Was The Pink Nominated?

[HemiRR]

Refereeing a senior tourney today and this foul occurred. Was the penalty 6 or 7?

After potting a red the striker needed a cue extension for his next shot. The rest was placed on the table and the cue placed on the rest. while adjusting the position of his setup his cue struck a red. The only colour ball in that direction was the pink. Even though the striker had not verbally said 'pink' I awarded 6 points as I was satisfied that he was plying the pink. The opponents argued that it should be 7 as he had not nominated a colour. Was this a 7 point foul or was my decision correct?

[The Statman]

You were correct.

[Souwester]

Nomination can be by indication (by physically pointing with finger, or cue, or rest) or declaration (making a verbal statement). Therefore, the player had nominated pink, and the penalty was correctly given as six.

Even if the nomination hasn;t been specific then the penalty doesn;t have to be seven. If, to use your scenario, there had also been the yellow, close to the pink, with black totally away from all the action, then by getting the rest out he was going to nominate either yellow or pink, so the penalty would be given as six.

This seems to be one of the generally accepted refereeing practices which goes against the strict wording of the rule book.

[damienlch]

But I often see on TV that the players tend to nominate a baulk colour verbally, even though it seems quite obvious which one they are going for. For e.g. when they lose position at the top half of the table and trying to pot or play safe off one of the baulk colours which are on their respective spots.

I wonder why would they do that when it's such an obvious shot? Force of habit perhaps?

[The Statman]

But I often see on TV that the players tend to nominate a baulk colour verbally, even though it seems quite obvious which one they are going for. For e.g. when they lose position at the top half of the table and trying to pot or play safe off one of the baulk colours which are on their respective spots.

I wonder why would they do that when it's such an obvious shot? Force of habit perhaps?

Exactly that, I think.

John Higgins has always been a habitual nominator, in the same way that Tony Meo was a habitual middle finger tapper.