Miss rule imperfection?

[APK]

In situations like this I would employ Rule 5.1 which states that the referee is is sole judge of fair and unfair play and shall be free to make a decision on any situation not covered adequately by Rule.

Clearly there is almost 0% chance of hitting the yellow first so, yes it would be a foul but I would just call a foul.

In my opinion this would be in the interests of fair play.

[Souwester]

Section 5 isn't used by referees nearly enough.

Another question about judgment. Cue ball is tight on the baulk cushion exactly a ball's width from the side cushion (which you can tell because there's another colour there to guide you. The last remaining red is right down at the far end of the table, just off the top cushion, poking out about a millimetre from the side cushion with another colour immediately in front of it.

Technically you have direct contact with that red, but it's almost impossible to hit. Should the referee call a Foul and a Miss if the player fails to hit it?

[damienlch]

Section 5 isn't used by referees nearly enough.

Another question about judgment. Cue ball is tight on the baulk cushion exactly a ball's width from the side cushion (which you can tell because there's another colour there to guide you. The last remaining red is right down at the far end of the table, just off the top cushion, poking out about a millimetre from the side cushion with another colour immediately in front of it.

Technically you have direct contact with that red, but it's almost impossible to hit. Should the referee call a Foul and a Miss if the player fails to hit it?

so what you're basically saying is should a referee call a Foul and a Miss if a player misses an extremely difficult thin cut?

my view is that the referee shouldn't call it since the shot is indeed almost impossible albeit the player can "see" the ball on.

in my opinion, the Foul and Miss rule should not be evoked if:

1. the cueball or object ball is in an awkward position and
2. the player makes a genuine attempt to hit the object ball and
3. the path from the cueball to object ball is the most straightforward path

i guess the questions would be how to determine awkwardness, genuineness (is that a word?) and straightforwardness... well, i'll let the referee decide.

we can probably be sure that a player is making a genuine attempt at hitting the object ball when he loses points till snooker is required... but does it really need to go to that extent?

[APK]

Souwesters example would not be a foul and a miss because if there is exactlt a balls width between the cusion and the cue ball, the cue ball must make contact with the ball not on during the shot.

However, assuming there is slightly more than a balls width available then the cushion shot is an interesting one.
Some table allow shots the full length of the cushion, sometimes even over the centre pocket, and thge cue ball will "stick" to the cushion.
Sometimes a little side on the cue ball will help.

So you need to understand the quality of the table and the ability of the player.

The miss rule states that the player must endeavour to the best of his ability to hit a ball on.

If the player has proven to you, the referee, that he has no knowledge of how to play such shots, then he may very well play to the best of his ability and still fail miserably.

These problems are hardest to gauge early in a match when you don't know the players.

[Souwester]

You perhaps misunderstand the scenario I posed: cue ball was exactly one ball's width off the side cushion and object ball at the end of the table was about 1mm off the cushion, so just sticking out behind the ball not on.


The rules are quite clear though that F&M *WILL* be called if you can see any part of an object ball in a straight line. Just where do you draw the line and not call it? Would you call F&M if 2mm were sticking out? 3mm? It's a very hard judgement call.

I was talking to a couple of professional referees last weekend and discussed something similar, and they disagreed with what other professional and European referees said (although there was still plenty of disagreement with others).

I think you have to use section 5 to make a fair decision sometimes, even if it goes against the rules which are laid down in the rule book, but you're always going to open to criticism if you do.

[APK]

Ah, I see. so the Rule is very clear on this scenario.
The referee must judge whether the player has attempted to the best of his ability to hit the ball on.

This will depend on the ability of the player and the situation.
If it is a professional player in the early stages of a tournament, there is no real pressure and he should be able to hit that ball.
A less able amateur may have proven that he is not that accurate.

[shdl83]

May I ask why at 5:55 no miss is called on Davis?

[Bigmeek]

It's because the miss rules doesn't apply when snookers are required.
PS did you notice this thread is over 4 years old?

[alabadi]

Those two shots I've descrbed above could actually have involved exactly the same travel of the cue-ball; but in the one case it is accidental and in the other it is (accidental).

is this a misprint, did you mean deliberate on the second part