Questions Related to Miss Rule

[Hyperonic]

Imagine that the cue-ball was surrounded by reds, in the pack, and the player was on a colour. Let's say the pink is close to its spot and the brown and blue are also spotted. It would not be within the spirit for the player to nominate brown and play directly towards it - because the blue and pink are in the way. In that scenario it would be fair to call a Miss because he is not aiming as if the reds were not impossibly snookering him.

So the striker in this situation must only nominate pink and play towards it directly because that would be the easiest ball on to hit if the impossible snooker wasn't there ? Will it be called a miss if he nominates blue or brown and play towards the side cushion as if he was attempting to hit them indirectly ?

[Hyperonic]

hyperonic:

If hand touched yellow that is an immediate foul and the hitting of the pink will not count in this stroke unless the pink leaves the table.

when the red is the ball on and the cue ball goes to hit the pink while the hand or cue hits the yellow, then I think it will be a foul of 6 points because two fouls have been made in this stroke and the highest value penalty is incurred according to the following rules :

(c) A stroke is not completed until all balls have come to rest.
(g) If more than one foul is committed in the same stroke, the highest value penalty shall be incurred.


Do you agree, 'DawRef' and 'The Statman' ?

[The Statman]

So the striker in this situation must only nominate pink and play towards it directly because that would be the easiest ball on to hit if the impossible snooker wasn't there ? Will it be called a miss if he nominates blue or brown and play towards the side cushion as if he was attempting to hit them indirectly ?

That is up to the referee's judgement. In reality, a player is more likely to nominate pink so as to scatter the reds less - it's unlikely that the extra 2 points for the foul would matter too much at that stage. Also, in reality, the thought of having to replace the reds might cross the referee's mind!

[The Statman]

when the red is the ball on and the cue ball goes to hit the pink while the hand or cue hits the yellow, then I think it will be a foul of 6 points because two fouls have been made in this stroke and the highest value penalty is incurred according to the following rules :

(c) A stroke is not completed until all balls have come to rest.
(g) If more than one foul is committed in the same stroke, the highest value penalty shall be incurred.


Do you agree, 'DawRef' and 'The Statman' ?

Yes I agree. I think the previous answer had assumed that the hand had touched the pink before the stroke had commenced.

[Hyperonic]

(a) A stroke is made when the striker strikes the cue-ball with the tip of the cue.

(d) After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule, when there is a clear path in a straight line from the cue-ball to any part of any ball that is or could be on, and the striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball while preparing to play a stroke, a miss will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed and....
(ii) the next player may ask the referee to replace all balls moved to their original position and have the offender play again from there...

Will it be called a stroke if accidently the tip of the cue touches and moves the cue ball slightly when doing the preliminary waggles and hence, will it be called foul and a miss or just foul ?

How the balls can be replaced given that it has not been called a miss ? Is it not called a miss because miss can only be called when the stroke is played ?

[The Statman]

(a) A stroke is made when the striker strikes the cue-ball with the tip of the cue.

(d) After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule, when there is a clear path in a straight line from the cue-ball to any part of any ball that is or could be on, and the striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball while preparing to play a stroke, a miss will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed and....
(ii) the next player may ask the referee to replace all balls moved to their original position and have the offender play again from there...

Will it be called a stroke if accidently the tip of the cue touches and moves the cue ball slightly when doing the preliminary waggles and hence, will it be called foul and a miss or just foul ?

If the tip of the cue touches the cue-ball then a stroke has been made. So, Miss.

How the balls can be replaced given that it has not been called a miss ? Is it not called a miss because miss can only be called when the stroke is played ?

Yes. A Miss can only be called for failure to hit the ball on, not for any other foul. Since the foul here is for touching a ball other than as a stroke, no Miss can be called. However, this exception rule makes plain that the balls can be replaced (i.e. no replacement under the Miss rule because a stroke was not made) to give the player the same difficulty as before. I bring to mind the scenario where full ball red is available but involves cuing over a colour. If you accidentally touch that colour with your hand, you may move it so that it is not so much of a hindrance. So if it is a second attempt on an already replaced shot, the balls can be put back to referee's satisfaction and the sequence of successive Misses will be held to remain intact – so a warning under the Three-Misses rule can still be forthcoming, or remian in force if already given.

[Hyperonic]

So if it is a second attempt on an already replaced shot,

can it be replaced if it is the first attempt ?

