A question for referees

[steveb72]

Just a scenario which hopefully wouldn't happen but just wondering what your take on it would be.

Player A is leading by 34 points with just one red left and is at the table. As he addresses his shot to pot the final red his clothing touches the green ball and the referee calls foul however player A doesn't get up from the shot and knocks in the red. Player B gets the 4 point penalty but now needs a snooker due to player A's unsporting behaviour. Of course it might not be unsporting if he cues just as the ref calls the foul but if it was potted say a couple of seconds after the foul was called would the frame be awarded to or would it just be tough luck on player B?

[The Statman]

Just a scenario which hopefully wouldn't happen but just wondering what your take on it would be.

Player A is leading by 34 points with just one red left and is at the table. As he addresses his shot to pot the final red his clothing touches the green ball and the referee calls foul however player A doesn't get up from the shot and knocks in the red. Player B gets the 4 point penalty but now needs a snooker due to player A's unsporting behaviour. Of course it might not be unsporting if he cues just as the ref calls the foul but if it was potted say a couple of seconds after the foul was called would the frame be awarded to or would it just be tough luck on player B?

Taking the latter point first, if the player was on his final backswing when the foul was called, and it could not be expected that the player could react to the call before striking the cue-ball, then I would judge that as the same as if the foul had occurred during the actual shot.

He will be 30 in front with 27 on the table and player B needs a snooker. (* see below.)

In your earlier scenario, where the player had ample time to get up from the shot but played it nevertheless, there is another course of action available to the referee, above warning for ungentlemany conduct – which, on its own, does not prevent his opponent from needing snookers in the frame in progress, even though it will mean a further case of misconduct will give frame/match to the opponent.

The other course of action is to apply the rule which states that, once a foul has been committed, a player's turn ends immediately. I would conceive that it is in order, therefore, to consider Player A's turn as at an end as soon as the foul is called; therefore the 'shot' that he played can come under 'ball(s) moved by other than striker' which is adequately covered by rule and states that the ball(s) so moved will be replaced by the referee.

* In these circumstances, where a player pockets the final red and accidentally makes a foul at the same time (and I stress accidentally), the player has not actually gained an advantage by making the foul. If he had potted the red but not fouled, he would be 35 up with 27 on, and a shot at the colour to boot. As it is, he is only 31 up with 27 on, opponent to play. So in fact, he has gained an advantage by knocking the red in, but gained a disadvantage by making the foul.

[missneworleans]

It all depends when referee said about the the foul if its obvious that it had been done before the shot has been taken-balls must be replaced
if when shot is taken-might be controversial but probably no replacement

[crucible77]

I know this is off topic, but can we give Statman TSF's first knighthood, he knows everything!