NEW Miss rule?

[Tricue]

Hello everybody here...
Been registered on here for a while but usually only browse, but I thought I'd post this as nobody seems to have mentioned it so I want to know if it is true?

Was in my club last week and the discussion was about the 'NEW' miss rule that will be introduced to 'ALL' tournaments over the next few weeks?
I'm not sure how accurate the info is but basically the 'NEW' rule is that after three misses irrespective of wheter snookers are required or not the opposing player will get 'ball in hand' anywhere on the table, therefore allowing the player the chance to win the frame rather than the other player losing the frame!
As I said I'm not sure if this is just speculation or rumour but I heard this from a very reliable source. I've checked the usual blogs etc and dont see any mention anywhere.
Can anybody shine any light on this?
Thanks,
Rob (aka Tricue)

[PatBlock]

I think we would've heard something here on TSF if such a dramatic change was immanent, so hopefully it's just rumor, because personally I absolutely hate the 'ball in hand anywhere on the table' idea.

As it is now, the miss rule is far from perfect, but if the refs used a little more discretion it would be much better.

-

[Tricue]

I think we would've heard something here on TSF if such a dramatic change was immanent, so hopefully it's just rumor...

-

Yeah I thought TSF would know if anybody knew...
Btw: thanks for the quick reply.

I think I might start posting rather than just browsing on here more often

... Roll on the Masters!

[adam_s_101]

I actually like the miss rule, a well placed snooker should have the chance to earn more than just 4 points. Ok there are situations where the rule is on the harsh side, but its the same for both players

[wildJONESEYE]

Ball in hand would be even more severe than about 20 misses.

[adam_s_101]

Sorry, should have said I like it the way it is

[Souwester]

I don't think World Snooker (or is it WPBSA?), who own the rules, have any reason to want to change the rule. Any changes they make are fed through IBSF to disseminate around the world to the amateur bodies. I'm fairly certain that IBSF have not made any announcements about a change to the rule, and as far as I'm aware haven't been considering any (proposed) change.

[Terry Davidson]

I have to disagree with the post that says a well laid snooker is worth a lot of points. Just rolling up behind a baulk colour from 6in away is NOT a skillful shot but with only one or two reds left on it could mean 40 points or more.

The most valuable shot in snooker is worth 7 points, why should any snooker be worth more? (Would someone please explain that to me?) The MISS rule as it now stands has changed the tactics of the game, especially at the amateur level.

I also agree it might be fair to have the player who laid the snooker get an OPPORTUNITY to win the frame however ball in hand anywhere on the table is a bit too much of a golden opportunity. I think ball in hand as per the rules existing now would be much better.

Thinking of the amateur game as in league matches would ball in hand in the 'D' be a game loser? Not in a lot of cases I feel as the player would have to run out however I will admit at the pro level even in the 'D' could be a frame winner

Terry

[magicman]

I hate it the way it is. Not only does it take an inordinate amount of time to constantly replace balls thus irritating the watching public but I don't think it's a fair rule either. No-one should be rewarded to the tune of 30/40/50 points for one shot, and before members start to say that's an exaggeration - the record is 15 misses I believe, which is at least 60 points!

I don't like ball in hand much either tbh but something needs to be done, as the rules should be universal for pro's and grass roots, and currently too many leagues ignore the rule entirely.

[JanieWatkins]

I don't think World Snooker (or is it WPBSA?), who own the rules, have any reason to want to change the rule. Any changes they make are fed through IBSF to disseminate around the world to the amateur bodies. I'm fairly certain that IBSF have not made any announcements about a change to the rule, and as far as I'm aware haven't been considering any (proposed) change.

This 3 misses and ball in hand and some other changes, was something IBSf and others tried to bring into the game about 7 or 8 years ago.
It was widely shot down in flames by experienced referees and tutors and World Snooker totally vetoed it. In the end IBSF dropped the project because any unauthorised change in the rules meant that ibsf or its members countries would render their events and the participants ineligible to professional qualification - unless the events were run under the approved wpbsa rules.

so basically it's old news that's cropped up again for some reason.

[The Statman]

I hate it the way it is. Not only does it take an inordinate amount of time to constantly replace balls thus irritating the watching public but I don't think it's a fair rule either. No-one should be rewarded to the tune of 30/40/50 points for one shot, and before members start to say that's an exaggeration - the record is 15 misses I believe, which is at least 60 points!

Yes but these are usually fairly easy escapes where the player chooses a more difficult escape. I well remember the incident of 12 or 13 misses which was the previous record; it was Dave Harold and he had reds absolutely everywhere but chose a very awkward route to land on one specific red.

It is easy to argue that it was he who chose to give away 50 points rather than make an easy hit.

The number of points given away, in the vast majority of instances and certainly when 40+ points are involved, is the prerogative of the player.

[Souwester]

I hate it the way it is. Not only does it take an inordinate amount of time to constantly replace balls thus irritating the watching public but I don't think it's a fair rule either. No-one should be rewarded to the tune of 30/40/50 points for one shot, and before members start to say that's an exaggeration - the record is 15 misses I believe, which is at least 60 points!

But it is an exaggeration!

As a referee (admittedly not at pro level, but certainly at international amateur level), sometimes a match can go through its entirety without a miss being called. I remember the Home Internationals in 2009 where in one match I went all three frames without any fouls at all.

F&M calls are relatively rare on the whole, and they really don't detract too much from the game as a whole. By and large I would say that 95% of misses are resolved after two F&M calls. The number of times a ball has to be replaced multiple times really are quite rare, although for some reason, like buses, they seem to bunch together!

[Souwester]

Yes but these are usually fairly easy escapes where the player chooses a more difficult escape. I well remember the incident of 12 or 13 misses which was the previous record; it was Dave Harold and he had reds absolutely everywhere but chose a very awkward route to land on one specific red.

It is easy to argue that it was he who chose to give away 50 points rather than make an easy hit.

The number of points given away, in the vast majority of instances and certainly when 40+ points are involved, is the prerogative of the player.

I would agree. In many cases where there are multiple F&M calls, the player is trying to play a very specific shot, which, even if he gives 40 points away, will leave his opponent with nothing on. If he went for the easier escape he may well be letting his opponent in to score heavily and probably win the frame! Giving away 40 points still keeps him in the frame.

[The Statman]

Thanks for the reply, Souwester.

I don't know if you agree with me on this, but if you made it 3 misses and ball in-hand (or anywhere on the table), you are in effect inviting the player on his third attempt not to even attempt to hit the ball on. He may as well just push a colour safe or somesuch. That may be safer than guaranteeing a hit and leaving a potential clearance opportunity to his opponent.

Another suggestion I've heard is after 3 misses give an automatic free ball - again, he can just tap the white to a position where even with a free ball there is no attractive pot.

In fact, anything done to limit the amount of Misses will just invite the player to make a tactical foul on the last attempt. I don't see any obvious way around that.

[tornado taylor]

I'm sure I heard the rumour of the ball in hand suggested after the uk as a trial in a few smaller tournaments I dont like this idea at all I think you have to work for your chances not be given it on a plate. I think the miss rule is fine to a point but the ref's let it down quite often for me.