Is this a foul after a free ball?

[finabb]

Hello

I had a free ball and took the brown as a red to the centre pocket. I missed and the brown covered HALF of the remaining 1 red on the table, the other HALF of the red was covered by the yellow.
Is this a foul or does the free ball have to cover the red completely?
Thanks

[SouthPaw]

It is a foul you dirty, dirty player! I could be wrong but as you legitimately went for the pot and not a snooker I'd assume it would be to the discretion of the referee to judge if it was deliberate...

[Terry Davidson]

I think on this one you need a diagram. Which ball was closest to the cueball as it would be considered the snookering ball however if the brown was in a position to cover the red without the yellow being there then I believe it would be a foul.

I would leave this one to a more expert referee as there is a problem with it and I can't remember if the full-ball-contact with the brown there has to be considered. Hopefully Statman will come back with an accurate answer

Terry

[DeanH]

If the Brown was the closest ball to the Cue Ball, in effect the snookering ball, this would be a foul as you have snookered the Ball On with the Free Ball (and it not being potted). The non-offending player will have a Free Ball option.
If the Yellow is the closest ball to the Cue Ball, then no foul as you disregard all other balls apart from the snookering ball.
See the following thread and the different scenarios that should help you:
http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board...f-you-have-one

[finabb]

Any Ref's or stat guys have the 100% correct answer please

[The Statman]

Yes, you have snookered behind the free ball, so it is a foul.

The definition of 'snookered' is the same as for judging a free ball, so virtually a clear ball's width either side - not the same as 'snookered' used informally to mean 'can't hit it direct'.

It's unfortunate that this happened as bad luck from an attempted pot - but there is no discretion (just think of all the other types of foul which are unfortunate, but you can't have discretion, you just have to live with it!).

And of course, your opponent will have a free ball himself as well as the 4 points!

[The Statman]

My article What you can and can't do with a free ball might be of help.

[finabb]

Thanks again Statman

[dieselman147]

This would be a foul as the brown is stopping you from hitting the red. Does anyone know what the rule is if you full ball snooker someone on the last red behind a free ball (say brown) but there is also another ball (say yellow) causing a full ball snooker? Even if u remove the free ball (brown) your opponent would still be snookered (behind yellow). And would it make a differance if the free ball (brown) and the other (yellow) were the other way round, so your full ball snookered (behind the yellow) but the free ball (brown) has gone inbetween the cue ball,yellow and red? Hope this makes sense as i cant find a definative answer to this one..

[DeanH]

with snookers it is only the nearest ball to the cue ball that is considered as the snookering ball, you do not start the scenarios of "well if this one is removed, then this one..."

[SouthPaw]

Yes, you have snookered behind the free ball, so it is a foul.

The definition of 'snookered' is the same as for judging a free ball, so virtually a clear ball's width either side - not the same as 'snookered' used informally to mean 'can't hit it direct'.

It's unfortunate that this happened as bad luck from an attempted pot - but there is no discretion (just think of all the other types of foul which are unfortunate, but you can't have discretion, you just have to live with it!).

And of course, your opponent will have a free ball himself as well as the 4 points!

What happens if you miss the pot on your free ball but it lands in a snooker position though there's a ball between your free ball and white? So it would have been a foul shot barring there was for talks sake the blue snookering before the free ball chosen, would you imagine the the other ball not there and still call a foul or is that acceptable legal scenario?

[The Statman]

What happens if you miss the pot on your free ball but it lands in a snooker position though there's a ball between your free ball and white? So it would have been a foul shot barring there was for talks sake the blue snookering before the free ball chosen, would you imagine the the other ball not there and still call a foul or is that acceptable legal scenario?

Well yes that would be fine, the foul isn't for "snookering" full stop; it's for "snookering behind the nominated ball." As correctly identified before my post, if two (or more) balls are snookering, the one closer (or closest) to the cue-ball is the one that's considered.

[SouthPaw]

Well yes that would be fine, the foul isn't for "snookering" full stop; it's for "snookering behind the nominated ball." As correctly identified before my post, if two (or more) balls are snookering, the one closer (or closest) to the cue-ball is the one that's considered.

Thank you, that's happened once that I can remember and the original post situation, I thought both would be legal shots but that's good to know for future similar situations.

[staners1]

i also was going to ask this question

[bally969]

Its a foul as both sides off the ball on canot be hit because of the free ball taken