(ii) the next player may ask the referee to replace all balls moved to their original position and have the offender play again from there, and

If a color was the ball on when the striker fouled while preparing for the stroke, would the offender play again for red or for color ?

[The Statman]

Well the subsection you quote begins: "After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule..." so by definition it must be a second (or subsequent) attempt.

Or am I misunderstanding your query?

[TheSonOfDavis]

Hi everybody, I have a question relating to this. This occured to me on sunday whilst playing in the qualifying section for the english amateurs
A player had me in a snooker which i missed 4 times i think, on the 5th time of playing out of the snooker i've basically left him a red so easy i think my grandmother would've potted it eyes closed (red and white no more than 10 inches apart, and no more than a foot from the pocket.) He has still put me back in. Is it me, or is this just sersiously bad sportsmanship?? There is a serious loophole in the miss rule. If a player has a ball on thats unmissible almost, the miss rule shouldnt be allowed.What does everyone think??

[The Statman]

Hi everybody, I have a question relating to this. This occured to me on sunday whilst playing in the qualifying section for the english amateurs
A player had me in a snooker which i missed 4 times i think, on the 5th time of playing out of the snooker i've basically left him a red so easy i think my grandmother would've potted it eyes closed (red and white no more than 10 inches apart, and no more than a foot from the pocket.) He has still put me back in. Is it me, or is this just sersiously bad sportsmanship?? There is a serious loophole in the miss rule. If a player has a ball on thats unmissible almost, the miss rule shouldnt be allowed.What does everyone think??

Unfortunately that's so subjective that it couldn't work, really.

Ok, the shot you were talking about was an unquestionably easy one, but what if it's borderline?

In the end, once a Miss has been called, the incoming player has those options available – you are adjudged not to have attempted the escape to the best of your ability and, if you're put in again, I'm afraid you have to take the consequences.

[Hyperonic]

Hi everybody, I have a question relating to this. This occured to me on sunday whilst playing in the qualifying section for the english amateurs
A player had me in a snooker which i missed 4 times i think, on the 5th time of playing out of the snooker i've basically left him a red so easy i think my grandmother would've potted it eyes closed (red and white no more than 10 inches apart, and no more than a foot from the pocket.) He has still put me back in. Is it me, or is this just sersiously bad sportsmanship?? There is a serious loophole in the miss rule. If a player has a ball on thats unmissible almost, the miss rule shouldnt be allowed.What does everyone think??

If you were genuinely attempting to hit the easiest ball on with the easiest escape then I think a miss should not have been called in the 1st failed attempt, unless in the mind of the referee the snooker was so easy or you were a very talented player

[DawRef]

If you were genuinely attempting to hit the easiest ball on with the easiest escape then I think a miss should not have been called in the 1st failed attempt, unless in the mind of the referee the snooker was so easy or you were a very talented player

No. Top amateur and professional players are not simply trying to get out of the snooker. They are trying in such a way as to leave both the cue-ball and object ball as safe as possible. So, even though the snooker is easy, the referee is quite justified to coninue calling 'foul and a miss' until such point you need a snooker yourself, or he is satisfied you have made a genuine effort to hit the ball on.

In the end, once a Miss has been called, the incoming player has those options available – you are adjudged not to have attempted the escape to the best of your ability and, if you're put in again, I'm afraid you have to take the consequences.

Couldn't agree more. Merry Xmas everyone.

[Hyperonic]

(d) After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule, when there is a clear path in a straight line from the cue-ball to any part of any ball that is or could be on, and the striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball while preparing to play a stroke, a miss will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed and
(ii) the next player may ask the referee to replace all balls moved to their original position and have the offender play again from there, and


Does this rule apply in both situations when the offender is on the red or when on a colour ? If yes, then will the offender play again for colour or red if he was on a colour when he fouled ?

[snookerfan91]

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) Up to the ref's discretion.
4) Yes.
5) No. (Misses won't be called in the above scenarios either if snookers are required or leave the striker needing snookers).

That is correct.

[Odrl]

(d) After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule, when there is a clear path in a straight line from the cue-ball to any part of any ball that is or could be on, and the striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball while preparing to play a stroke, a miss will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed and
(ii) the next player may ask the referee to replace all balls moved to their original position and have the offender play again from there, and


Does this rule apply in both situations when the offender is on the red or when on a colour ? If yes, then will the offender play again for colour or red if he was on a colour when he fouled ?

Yes, it does. If the ball on was a colour, and the balls are replaced under this rule, the "offender" is still on a colour. The same as if a miss was called.