Touching Ball

[Bigmeek]

Couldn't find the answer to this using the search facility.

Striker has potted a red and finished up touching the (eg) black.
Referee states "touching ball" and points to the black.
Striker doesn't nominate a colour and plays away from the black. Cue ball hits several cushions and pots the (eg) blue. Striker smiles and says he meant it! Non-striker grimaces and claims foul.
Questions:-
Should referee have asked striker to nominate? Don't think striker is required to nominate?
Has a foul been committed and if so what is the penalty?

[thinsy]

Can't remember for sure of the top of my head but I think if a ball ISN'T nominated the referee would have to consider the black as nominated ball therefore potting the blue would be a foul and 7 points away because you were in his opinion playing the black!!

If a nomination of ball being played is required the referee will ask for it to be nominated!! This is one reason why you will hear many players nominate the colour regardless of whether the referee is sure of the ball you are playing or not... Better safe than sorry!

[Kyra]

Couldn't find the answer to this using the search facility.

Striker has potted a red and finished up touching the (eg) black.
Referee states "touching ball" and points to the black.
Striker doesn't nominate a colour and plays away from the black. Cue ball hits several cushions and pots the (eg) blue. Striker smiles and says he meant it! Non-striker grimaces and claims foul.
Questions:-
Should referee have asked striker to nominate? Don't think striker is required to nominate?
Has a foul been committed and if so what is the penalty?

In a normal touchung-ball-situation the referee will always ask the striker to nominate (declare) a ball, because it is not obvious which shot he is about to play (see below) . If the striker doesn't answer the question it's a 7 point foul (3.14 (d) (v)).

8. Touching Ball
...
(c) Providing the striker does not cause the object ball to move, there shall be no penalty if:
(i) the ball is on,
(ii) the ball could be on and the striker declares he is on it, or
(iii) the ball could be on and the striker declares, and first hits, another ball that could be on.
...


In the situation that you described the referee has a problem. He forgot to ask the striker to nominate (declare) a ball on. So he can't penalise the striker for hitting/not hitting a ball (which one was the "correct" ball ?).

[Souwester]

The referee should always ask the striker to 'declare' (ie verbally say) which ball he is nominating if he is unsure.

After potting a red and the player ends up touching a red, then this isn't technically a 'touching ball' (because red is not the ball on for the next shot, but a colour), and the normal convention would apply and the referee would only ask for a declaration if he was unsure as to which colour the player was aiming for.

Where the cue ball ends up touching a ball that is or could be on (ie touching a colour after potting a red) then the referee should always ask the striker to declare, because of the very situation outlined in the original post. In this case the referee cannot call foul, because it is possible that the striker was going for the blue. It's the referee's own failing that has created the situation.

In cases like the OP's scenario it is always wise for the striker to voluntarily declare which ball he is on for the avoidance of doubt, and will save many arguments in games where two players are refereeing themselves.

A similar situation is when the cue ball comes to rest touching a colour after a foul, and a free ball is awarded. The colour that the cue ball is touching could be on, and if nominated, the player could simply play away. However in playing away he could be aiming at another colour and fail to hit it. The referee needs to know which is the nominated ball in order to know whether a foul is committed.

[Bigmeek]

Thanks everyone. That's very clear. I was the ref!!!