Foul and miss question

[steveflanuk]

Quick question on the foul and miss rule and the snookers required stage.

I know you can't be called for a foul and a miss when snookers are required, but is that before the foul and miss or afterwards?

For example, say you are 26 points behind with only the colours remaining and miss the yellow which will now take you 30 points behind and thus needing snookers. So before the foul you didn't need snookers but you do now need snookers as a result of the foul - can you, therefore, be called for a miss as well as you didn't need snookers prior to the shot?

Cheers in advance

[tedisbill]

It's NOT a foul and a miss if you now require snooker following the shot.

So in your example, if you didn't need snooker, but then after you played the shot you did, NO miss would be called.

[SnkrRef]

I know you can't be called for a foul and a miss when snookers are required, but is that before the foul and miss or afterwards?

If one player (either striker or non-striker) needs snookers or can only draw, either before the stroke or after it, then no miss will be called.

The exception to this is if one miss has been called when the player has central full ball contact. Second and third misses can then be called regardless of the difference in scores. Also, of course, a miss can be called, if the striker has blatantly made no attempt to hit the ball on, regardless of scores.

[tommygunner1309]

Quick question on the foul and miss rule and the snookers required stage.

I know you can't be called for a foul and a miss when snookers are required, but is that before the foul and miss or afterwards?

For example, say you are 26 points behind with only the colours remaining and miss the yellow which will now take you 30 points behind and thus needing snookers. So before the foul you didn't need snookers but you do now need snookers as a result of the foul - can you, therefore, be called for a miss as well as you didn't need snookers prior to the shot?

Cheers in advance

As soon as you strike the ball and it misses the yellow the referee will call 'foul'. As soon as he calls foul four points are added to your opponents score - thus you need snookers to win - so no 'miss' will be called (unless the conditions as stated by SnkrRef are relevant)

[SnkrRef]

Another interesting anomaly was discussed at the recent Q&A session with the WPBSA Rules Committee. In the scenario discussed, a player (33 points up) fails to first hit the last red but goes on to pocket the red, meaning his opponent now needs snookers. Should a miss be called? If the balls are replaced then the possible extra 8 points on the table (as before the stroke) means that he can still win. The decision was YES a miss can be called, citing s5.1.

10. Q. With just one red left on the table and the difference in the scores being 33 points in favour of player
A who believed that he could strike the final red by playing between the yellow and blue, but struck
the yellow on the way through. The referee immediately called “foul and a miss” but the cue ball
goes on and collided with the red which entered the pocket. Now player A is 29 up with 27 on the
table. His opponent asks for the balls to be replaced which the referee duly does and brings the red
back to the table. Was this the correct decision? There were two possible answers which were:
1. No Foul and a Miss should have been called because of the difference in scores.
2. Yes, it should be a Foul and a Miss because under these circumstances, player B is now at a
distinct disadvantage by now requiring penalty points by an unfair (though not unlawful) manner.
A. The committee feel the referee acted appropriately in this instance. The decision by the committee is
that a referee should refer to the Snooker Rules Section 5:1 (i) and (ii), Page 30.

[tommygunner1309]

Another interesting anomaly was discussed at the recent Q&A session with the WPBSA Rules Committee. In the scenario discussed, a player (33 points up) fails to first hit the last red but goes on to pocket the red, meaning his opponent now needs snookers. Should a miss be called? If the balls are replaced then the possible extra 8 points on the table (as before the stroke) means that he can still win. The decision was YES a miss can be called, citing s5.1.

10. Q. With just one red left on the table and the difference in the scores being 33 points in favour of player
A who believed that he could strike the final red by playing between the yellow and blue, but struck
the yellow on the way through. The referee immediately called “foul and a miss” but the cue ball
goes on and collided with the red which entered the pocket. Now player A is 29 up with 27 on the
table. His opponent asks for the balls to be replaced which the referee duly does and brings the red
back to the table. Was this the correct decision? There were two possible answers which were:
1. No Foul and a Miss should have been called because of the difference in scores.
2. Yes, it should be a Foul and a Miss because under these circumstances, player B is now at a
distinct disadvantage by now requiring penalty points by an unfair (though not unlawful) manner.
A. The committee feel the referee acted appropriately in this instance. The decision by the committee is
that a referee should refer to the Snooker Rules Section 5:1 (i) and (ii), Page 30.

I am in total agreement of the miss being called here. The rules manual states that a referee should base his decisions "in the interest of fair play" and there is no doubt in this scenario that it would be totally unfair to the non-offender if a miss was not called, and the red not replaced.

[luke-h]

If one player (either striker or non-striker) needs snookers or can only draw, either before the stroke or after it, then no miss will be called.

The exception to this is if one miss has been called when the player has central full ball contact. Second and third misses can then be called regardless of the difference in scores. Also, of course, a miss can be called, if the striker has blatantly made no attempt to hit the ball on, regardless of scores.

