Referee counting

[DeanH]

I would certainly like to know when the document is ready for publication or even for a draft review.
Cheers

[DawRef]

However, if there are colours moving the ref might well be well advised not to call a score until it has stopped.

An example would be a player potting the blue and then screwing the cue-ball into the pack of reds. An experienced ref will wait until everything has stopped moving before calling the score and re-spotting the blue.

[Reecey]

I have also seen a eager ref respotting a ball before the cue ball has come to rest. Most ref's will accept feedback if given in the right manner, I know I learnt alot about reffing this way.

[The Statman]

The calling of the score should always be the last thing the referee does, after he has spotted balls, replaced equipment, etc. It is an indication to the player that he is ok to play his next shot. The new 2011 rules do now make it clear that a stroke does not end until the referee has called any score.

The foul was correct, because the player had played his next stroke before the referee had completed the spotting of the colour, and the penalty for that is specifically stated at s3 r10(b);

(b) value of the ball on or ball concerned, whichever is higher, by:
(i) striking when any ball is not at rest;
(ii) striking before the referee has completed the spotting of a colour that is not a free ball;

(or 10(a) in the case of a free ball being respotted).

...

Hi Souwester.

I believe the new rule changes the application of this particular foul. The Rule now makes clear that a shot is not completed until all balls have come to rest AND the referee has called the score AND all equipment has been removed AND any ball potted has been respotted by the referee.

Because of the last part of that (my bold), I would argue that the shot on the colour had not been completed and it is therefore that shot that should be called foul, and not the shot on the following red. The foul would therefore be for striking the cue-ball more than once during a stroke or, if you prefer to look at it this way, touching a ball in play apart from the cue-ball with the tip of the cue at the commencement of a stroke.

Food for thought?

[Souwester]

I absolutely agree.

Reading your answer prompted me to look up the rules again, and it hadn't previously registered that we nbow have two entries in 'Penalties' pertaining to striking before a colour has been spotted:

(a) value of the ball on by:
(i) striking before the referee has completed the spotting of a colour taken as a free ball;

(b) value of the ball on or ball concerned, whichever is higher, by:
(ii) striking before the referee has completed the spotting of a colour that is not a free ball;

Given that a stroke is not complete until all balls have been spotted, then the ball on will not change until the colour has been spotted. Therefore, if a colour is taken as a free ball, but before that free ball is respotted, the striker plays at the black, what is then penalty? Surely the ball on is still the red (from the previous stroke) so the penalty for striking the black is four points? The higher value of the ball concerned (black) cannot be applied because (b)(ii) only applies to non-free ball situations.

Under the old rules, the wording was simply this:

(b) value of the ball on or ball concerned, whichever is higher, by
(ii) striking before the referee has completed the spotting of a colour,

... so I would have awarded a penalty of seven points.

I've been trying to think of a scenario where, under the new rules (given the definition of a stroke) when a penalty of more than the ball on could apply. The only thing I can think of is that, with only the colours on the table, a foul has been committed and brown, blue, or pink has been forced off the table. The incoming player, for whatever reason, doesn't think the ball has to be respotted and plays at the next highest colour in order, so would be penalised for the colour he plays rather than the vakue of the ball on.

That begs the question, why should the penalty be different for the last scenario compared to the first?

[The Statman]

Indeed. Of course, in your 'playing at the black' scenario, it will often turn out to be a 7-point foul because it is likely that the player will succeed in what he considers 'potting' the black - which would then be 7 for the black going in when the ball on is still technically red.

Of course, another important distinction is that, being a foul on the 'previous' stroke, he cannot score for the red - whereas if it was a foul on the 'next' stroke he would score 1 for the red and give away 7 for the foul on the black.

I think the new wording of end-of-stroke, essentially, deems redundant the 'playing before all balls have been spotted', in the same way that a previous ruling about playing a shot before all balls were at rest (as in, colour after a [real] red) deemed redundant the foul of 'playing before all balls are at rest' because under the revised interpretation it cannot happen.

(The above sentence may make no sense, but I will elaborate if requested!)

The distinction between the 'was a free ball' and 'wasn't a free ball' is potentially simple if you manage to work it out:

Because a free ball had equal value to the ordinary ball on, and the foul is called on that original stroke, the rule does not need to say "whichever is the higher" because by definition they had the same value.

Whereas, the value of the ball on or ball concerned comes into play when ........... and this is the point where, as you say, Souwester, it doesn't make sense. The ball concerned must itself have been the ball on, otherwise the player will not be at the table to take the following shot.

So perhaps it is guiding the other new wording about penalising the oncoming player if he plays his opening stroke before the balls have come to rest - and by extension, been spotted - from the last stroke of his opponent's turn

[The Statman]

In fact, Souwester, the issue is settled in another part of the re-worded rule, Section 3 Rule 4(g), which is concerned with describing how the frame progresses and which ball is on. Subparagraph (iv) states:

(iv) In the event that the striker, in a break, plays before the referee has completed spotting a colour while all other balls are at rest, the value of the colour shall not be scored and Section 3 Rule 10(a)(i) or Section 3 Rule 10(b)(i) shall apply as appropriate.

...which refers to the two bits you highlighted.

[vmax4steve]

An example would be a player potting the blue and then screwing the cue-ball into the pack of reds. An experienced ref will wait until everything has stopped moving before calling the score and re-spotting the blue.

Surely an experienced ref should wait until all balls come to rest, re-spot the blue and then call the score.

[The Statman]

Surely an experienced ref should wait until all balls come to rest, re-spot the blue and then call the score.

Sure, but it does happen! I have occasionally called a score only to realise I've been a bit premature and something then happens which bites me on the backside.

[Souwester]

Referees' calling guide

After 3½ months, this document has finally had the go ahead for publication!

Referees Best Practice - Calling.doc

[vmax4steve]

After 3½ months, this document has finally had the go ahead for publication!

[ATTACH]9967[/ATTACH]

Thanks for that Souwester, I shall be contacting my league secretary asap.

What I think is missing though is that a referee should try his best to keep up with a fast player.

[The Statman]

Very good, Souwester.

Just one very minor point - you say a free ball should be part of a single uninterrupted call and give the example "39, free ball or whatever".

Surely it should immediately follow a foul so the example would be better if the figure was between 4 and 7.

[Souwester]

Ooops, wrong version of file uploaded. Now corrected!