A refereeing dilemma

[Souwester]

I may be wrong as I said, but I would call and stand by that decision in a match every time, until I was informed differently by a certified official. It is my interpretation of the ruling.

The othetr three contributors to this thread are all certifiated referees of long-standing.

[DeanH]

Hi deant1982 I think you may find that Souwester and other here are certified officials when it comes to Snooker rules
My interpretation of the original scenario, (missed the pack, hit the blue, "Miss", balls still in motion, non-offender "Play again", balls still in motion, referee checking for free ball):
As balls were still in motion the stroke has not been completed, so the non-offender did not have the right to make his comment as not being the player in Turn, and from the description the referee had not indicated to the non-offender that he had an option as the referee was, correctly, waiting for the balls to stop and the stroke to be over. If I was the referee, I would not have made any indication (by eye or hand, etc.), after announcing "Foul and a Miss", to the non-offender that he had a choice until the balls had come to rest, assessed the situation, then completed the relevant score for the turn, ("Offending Name, break score, Non-offending Name, "Five", and if necessary "Freeball") then indicated to the non-offending what would he like to do.
To me the stroke rule, 6(c) is not complete until ALL (i)-(iii) criteria are complied with and THEN the referee calls the score for the turn/foul/etc.
6. Stroke
(c) A stroke is not completed until:
(i) all balls have come to rest;
(ii) the striker has stood up, in readiness for a succeeding stroke, or leaving the table;
(iii) any equipment being used by the striker has been removed from a hazardous position; and
(iv) the referee has called any score relevant to the stroke.
Maybe it should say at the end of 6(c)(iii), instead of "; and" but "; and only then"
To me the call "Foul" signifies the end of player's Turn not the end of the Stroke, only then the out-going player's Stroke is complete is it the on-coming player's Turn. So the "Back Please" was not an authorised request for "Play Again".
As I say this is my interpretations as I see the scenario and as I read the rules, I am sure I have repeated other's comments and like any comments as I am looking into the interpretation and nuances of the game and rules of snooker.
Cheers

[DawRef]

If it was me,I'd put the balls back as the player had requested. It is his loss if he then finds out after he could have had a free ball.
Although the cue-ball had not finished travelling and therefore the stroke not complete, could the call of "back please" be taken as similar to a call by a spectator, and therefore the referee ignoring the request?