question for a reff

[shanerayner28]

was playing a league game last nite and a free ball was nominated I.e the blue wen he played the shot the blue ended up in front of the cue ball so i ask if it was a foul plus a free ball then got told it wasn't because the black was covering the brown so it wasnt a foul shot can anyone state the rule cos i was under the impression only time u could roll up to a free ball was wen theres only pink and black on the table anyone willing to help

[jim evans]

in my understanding it would have been a foul shot so a free ball

[LittleMissAlexa]

depends what ball on is you cant snooker behind the freeball you can roll up to it if its a different ball snookeriing the ball on if the brown was being snookered by the black then its legal

[jim evans]

i always thought it was the first snookering ball that counted so if brown is ball on and blue is nominated as free ball if you roll up behind it is the blue which is the first snookering ball so therefor a foul reguardless of other balls inbetween

[LittleMissAlexa]

you didnt mention where the brown was u can roll up to a ball and snooker behind a different ball

blue

white

black

ball on

in that order on a table

[DeanH]

i always thought it was the first snookering ball that counted so if brown is ball on and blue is nominated as free ball if you roll up behind it is the blue which is the first snookering ball so therefor a foul reguardless of other balls inbetween

Correct, the first snookering ball is counted.
I assume from the OP:
Brown was ball on.
Free Ball given.
Blue nominated.
At end of strike Cue Ball snookered behind Blue.
Foul & Free Ball.

[LittleMissAlexa]

we havent had confirmation of what side of the b;lue the snooker was played

[jim evans]

yes i agree with that but ithink what shane means is he rolled up to behind the blue so order was white ,blue,black ,brown

[LittleMissAlexa]

i think we need more info from shane

[DeanH]

yes i agree with that but ithink what shane means is he rolled up to behind the blue so order was white ,blue,black ,brown

That is my reading of the OP

[buddfridgeman]

Yeah had one a little like that, I played a free ball after a foul, brown into middle bag, brown misses comes back across and covers half the reds with the blue ball on its spot covering the other half , all reds snookered on but the left hand side reds coverd by blue not brown, it got called a foul and free ball and lost 64-65..still dont have the answer to it.but would like to know.

[Souwester]

As others have said, whether it is a foul or not depends on the relative position of the balls. If there is one ofr more balls not on obstructing the path to the ball on, then it is the obstructing ball nearest to the cue ball which is considered to be the effective snookering ball. So only if the blue is nearest to the cue ball would it be a foul.

[Souwester]

Yeah had one a little like that, I played a free ball after a foul, brow into middle bag, brown misses comes back across and covers half the reds with the blue ball on its spot covering the other half , all reds snookered on but the left hand side reds coverd by blue not brown, it got called a foul and free ball and lost 64-65..still dont have the answer to it.but would like to know.

As in my previous post, which ball was nearest to the cue ball, brown or blue?

[LittleMissAlexa]

As in my previous post, which ball was nearest to the cue ball, brown or blue?

he said half the balls were covered by the brown which means the brown wasnt a snookering ball

[Souwester]

he said half the balls were covered by the brown which means the brown wasnt a snookering ball

Sorry, I'm not awake yet. Indeed, the brown wasn't snookering the player on all reds, so no foul.