Nominating free ball ?

[nrage]

9 out of 10 players would normally declare their free ball. Indeed it is common sense to do so. What would you do as a referee if you had this situation. Player A fouls and snookers Player B and the ref declares a free ball. Player B gets down and aims at the yellow which is on its spot, but misses it by a fraction - the cue ball comes off the bottom cushion and runs up the table and hits the black. What would you do?

I would be interested to hear what souwester or another ref has to say about this, but IMO it's foul 7 points..

My reasoning is that if the player gets straight down as if to play the yellow, he has effectively "indicated" that he is playing yellow. If he "indicates" the black by pointing at it, or saying "black", no problem. If he is measuring angles for another ball other than yellow, then it's possibly black and the ref/I as his opponent would ask him to clarify his intent.

There is a school of thought that thinks he was indicating yellow - so it would be a 7 point penalty when he hits the black.

I guess this is the school of thought I adhere to.

What then if the player declares he was playing black.?

In strict adherence to the rules souwester posted I think the ref would have to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I think in most cases everyone would find the statement to be a bit hard to believe. As a ref I would probably ask the player to declare all colours from that point on.. partly to make a point.

Actually, as a referee I would say "declare please" when the player got down to play his shot. The ref is completely within his rights to do so if there is any doubt in his mind.

But, in this situation you would assume (unless the player gave you some reason to doubt - like measuring up angles off the cushion) they were playing yellow, so I don't think anyone would be in doubt and actually ask, I think just about everyone would assume "yellow" by indication/pointing the cue.

[nrage]

sorry but you dont have to nominate if its obvious, in my case i had the ball in hand and set it up behind the brown. which was on its spot. the ref watched me do this. if he was not sure of which ball you are going too play, he can ask you too nominate.. ask any ref and they will back this up.. this is the real end (QUOTE)

True, that's the point souwester is trying to make clear. You do not have to [make your nomination 100% clear - typically verbally] unless the ref (or your opponent when there is no ref) asks you to.

Another thing ppl seem to be confused about is that nomination can be by indication i.e. by pointing the cue, or gesture. Most people think it has to be by saying the colour aloud. Saying it is definitely the clearest form, and most people simply do this as a matter of course.

Edit: changed wording - in [] above.

[Souwester]

I would be interested to hear what souwester or another ref has to say about this, but IMO it's foul 7 points..

My reasoning is that if the player gets straight down as if to play the yellow, he has effectively "indicated" that he is playing yellow. If he "indicates" the black by pointing at it, or saying "black", no problem. If he is measuring angles for another ball other than yellow, then it's possibly black and the ref/I as his opponent would ask him to clarify his intent.

Indeed.

I guess this is the school of thought I adhere to.

Tommygunner actually said "he aims at the yellow" so it has to be a seven point penalty for first hitting the black.

In strict adherence to the rules souwester posted I think the ref would have to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I think in most cases everyone would find the statement to be a bit hard to believe. As a ref I would probably ask the player to declare all colours from that point on.. partly to make a point.

No, I don't think I would give him the benefit of the doubt, if I'm satisfied that he's aiming at the yellow. It may depend though on how the shot is played, eg strength: has he hit it as though he intends to pass the yellow and go down to hit the black? But going against the player would be the possibility of a seven point penalty for failing to hit the black, and the fact that all decent players know that if they are going for anything other than the obvious shot they should declare. However, which situation is likely to give the safest leave for the incoming player?

But, in this situation you would assume (unless the player gave you some reason to doubt - like measuring up angles off the cushion) they were playing yellow, so I don't think anyone would be in doubt and actually ask, I think just about everyone would assume "yellow" by indication/pointing the cue.

Agreed.

[allanr5]

Oh man I think finally got it I hope here's how's I understand now part a) is a definition of what a nominated ball is, part b) is a compliance rule when asked by the ref and the rest deals with penalities a) initially throws you for loop because it states "that the stricker declares" that said we always declare a free ball I hate debating rules during a game even if your right it ends up spoiling the mood this site is great for getting everything sorted Thanks and if I am still wrong somebody is shooting again lol

P.S. I guess I made that statement initially early in this thread because we never have a ref need to get rid of foot in mouth disease before making a comment without researching first but I don't think I was alone on full understanding of this rule

[Souwester]

Oh man I think finally got it I hope here's how's I understand now part a) is a definition of what a nominated ball is, part b) is a compliance rule when asked by the ref and the rest deals with penalities a) initially throws you for loop because it states "that the stricker declares" that said we always declare a free ball I hate debating rules during a game even if your right it ends up spoiling the mood this site is great for getting everything sorted Thanks and if I am still wrong somebody is shooting again lol

P.S. I guess I made that statement initially early in this thread because we never have a ref need to get rid of foot in mouth disease before making a comment without researching first but I don't think I was alone on full understanding of this rule

Sounds about right.

