The nominated ball rule

[steve c11]

Hi everyone.

After taking up snooker again after many years and now playing with a good player who is a bit of a know it all about rules, I wondered if any person here can answer a question about a nominated ball. I understand completely that if you are snookered after a foul that you can nominate a ball and I also understand the points value of that nominated ball. This what happened last night whilst playing. The brown ball was left right over the middle pocket and very easy to hit but my opponent fouled whilst trying to pot the brown ball. The only balls left on the table were brown to black. On my opponents foul the brown was then snookered so I obviously had a choice of whether to ask my opponent to play again ( which was a very easy pot for him and a possible frame winning ball for him to win him the frame ), or I could nominate a free ball for myself. Nothing was on to be potted by me so the nearest ball to me was the black which I nominated and I then struck the black and snookered my opponent behind that nominated ball. My opponent then stated that was not allowed but after my opponents foul and me having no ball to pot and by electing the nominated ball I would probably have left that brown right over the pocket had I attempted to hit any other ball as my nominated ball.

Sorry to have confused this, but is my opponent correct ? If he is then that rule is nuts as by an opponent fouling it gave me no advantage by either letting him pot again on a easy brown, or hitting one of the other colours and probably leaving the brown on for him to win the frame. Why does a nominated ball not become the ball in play to do with as you would do with a normal ball in play ?

Regards.

Steve

[Londonlad147]

Your opponent was indeed correct. You cannot snooker behind your nominated free ball, by accident or design, other than if only pink and black are on the table.

As to the rationale for that particular rule, I can't answer it.

If you were snookered on the brown surely you could have asked you opponent to play from that position. You say "letting him pot again on an easy brown".. by that I presume you mean a Miss was called and the balls replaced to where they are? You don't have to take the miss though, and can still request the opponent to play from the position left if you didn't fancy the shot yourself.

[Bigmeek]

You could have knocked the black (or any other nominated ball) onto the brown if it was hanging over the pocket. I agree that somtimes you get a situation where you don't get any advantage from a free ball. Just the way it is.

[maryfield]

Your opponent is correct. If the brown was an easy pot after the foul, why didn't you pot it yourself? If you mean it was hanging over pocket and by getting out of snooker and striking the brown it was likely to pot then you could have played black, pink or blue as free ball and used it to pot the overhanging brown.

[steve c11]

Thanks for the answer. We do not play the miss rule as it is yet another ridiculous rule for the amateur to try and fathom out. How on earth can you put the balls back to where they were in your local snooker club ? So we don't play that rule as it is unworkable in the real world. So obviously I could not then call a miss. So I was wrong but had there only been pink and black on the table I could have done it ? Farcical ? Who makes these rules up, a five year old ? The rule should either be allowed or not allowed, not a somewhere in the middle of the house rule. In the rules of golf there are rules that only apply to a professional player and not to an amateur. I think the miss rule should be one of those rules.

[steve c11]

Your opponent is correct. If the brown was an easy pot after the foul, why didn't you pot it yourself? If you mean it was hanging over pocket and by getting out of snooker and striking the brown it was likely to pot then you could have played black, pink or blue as free ball and used it to pot the overhanging brown.

So I nominated the black ball as my free ball and can then hit the black and pot the brown ball ? That is perfectly legal ? If that is the case then some of these rules were defiantly made up by a five year old. As usual a rule for a rules sake with no real purpose or real logic. But thank you for your reply.

[steve c11]

You could have knocked the black (or any other nominated ball) onto the brown if it was hanging over the pocket. I agree that somtimes you get a situation where you don't get any advantage from a free ball. Just the way it is.

If that is indeed the rule, does anyone know where that ruling is ? If that rule is correct I cannot understand the logic of it.

[billabong]

I could be wrong ( again ), but I think Meek fella meant that you could have used the black to knock the brown away from being an easy "on". .

[Bigmeek]

I could be wrong ( again ), but I think Meek fella meant that you could have used the black to knock the brown away from being an easy "on". .

Not wrong mate. You can use the "nominated ball" to either pot the brown OR move it from hanging over the bag. You'd need to see the position of the balls (and know the frame score) to know what the correct shot is. Knowing the correct shot, as we all know, comes with experience.

[Terry Davidson]

When you are snookered after a foul and nominate a free ball then that nominated ball, for the purposes of this one shot, becomes ANOTHER ball which is on. In your case as you nominated black, the black effectively becomes another brown ball and you have a number of choices as long as you strike the black ball first (you cannot nominate black and then play the brown without hitting the black first).

