ball

[Hyperonic]

In a free ball situation, is it necessary to verbally declare the nominated ball even if it is clear from the player's pointing taking the shot and his cue about his intended ball ? If not asked by referee or opponent player, will it be a foul if the player doesn't declare the nominated free ball but it is clear what his intended ball is ?


12. Nominated Ball
(a) A nominated ball is the object ball which the striker declares, or indicates to the satisfaction of the referee, he undertakes to hit with the first impact of the cue-ball.
(b) If requested by the referee, the striker must declare which ball he is on.

13. Free Ball
A free ball is a ball which the striker nominates as the ball on when snookered after a foul (see Section 3 Rule 10).

[glove147]

You answered yourself by quoting the rules.
The Freeball has to be nominated. Verbal announcing is NOT necessary in a clear situation.

Quite usual that players tell the ref their choice verbally, though. Don't know why lol. This always takes a few minutes when i train new refs.

[Hyperonic]

What if after potting a red ball, the cue ball is in the black ball area and the striker is playing for one of the baulk colors like brown ball but doesn't declare it. In this situation can the opponent player call it a foul while he had a chance to ask the striker to declare his intention but refrained to ask so that he can take a foul ?

[gettingbetter]

The unwritten rule in such situation - whether it is nominating a free ball or nominating a coloured ball after sinking a red is that if it is unclear what ball the striker wants to contact, they must verbally nominate what ball they are going for.

So if someone is playing for black and falls out of position and tries to run back to the baulk area, then it is necessary to nominate a colour. On the other hand, if someone is and around the black spot, there is obviously no need.

[DawRef]

As said below, you have ansered it yourself. The rule states," ....or indicates to the satisfaction of the referee...."
My advice would be to verbally nominate anyway. That way, there will be no chance of the referee calling a 'foul' against you.
Remember, though, if the referee asks which ball you are attempting and you fail to reply, it will be a penalty of seven points, even if the black was your intended ball. (Section 3 Rule 12(d)(v))

[Hyperonic]

The unwritten rule in such situation - whether it is nominating a free ball or nominating a coloured ball after sinking a red is that if it is unclear what ball the striker wants to contact, they must verbally nominate what ball they are going for.

So if someone is playing for black and falls out of position and tries to run back to the baulk area, then it is necessary to nominate a colour. On the other hand, if someone is and around the black spot, there is obviously no need.

I was told by someone that in the free ball case it is necessary to verbally declare the intended ball even if it is clear what ball the striker is contacting. He said that the reason behind this is that in the free ball case it is the first shot in the striker's turn so either he can play the ball on or any other ball so he has to verbally declare the free ball colour while in the case of nominating a colour ball after potting the red there is no need to declare since it is clear that the striker is always going to pot one of the colours, unless it is unclear what ball the striker wants to play in the baulk area when the cue ball is in black ball area.

So the question is that, is the nomination of free ball by verbally declaring must than nomination of colour ball after potting red in the situation that in both the cases it is clear which ball the striker is playing ?

[steveb72]

I was told by someone that in the free ball case it is necessary to verbally declare the intended ball even if it is clear what ball the striker is contacting. He said that the reason behind this is that in the free ball case it is the first shot in the striker's turn so either he can play the ball on or any other ball so he has to verbally declare the free ball colour while in the case of nominating a colour ball after potting the red there is no need to declare since it is clear that the striker is always going to pot one of the colours, unless it is unclear what ball the striker wants to play in the baulk area when the cue ball is in black ball area.

That's HIS rules, not the official rules! lol

I have come across many players who are adamant that the nomination must be verbal, but that is not the case.

Basically, if the REFEREE is unsure which ball the striker is aiming for, he/she will ask the striker to verbally nominate. Hence why there is a provision in the rules for a seven point penalty if the striker fails to answer.

Most snooker players are good sports and will therefore nominate verbally to the referee if it is not obvious which ball they are playing, thus avoiding any embarassment.

[Hyperonic]

Most snooker players are good sports and will therefore nominate verbally to the referee if it is not obvious which ball they are playing, thus avoiding any embarassment.

I have seen in the videos that professional player's always nominate verbally in the free ball case even when it is obvious but not in the case of colour after potting red. Is there any reason for this or is it just because it has become traditional to always verbally nominate the free ball colour even if it is obvious ?

[davis_greatest]

I have seen in the videos that professional player's always nominate verbally in the free ball case even when it is obvious but not in the case of colour after potting red. Is there any reason for this or is it just because it has become traditional to always verbally nominate the free ball colour even if it is obvious ?

The difference is that:
- after potting a red, the player does not necessarily need to nominate his colour (unless requested by the referee) - simply (s3, rule 3(f)(i)) "the next ball on is a colour of the striker’s choice"; whereas
- a free ball must be nominated (s2 rule 13) - "A free ball is a ball which the striker nominates as the ball on when snookered after a foul" and (s3 rule 10) "the referee shall state FREE BALL (a) If the player next in turn elects to play the next stroke, (i) he may nominate any ball as the ball on".

