Rule's help

[SnkrRef]

There is no doubt in the OP's scenario that blue is the effective snookering balls. You can never be snookered on a red by another red, so if one red is stopping you from hitting another on the extreme edge then it's NOT a free ball.

In the situation the OP describes, imagine taking away all the reds leaving just the one on the far left and the one on the far right. If either one can be hit on both edges then it is not a free ball.

[roylu021]

When red ball is the ball on, if any red ball, after taking all other red balls away, cannot be hit straightly at both edge by the cue ball, it's a freeball.

[SnkrRef]

When red ball is the ball on, if any red ball, after taking all other red balls away, cannot be hit straightly at both edge by the cue ball, it's a freeball.

That's not entirely correct phraseology, although I suspect you know what you mean. It would be clearer to turn it round and say when it is not a free ball:

'When red is the ball on, after taking all other reds away, if one or more reds CAN be struck at both extreme edges, then it is NOT a free ball'.

With your phraseology, imagine the cue ball is between brown and blue, just off centre, with the pack of reds in tact. Take away all but the two top left and right reds. It is possible that you can see both extreme edges of the left-most red, but only the right edge of the right-most red. Because that right hand red can't be hit on both sides, that would be caught buy your reference to 'any red' and would be a free ball. However, because you CAN see both sides of the left-most red, it is not in fact a free ball situation.

Sorry if I appear to be a pedant, but use of correct language and phraseology makes all the difference when interpreting and explaining the rules. Incorrect usage could result in the wrong decision, as just demonstrated.

[roylu021]

yes, should it be turn around

[roylu021]

yes, should it be turn around

Or replace ANY with EACH.
I know the meaning but cannot express it very well as English is a foreign language to me.
Thank you for your help

[The Statman]

Player A breaks off but miscues and ends up behind the blue without touching any reds he ends up behind the blue but still able to see the last two reds in the triangle. in this situation because player B can still see the last two reds but is unable to hit both edges is this a free ball situation?

Thanks luke

It all depends whether the blue is preventing the theoretical path to the extreme edges of the reds.

If it is only the other reds that block the path to the extreme inside edge of the corner red*, then there is no free ball. (* or, possibly, the next red up.)

But if the blue (or, conceivably, the pink) is preventing the path to the finest edge of the corner red, then a free ball will be awarded.



The test is this:

Leaving all colours where they are, and treating each red as if it was the only one on the table, would there be a free ball?

If all reds respond with 'Yes' to the above question, then it's a free ball. If any red responds 'No', then it is not a free ball.


My article Free Ball - how to tell if you have one may be of help - the second diagram illustrates it.

[luke-h]

It all depends whether the blue is preventing the theoretical path to the extreme edges of the reds.

If it is only the other reds that block the path to the extreme inside edge of the corner red*, then there is no free ball. (* or, possibly, the next red up.)

But if the blue (or, conceivably, the pink) is preventing the path to the finest edge of the corner red, then a free ball will be awarded.



The test is this:

Leaving all colours where they are, and treating each red as if it was the only one on the table, would there be a free ball?

If all reds respond with 'Yes' to the above question, then it's a free ball. If any red responds 'No', then it is not a free ball.


My article Free Ball - how to tell if you have one may be of help - the second diagram illustrates it.

Thankyou for that.

[t.lavery55]

This was written by a long standing referee, who unfortunately no longer comes on TSF.

Are you sure about that?

[SnkrRef]

Are you sure about that?

Statman still comes here, as evidenced a few posts ago. Maybe Dean was getting confused with Souwester.

[DeanH]

Are you sure about that?

oops got the wrong person, as you can see The Statman is alive and well on TSF
no offence Statman

[DeanH]

Statman still comes here, as evidenced a few posts ago. Maybe Dean was getting confused with Souwester.

That is the person yes, he used to do great threads and posts

[SnkrRef]

That is the person yes, he used to do great threads and posts

Yes, it's a shame that Souwester felt obliged to leave.