Opinion sought about situation under new rule wording

[roykay]

This thread reminds me of many situations where a player pots a red in conjunction with a foul. This often leaves the non striker needing a snooker. I have allways thought that a penalty of 8 away instead of four (if a red is potted with a foul stroke) solves the problem and makes the game fairer.
Roy Bacon

[The Statman]

This thread reminds me of many situations where a player pots a red in conjunction with a foul. This often leaves the non striker needing a snooker. I have allways thought that a penalty of 8 away instead of four (if a red is potted with a foul stroke) solves the problem and makes the game fairer.
Roy Bacon

Actually, Roy, I have often thought the same - fouls are 8 points per red pocketed in the stroke, or the usual minimum of 4, or value of ball on etc etc etc if higher.

I can't see it ever happening, though, but I don't see why not! It seems logical that if a player gets rid of a ball from the table, he should give his opponent the number of points that it could have yielded.

(Now imagining fluking three reds in one stroke but trickling in-off and being penalised 24 points for it!)

[deant1982]

Actually, Roy, I have often thought the same - fouls are 8 points per red pocketed in the stroke, or the usual minimum of 4, or value of ball on etc etc etc if higher.

I can't see it ever happening, though, but I don't see why not! It seems logical that if a player gets rid of a ball from the table, he should give his opponent the number of points that it could have yielded.

(Now imagining fluking three reds in one stroke but trickling in-off and being penalised 24 points for it!)

I think Souwester has answered what I would do. If the player could stop his shot but didn't, a warning for ungentlemanly conduct and replace the balls. If he (in my opinion) couldn't reasonably stop the shot, this is similar to going in off the red, simply bad luck for player B.
Regarding the 8 points for a red, this is all well and good, but there are times when the black isn't available from a foul, so the red will not potentially yield 8 points. What if the black is touching the cushion nearest its spot, in the centre of the cushion, brown, blue and pink are surrounding it (making an unside down T if you like), the red is over the yellow pocket, yellow and green next to it but allowing it to be potted, and the cue ball is tight on a side cushion, so only top can be played. There is no way that red is worth 8 points, it is more than likely a maximum of 4 (red + green) so it shouldn't be worth 8.

A very tricky question here Statman! I suppose it is like the miss rule - open to the referee's interpretation of the rule.

[The Statman]

Yes but wherever the black is, the other player could work to dislodge it and only pot the red once black is available. If 34 behind on the last red, he will probably try to do this for sure! By the red being pocketed in a foul, it is denying him that opportunity.

Then again, the player 34 behind might accidentally foul while pocketing the red and then, as you say, the 8 points would be very excessive!

[DawRef]

Here is the reply I got from a professional referee:

If the player fouls on his backswing, like Statman says if the player didn't have time to react I would just call the foul and let it stand. BUT, if the player wilfully carried on playing the stroke after i've called foul, I would replace the balls to where they were and warn the player for ungentlemanly conduct. I wouldn't class it as a second foul as a few people have suggested, more that he had wilfully ignored my call of foul.

My reason for replacing them would be section 5(a) the referee shall (i) be the sole judge of fair and unfair play. If he has carried on playing his stroke after the foul has been called just to try and remove the frame winning ball, that is hardly fair on his opponent.

I've spoken to a couple of the pro refs and they said the same as me.

[vmax4steve]

This thread reminds me of many situations where a player pots a red in conjunction with a foul. This often leaves the non striker needing a snooker. I have allways thought that a penalty of 8 away instead of four (if a red is potted with a foul stroke) solves the problem and makes the game fairer.
Roy Bacon

I have often thought that maybe there should be a spot on the table for the last red to be placed on if it is potted in conjunction with a foul stroke. Perhaps between the black and pink spots.