For most people, the easiest and least ambiguous way to nominate is to declare the free ball verbally, which is why you will see players do this. However, the player may indicate the free ball by other means, provided it is (s2 rule 12a) "indicated to the satisfaction of the referee".

[The Statman]

I was told by someone that in the free ball case it is necessary to verbally declare the intended ball even if it is clear what ball the striker is contacting. He said that the reason behind this is that in the free ball case it is the first shot in the striker's turn so either he can play the ball on or any other ball so he has to verbally declare the free ball colour while in the case of nominating a colour ball after potting the red there is no need to declare since it is clear that the striker is always going to pot one of the colours, unless it is unclear what ball the striker wants to play in the baulk area when the cue ball is in black ball area.

So the question is that, is the nomination of free ball by verbally declaring must than nomination of colour ball after potting red in the situation that in both the cases it is clear which ball the striker is playing ?

That did used to be the case, but the rule was rewritten in something like December 1980, to bring it in line with the standard 'colour after a red' scenario.

Therefore, both situations are exactly the same. You do not have to verbally declare the colour you are choosing. If it is not obvious to the referee, he must ask, and he cannot call foul unless he has asked and received no reply.

[tallguy]

That did used to be the case, but the rule was rewritten in something like December 1980, to bring it in line with the standard 'colour after a red' scenario.

Therefore, both situations are exactly the same. You do not have to verbally declare the colour you are choosing. If it is not obvious to the referee, he must ask, and he cannot call foul unless he has asked and received no reply.

Bold highlighted by me.

So does this mean that the referee cannot a foul unless he has asked or the player has explicitly nominated a colour ?

Hypothetical scenario : With all colours on their spots, I have the option of playing free ball and I line up to play black at a half ball angle. Horrible miscue. missed black altogether but knocked in the pink coming off two cushions. Since the ref hadn't asked me and I hadn't explicitly indicated in any way what my nominated ball was, can I (very shamelessly ) now claim that pink was what I had in mind ?

Would the answer be any different if I were playing a colour after a red ?


DISCLAIMER : The use of first person in the hypothetical scenario does not in any way imply that I have done or intend to do so as described.

[mooneyy]

The answer is that the ref would have to call a foul because it was obvious
that you were aiming for the black.

Same for colour after red...

[The Statman]

Bold highlighted by me.

So does this mean that the referee cannot a foul unless he has asked or the player has explicitly nominated a colour ?

Hypothetical scenario : With all colours on their spots, I have the option of playing free ball and I line up to play black at a half ball angle. Horrible miscue. missed black altogether but knocked in the pink coming off two cushions. Since the ref hadn't asked me and I hadn't explicitly indicated in any way what my nominated ball was, can I (very shamelessly ) now claim that pink was what I had in mind ?

Would the answer be any different if I were playing a colour after a red ?


DISCLAIMER : The use of first person in the hypothetical scenario does not in any way imply that I have done or intend to do so as described.

Sorry, yes. I did not explain myself fully.

If you have 'indicated to the satisfaction of the referee' that you were going for the black – by the fact that you were aiming the cue in only the direction of the black – then the referee will of course call foul if you don't hit it.

What I should have said was:

If the referee is in any doubt as to which ball you are going for, then he must ask and cannot call foul if he did not. Therefore, if snookered, or – here's a better example – if pointing in the approximate direction of say green and blue, the referee would be on dodgy ground if he did not ask which one you were going for, and you then hit the one he thought you were not attempting. Of course, if you hit neither of them, he could call foul.

[Hyperonic]

If the referee is in any doubt as to which ball you are going for, then he must ask and cannot call foul if he did not.

So this concludes that its not the responsibility of the striker to verbally nominate the colour after potting red and in the case of free ball.
The referee/opponent player will ask, if in doubt, and the striker must reply or it will be a foul of 7.
Can anyone verify this with a professional referee on email or something ?

[The Statman]

So this concludes that its not the responsibility of the striker to verbally nominate the colour after potting red and in the case of free ball.
The referee/opponent player will ask, if in doubt, and the striker must reply or it will be a foul of 7.
Can anyone verify this with a professional referee on email or something ?

Yes, that's correct. If the referee asks, there must be a response otherwise it would be a foul of 7.

Don't forget, there is an automatic foul of 7 for making a foul before nominating a colour – say for example you're going round the table after potting a red and your finger touches a ball before you've decided on your next shot. The failure to nominate when asked is essentially an extension of that.

Personally, if someone fouled when placing the rest on the table, I would consider that a nomination to my satisfaction, if there is only one colour for which the rest would be remotely necessary; so for example if a player needed the rest for the pink but the other colours were all in the opposite direction, and the player fouled while putting the cue onto the rest, I would happily call a foul 6 rather than 7 even if the player had not yet actually lined up towards a particular ball.