Snookered by nominated ball? Or not!

[JoeG]

Situation: After a foul shot by me, my opponent had a 'free ball'. He nominated black and played it so that the white was behind the pink, snookering me on the yellow. The black, however, continued to roll and stopped just touching the yellow in a direct line between the yellow and white - i.e. if the pink wasn't where it was, I would be snookered by the nominated free ball.
I claimed a foul and a free ball because if I had managed to swerve around the pink, or if I had come off a side cushion, I would still be unable to hit the yellow because the nominated black was snookering me!
Was I right?

[liquidsymphony]

i don't think you allowed to claim for a foul

[PatBlock]

You can't snooker directly behind the nominated free ball of course, but I'd be unhappy if a foul was called against me for the situation you describe.

...if the pink wasn't where it was, I would be snookered by the nominated free ball.

The balls are where they are, not where they could be.

There's always a place on the table where the nominated free ball would be in the path of the ball on, so I don't think you can call a foul for that.

I could be wrong, but I'd say no, it's not a foul.

-

[Terry Davidson]

I'm not going to dig out my rules and quote them but the snookering ball is considered to be the one closest to the cueball and in this case that is the pink...so no foul can be called even if the black is also a snookering ball but beyond the pink.

There is however one time where a player may snooker behind the nominated free ball and that is when only pink and black are left of the table.

This rule is to prevent a player from rolling up tight behind a nominated free ball (except with only pink and black left of course).

Terry

[Souwester]

Terry is correct, it would not be a foul because the pink would be considered to be the effective snookering ball (as the nearest obstructing ball). As he says, though, you can snooker behind the nominated ball (black) when only pink and black are left on the table.

[147Alexandra]

I also agree with Terry's call. What if the effective snookering ball only formed a partial snooker, and a second(free ball) ball took away a side of the object ball which would otherwise be an easy hit! What would the ruling be?

[Souwester]

I also agree with Terry's call. What if the effective snookering ball only formed a partial snooker, and a second(free ball) ball took away a side of the object ball which would otherwise be an easy hit! What would the ruling be?

But you've already used the phrase 'effective snookering ball', which answers the question. The ball that matters is the nearest ball (to the cue ball) that prevents the cue ball from hitting either extreme edge of the object ball. Any other balls that might be in the way are totally irrelevant.