To paraphrase the rules very simply.... "The nominated ball is the one which the referee is satisfied the striker is aiming to first hit. If the referee is unsure which ball the striker is aiming at then he may ask the striker to verbally state it. If he fails to declare after being asked, it is a foul, penalty seven points"

[tommygunner1309]

Sounds about right.

To paraphrase the rules very simply.... "The nominated ball is the one which the referee is satisfied the striker is aiming to first hit. If the referee is unsure which ball the striker is aiming at then he may ask the striker to verbally state it. If he fails to declare after being asked, it is a foul, penalty seven points"

Hit the nail on the head as usual. It really comes down to the referee. If he is satisfied by the strikers indication then so be it. If he is unsure he should ask. IMO a good referee will never allow a situation to arise of which he is unsure. He must have full control of the match and the only way to do so is to be absolutely clear what the strikers intentions are.

[Souwester]

Hit the nail on the head as usual. It really comes down to the referee. If he is satisfied by the strikers indication then so be it. If he is unsure he should ask. IMO a good referee will never allow a situation to arise of which he is unsure. He must have full control of the match and the only way to do so is to be absolutely clear what the strikers intentions are.

Oooh this is my 1500th post!

Indeed, I have to agree with that post.

Maybe I should consider writing 'The Idiot's Guide to the Rules of Snooker'? Might just be more understandable than the official version!

[DeanH]

Oooh this is my 1500th post!

Indeed, I have to agree with that post.

Maybe I should consider writing 'The Idiot's Guide to the Rules of Snooker'? Might just be more understandable than the official version!

Many, many years ago myself and my brother went into a standard high-street sports shop and they used to have racks of a series of books "beginners guide to" (or something like that) I thnk it was and you would have all the common sports. We got the one for snooker as we had recently go a 6x3 table-top for Xmas
It was a great book, very simple and clear, also had one for tennis and squash as I was young and active in those days
Maybe someone also remembers this series?

[tommygunner]

Maybe I should consider writing 'The Idiot's Guide to the Rules of Snooker'? Might just be more understandable than the official version!

Actually, I think that has been written and I have a copy. When I passed my grade 3 I recieved a rules manual in A4 format, and all the rules are written on the left hand side of the book. On the right hand side are written the Sussex Referees Association Explanatory notes.

Example. Section 3. rule 7 (e). If there is more than one colour to be spotted and their own spots are occupied, the highest value ball shall take precedence in order of spotting
SRA explanatory notes; This rule is regularly misunderstood and can best be clarified as;-
(i) If any of the balls to be spotted may be placed on their OWN spots, then do so.
(ii) of any left, take the highest value ball and place it on the highest available spot. Repeat this procedure, resorting to (f) and (g) if neccessary, until all balls are back on the bed of the table.

As you can see, it gives idiots like me (lol) the perfectly straight forward plain language procedure. I wouldn't be without this manual and read it regularly.

Congrats on 1500 pieces of invaluable information

[tommygunner1309]

mmmm wonder what happened there!!!!! lost my avatar and the 1309. Almost as disastrous as missing the black off the spot

[Souwester]

mmmm wonder what happened there!!!!! lost my avatar and the 1309. Almost as disastrous as missing the black off the spot

Odd. It seems to be a different profile, which joined in Sep 2010 with just 2 posts!

[tommygunner1309]

Oh yes I remember. Changed my profile in july 2011 because I didn't have an avatar on the original. Must have had a brainstorm signing in - now got it to remember me lol

[The Statman]

Just a bit of historical background here - it was once the case that the free ball had to nominate the free ball, unlike the colour after a red. Failure to nominate was indeed a foul.

However, it is amazing the number of people who think this is still the case. The rule was officially changed on 1 December 1973! I know a lot of people who were born long after that date, who don't know that it changed.

I suppose it just goes to show that information handed down lasts far longer than it should!

[allanr5]

so were the present rules in place when the ref called a foul on Cliff Thorburn vs Alex Higgins when the ref declared a foul because he didn't hear Thorburn declare the green as his freeball the crowd heard him when Cliff appealled to Alex Alex gave him the deer in the headlights look and seemed totally perplexed, did the ref ask him to declare? or was there an anticipation from the ref for Cliff to declare I think a lot of people know this story Thorburn was so mad he had to leave the table to calm down I think this match was after the rule change you would think if the ref asked him to declare why wouldn't he the story as I've read it doesn't seem to mention the ref asking Cliff to declare any one have any more insight to this debacle or the whole story I know its going back awhile but it is an example when a pro was fouled with the freeball rule

[Jake O'Sullivan]

Is this the same with naming a colour after a red has been potted because I've come across the same argument before when they've been told after potting a red you have to nominate your colour regardless? so is it the same? If it's obvious, you don't have to name the colour?