1. You can pot the black which comes back onto its spot and brown is now the ball 'on'.
2. You can play the black ball onto the brown and either pot the brown or move it. If you pot the brown the blue becomes the ball 'on'. If the brown is over a pocket and you pot BOTH black and brown the brown stays down, the black is re-spotted and the blue is the ball on, you score 4 points and not 8.
3. You can have your opponent shot again as he is snookered.

What you cannot do is snooker your opponent behind the nominated ball except when only pink and black remain.

The one thing I don't understand is if the brown was an easy pot for your opponent why did you not take it on and pot it yourself? Just because you are awarded a free ball there is no rule that says you MUST take the free ball option. If in this case if the brown were only partially obscured you are still allowed to hit the brown directly without nominating a free ball.

This rule has been in existence forever and is widely known by most players. I've always told all of my students it's to their own benefit to read and understand the rules.

[Londonlad147]

If you have a free ball and you choose another colour as your free ball, then you must first make contact with the free ball you've nominated. However, the original ball is still the ball on, and you may pot either or both the free ball and the ball on.

Imagine this situation. Brown to black left on the table so brown on. You come to the table and have been awarded a free ball. The brown is in the jaws of the pocket with the blue immediately in front of it. You're perfectly entitled to nominate blue to play the plant onto the brown to pot the brown (and the blue).

If, though, the blue is in the jaws, with the brown in front of it, but partially obscured by the black (hence the free ball), what you can't do is nominate blue and play the brown ball to make the plant onto the blue to pot it. That's because you haven't hit your nominated ball first.

[The Statman]

Hi everyone.

...On my opponents foul the brown was then snookered so I obviously had a choice of whether to ask my opponent to play again ( which was a very easy pot for him and a possible frame winning ball for him to win him the frame ), or I could nominate a free ball for myself.

If it was an easy pot on the brown for your opponent, surely it was also an easy pot for you?

Why didn't you just refuse the free ball, and just play the brown?

Just because you have a free ball, doesn't mean you have to use it.

====

Other than that, I agree with everyone else's answer and have nothing to add.

[The Statman]

Thanks for the answer. We do not play the miss rule as it is yet another ridiculous rule for the amateur to try and fathom out. How on earth can you put the balls back to where they were in your local snooker club ? So we don't play that rule as it is unworkable in the real world. So obviously I could not then call a miss. So I was wrong but had there only been pink and black on the table I could have done it ? Farcical ? Who makes these rules up, a five year old ? The rule should either be allowed or not allowed, not a somewhere in the middle of the house rule. In the rules of golf there are rules that only apply to a professional player and not to an amateur. I think the miss rule should be one of those rules.

The free ball was introduced in about 1919, superseding the previous rule whereby if snookered after a foul, the oncoming player could have the offending ball lifted for the duration of the stroke. This was 30 years before the "play again" option came in and it was still a while before the minimum foul was 4 points - going in-off a red was 1 away!

It was found that the free ball was too big an advantage if the oncoming player could just roll up behind it, so that is why, in 1934, it was outlawed. However, when only pink and black remain, there is no other ball to snooker behind, so that is why it is an exception.

I hope this explains a little the rationale behind it.

The free ball essentially means there is an extra red on the table if reds remain, or as in your situation with the reds gone, you essentially had two browns - the real brown and whichever other ball you nominated. Since you are on the brown, and have another brown, there is nothing wrong with planting the nominated brown onto the real brown to pot it. It is no different to having two real reds on the table.

If this shot wasn't allowed, it would make the writing of the rules very complicated indeed, because reference to potting the ball on would have to have a note saying "except when a free ball has been nominated, in which case you cannot pot the ball on".

The only proviso is that when you nominate the free ball, you must hit the nominated ball first - but either or both of them can be potted.

[jonny66]

so in this situation with the brown hanging over the pocket, what happens if I nominate the black as free ball, pot the black and cannon the brown in, do I get 8 points, or just the 4?

[Londonlad147]

No, as has already been said, when colours are involved, you will only score the value of the ball on. The ball on would stay down but the colour taken as a free ball would be re-spotted.

Only if you take a colour as a red would you score for both balls.

As Statman has said, the rationale is that there are 15 reds on the table at the start of a frame so it is perfectly possible to score more than one point nif more than one red is potted in the same stroke. But because there's only one of each colour, that's why you can't score more than the ball on if ball on and free ball colour are potted together.

Simples.