foul or not

[MasterBreak147]

Im not fully clued up with all the rules of the game but a question was fired at me and i wasn't sure of the correct answer so can anyone here confirm this please
Ill try my best to explain

black on spot red touching black behind the black spot, white directly in front of the black touching the black...player A is at the table and has a free ball.

Player A whos at the table nominates black as its touching at fires away (plays a bad shot as such) and when player B comes to table he can see a quarter ball of the red...so effectively hes not snookered full ball

Answer1, Its a foul because he cannot hit both sides of the red as he is partly snookered behind Nominated ball ? foul 4 to player B
Answer2, Not a foul because he can see the red period ?

thanks all

[jrc750]

Not a foul, as he is not snookered

[SouthPaw]

You do know you can't snooker behind nominated free ball? If that's what happened it's a foul...

The player with the free ball should of nominated blue or low colours if he wanted to snooker...

[jrc750]

It's not a snooker tho ???

[SouthPaw]

It's not a snooker tho ???

I thought it would be if he can't hit both sides? With the black the nominated ball covering it...

[MasterBreak147]

jrc750 and southpaw you two sound just like what happened lol, one said it was the other said it wasn't ..me ive no blooming idea so ill except the majority here ha

[MasterBreak147]

should of nominated blue or low colours if he wanted to snooker...

agree and 99% of people would have done just that but he didn't and this mess happened

[SouthPaw]

I think we all have these types of arguments from time to time lol, but I'm almost certain I'm correct if not I apologise

[mooneyy]

As black was nominated as free ball and black lies in between the cue ball and red, player B is effectively snookered by the free ball.

Foul, 4 points and free ball to player A.

Whether the nominated free ball was touching before the shot is irrelevant.

[MasterBreak147]

player B is effectively snookered by the free ball.

But is he snookered if he can see and hit a quarter ball of the red ?

and it would be good if anyone replying can state if they are a official referee because again replies above state different opinions to this
thanks people

[snookerdad]

A player is said to be snookered if he can't hit both extreme edges of the object-ball. As long as there wasn't another snookering ball between the cue-ball and the black, it's a foul.

[jrc750]

As black was nominated as free ball and black lies in between the cue ball and red, player B is effectively snookered by the free ball.

Foul, 4 points and free ball to player A.

Whether the nominated free ball was touching before the shot is irrelevant.

Wrong surely ??
He could see part of the red, so was not snookered ???????????

[MasterBreak147]

A player is said to be snookered if he can't hit both extreme edges of the object-ball. As long as there wasn't another snookering ball between the cue-ball and the black, it's a foul.

Only ball obstructing the path to red was the black, i am constantly been told its no foul but i believe to think it was but again im no referee

[farrelld91]

Foul cant hit both extreme edges as snookerdad said

Think its section 2 rule 17

http://www.worldsnooker.com/staticFi...~167232,00.pdf

Look at section 2 rule 17 and section 3 rule 12

[MasterBreak147]

Thanks for the link, but for me reading that book is like trying to read spaghetti going by the replys so far im still no closer no offence i was hoping a qualified ref or two could just nail it lol