Please elaborate for me im having a thick moment lol, when you say central full ball contact do you mean the player can see a ball on full which he is choosing not to hit direct as he cannot get safe off it? thanks in advance.

[SnkrRef]

Please elaborate for me im having a thick moment lol, when you say central full ball contact do you mean the player can see a ball on full which he is choosing not to hit direct as he cannot get safe off it? thanks in advance.

Imagine a red is on the pink spot, with pink and black to either side (touching the red). The cue ball is on the brown spot, so is able to hit the red full in the face, and there is the full width of the red available. That is central full ball contact.

It doesn't matter whether the striker plays at that red, or at another red obscured by the pink or black, say, if he misses a red, it is an automatic F&M provided there were enough points on the table for one of the players to have won (without a respotted black) either before of after the shot.

Let's say he fails to hit the red and F&M is called, and that it was indeed the last red. He was 30 points behind before the shot, so he's now 34 points down (assuming a four point penalty), so no problem in calling the miss. If the balls are replaced and he fails to hit the red again, then, because he has central full ball contact available, a second, and indeed third miss can be called, even though he now needs snookers.

Once again, imagine those three balls in a line. Move the red back a few millimetres towards the black spot, and close the pink and black to touch the red again. Although, from the brown spot, the striker can still make central ball contact with the red, this is not deemed to be central full ball contact, as the full width of the red is not available, as the pink and black are now slightly overlapping it. A second (and third) miss would not be called in these circumstances, if the points were as previously described.

[The Statman]

Another interesting anomaly was discussed at the recent Q&A session with the WPBSA Rules Committee. In the scenario discussed, a player (33 points up) fails to first hit the last red but goes on to pocket the red, meaning his opponent now needs snookers. Should a miss be called? If the balls are replaced then the possible extra 8 points on the table (as before the stroke) means that he can still win. The decision was YES a miss can be called, citing s5.1.

10. Q. With just one red left on the table and the difference in the scores being 33 points in favour of player
A who believed that he could strike the final red by playing between the yellow and blue, but struck
the yellow on the way through. The referee immediately called “foul and a miss” but the cue ball
goes on and collided with the red which entered the pocket. Now player A is 29 up with 27 on the
table. His opponent asks for the balls to be replaced which the referee duly does and brings the red
back to the table. Was this the correct decision? There were two possible answers which were:
1. No Foul and a Miss should have been called because of the difference in scores.
2. Yes, it should be a Foul and a Miss because under these circumstances, player B is now at a
distinct disadvantage by now requiring penalty points by an unfair (though not unlawful) manner.
A. The committee feel the referee acted appropriately in this instance. The decision by the committee is
that a referee should refer to the Snooker Rules Section 5:1 (i) and (ii), Page 30.

Yes, I fully concur.

The logic (I assume) behind not calling a Miss when snookers are required, is that a player would indeed be attempting to hit the ball if failure would mean he required snookers (or more snookers), or would mean that his opponent would no longer require snookers (or require fewer).

Clearly, in this instance, it is his opponent who now needs snookers as a result of his foul, rather than the striker himself who needs them. Therefore, I agree with the committee's response that the situation is "not covered adequately by Rule" and as such the referee's actions under Section 5 are well warranted.

[The Statman]

Imagine a red is on the pink spot, with pink and black to either side (touching the red). The cue ball is on the brown spot, so is able to hit the red full in the face, and there is the full width of the red available. That is central full ball contact.

It doesn't matter whether the striker plays at that red, or at another red obscured by the pink or black, say, if he misses a red, it is an automatic F&M provided there were enough points on the table for one of the players to have won (without a respotted black) either before of after the shot.

Let's say he fails to hit the red and F&M is called, and that it was indeed the last red. He was 30 points behind before the shot, so he's now 34 points down (assuming a four point penalty), so no problem in calling the miss. If the balls are replaced and he fails to hit the red again, then, because he has central full ball contact available, a second, and indeed third miss can be called, even though he now needs snookers.

Once again, imagine those three balls in a line. Move the red back a few millimetres towards the black spot, and close the pink and black to touch the red again. Although, from the brown spot, the striker can still make central ball contact with the red, this is not deemed to be central full ball contact, as the full width of the red is not available, as the pink and black are now slightly overlapping it. A second (and third) miss would not be called in these circumstances, if the points were as previously described.

Exactly.

Long after I learnt it, I had it explained to me in a much more straightforward manner which is:

Basically "full ball contact" here is essentially saying that it is possible to play a shot at the ball on, in which the cue-ball comes to rest exactly where the ball on had been.

(Obviously this has a potential exception where the red is on the cushion so would rebound back onto the cue-ball, but that doesn't affect the principle of this excellent explanation.)